Detecting Deception: Expectation and Motivation - Coursework Example

Introduction One of the most important truths in as far as the life of any human being is concerned is the fact that we all lie occasionally. The reason being that a lie is not necessarily due to malignance in our hearts but it is actually one of the component of any human being (Esther, 2000). This is why some of the lies are actually very much acceptable in some of our cultures. However, deception refers to the information and messages that are transmitted knowingly for the purposes of creating a conclusion or even a false impression (Park & Levine, 2001). This means that deception can be very harmful. However, motivation and expectation are the two major factors that facilitates deception in not only organizations but also in the lives of the individuals. Literature review on Detecting Deception Deception refers to the information and messages that are transmitted knowingly for the purposes of creating a conclusion or even a false impression. Deception can be presented in so many ways. Some of these ways includes concealments, bluffs, lies, misdirection, mimicry, fakery, white lies, tall tales, deflections, equivocation, evasions, camouflage, exaggerations and strategic ambiguity. The list above shows methods of clearly showing how deception can be presented (Levine et al, 2003). It should be noted that deception is one of the things that are common in any ones life since it is encountered in every day life. The major problem with this is that no one is very good at the game of detecting deception. This is why, no and then we realize we have been deceived without even the slightest knowledge. Data that has been released, explains that in our every day relationship we always witness or get involved in deception. This means that 50% of our time is full of some kind of deception represented in one of the ways listed above (Burgoon & Levine 2008). Apart from the individual level, also the pursuit of deception detection should be vigilant at the level of governance in every nation. This is because it can greatly help us easily detect incidences of terrorism before they even happen. Actually, one of the reasons as to why the society has seriously failed is due to fact that it has not been abler to detect lies very easily. A good reason for such is that the society is lacking sufficient knowledge. This as a result leads to the situation of making decisions without the right information. To avoid that, there is a great need for the society to therefore, to avoid deception through adversaries, infiltration and manipulation by taking an action of safeguarding information (Lapinski & Levine 2000). On the other hand, it is obvious that to achieve information that is of high assurance; a lot is needed to be taken into consideration. This because of the complexity with which correct information is demanded to be in form of volume, speed involves communication globality, complexity, demands and expectations as well as information exchange (Joyce, 1976). This means that also the fallibility with which the human beings detect deception should be taken into great consideration to be able to eliminate deception. Also great care must be taken to ensure that the new technologies do not exacerbate vulnerability of the society to fall into deception. One of the reasons as to why getting rid of deception is so hard, is due to the fact that a human being are the source of deception. That is why it is very important to use other automated tools to help detect deception. Through these tools, there will be reliability as far as lies deception is concerned (Levine, 2001). One of the most important facts to take into consideration in trying to eliminate deception is the need for the society to incorporate all different fields as far information systems are concerned like criminology, communication, warfare, artificial intelligence and psychology. The reason for incorporating all of the above fields is to ensure the concept of interest conflict is dealt with hence ensuring that decision-making is done with accurate information. By doing this, also the issue of manipulation and misrepresentation due to opportunistic agents of information is not given a chance to influence behaviours. This will then enable all the organizations to make decisions not basing their argument on misrepresented information (Levine, 2008). It is very amazing that many people believe that they are in a position to detect deception on the process of one-on-one communication. This is whereby they claim that for them to achieve this they have to listen keenly as well as look at the other person’s nonverbal clues like eye contacts avoidance and shifting of the eyes. This method or theory of detection that has been adopted by many people has been found insufficient. This means that nonverbal behaviours are not the way to detect deception since many have been deceived even after applying them. In addition to that, it means that interpersonal interaction is not the way to detect deception. This is then where the aspect of knowledge comes in (Burgoon & Levine 2008). Deception and motivation Motivation refers to a kind of behaviour that is goal oriented. motivation can either be extrinsic or intrinsic. This means that it can come from within or from without a an individual. It should be noted that any form of deception is usually motivated by some given factors. Deception has been encountered mainly in communications that are computer oriented. One kind of a deception that is very common includes the gender switching. Identity concealment and attractiveness deception. This is whereby, different motivating factors leads to such kinds of deception. A study was done to investigate the motivating factor underlying the issue of identity concealment. The expectations of the results were not cut short. This is because, as a matter of fact, it was discovered that many people hide their identity due to privacy concerns. On he other hand, t was discovered that gender switching was caused by the fact that one suffers due to unknown self as well as the desire to play some new roles. In both experiments, there was a motivating factor(Levine, 2008). The fact that one was doing it to prove that they can detect deception. This means that each of them was motivated in looking out for any suspicious behaviour that will show that the experimenter may have awarded him or her a wrong card. Again, the participators, definitely, would also be very suspicious of the fact that the experimenter was likely to deceive him or her. Deception and expectation Expectations refer to what is believed to happen. If expectations are violated then that means that people will definitely make some veracity judgement. It has also been discovered that expected behaviours that are weird tends to give rise to dishonesty as compared to the behaviours that are normal. Since, expectation refers to the condition in which someone looks forward to something. This means that one is likely to be deceived due to their own expectation. According to a research that was carried out a few years ago, it was discovered that even in marriage a partner is likely to deceive the other one as per their expectation. The mind will always form some expectations depending on the five common senses(Levine, 2008). This means that what the sight sees, ears hears, nose smells, skin feels and hand touches will build up some expectations in the mind. Therefore it is true to say that expectation is one of the most important factors that influences deception. The following are some of the main types of expectations responsible to influence deception; mindset, stereotypes and preconceptions. However it is also important to note that expectations can be originated from some past experiences, culture and also training. In addition to that, it is very important to note that expectations also arise from some circumstances which evokes it. It is the correct expectation that leads to the right judgement while the wrong expectation leads to deception. There are two types of wrong expectation. The first one is the prejudices and then premature judgements. This is means that it is very likely for one to believe the deceptions which are in line with her or his expectation. The experiment, gave alot of expectations to the participants. This means that a lot of expectations were already built up in the mind of the participants(McCornack & Levine, 1990). One of the reasons being the fact that they were already informed that the experiment was trying to measure their ability of them to detect deception. This means that the participant was very expectant that the experimenter will deceive him or her. Due to this reason, it means that the participant was actually forced to apply some personal skills like looking out for some clues like non-verbal actions(Levine, 2008). Also some of the behaviour of the experimenter would automatically raise some doubts in the minds of the participants meaning that they definitely showed some signs of deception. This too could very easily lead the participant to make uninformed decision. Conclusion One of the most important questions that the experiment was trying to answer was if motivation and expectations are factors that facilitates deception (McCornack & Levine, 1990). The aim of the research was highlight the ability of a any person to detect deception. According to the hypothesis that was draw earlier that, motivation and expectation are the two major factors that facilitates deception in not only organizations but also in the lives of the individuals. It is very evident that indeed, the two factors are indeed facilitators to deception irrespective of the knowledge and skills one has in the subject of deception detection. It is also important to note that nonverbal behaviours are not the way to detect deception since many have been deceived even after applying them. In addition to that, it means that interpersonal interaction is not the way to detect deception. This is then where the aspect of knowledge comes in (Burgoon & Levine 2008).     References Burgoon, J. K., & Levine, T. R. (2008). Advances in deception detection. In. S. Smith & S. Wilson (Eds.). New Directions in Interpersonal Communication. Sage. Esther, W. (2000), Detecting deception. London: Vanguard Publishing. Joyce, E. (1976). Detecting deception: the role of various forms of information. Michigan: Michigan State University. Lapinski, M. K., & Levine, T. R. (2000). Culture and information manipulation theory: The effects of self construal and locus of benefit on information manipulation. Communication Studies, 51, 55-74. Levine, T. R. (2001). Dichotomous and continuous views of deception: A reexamination of deception ratings in information manipulation theory. Communication Research Reports, 18, 230-240. Levine, T. R. (2008). Deception Detection. In W. Donsbach (Ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Communication (vol III). Blackwell. Levine, T. R., Asada, K. J. K., & Park, H. S. (2006). The lying chicken and the gaze avoidant egg: Eye contact, deception, and causal order. Southern Communication Journal, 71, 401-11. Levine, T. R., Asada, K. J., Massi, L. L. (2003). The relative impact of violation type and lie severity on judgments of message deceptiveness. Communication Research Reports, 20, 208-218. McCornack, S. A., & Levine, T. R. (1990). When lovers become leery: The relationship between suspicion and accuracy in detecting deception. Communication Monographs, 57, 219-230. Park, H. S., & Levine, T. R. (2001). A probability model of accuracy in deception detection experiments. Communication Monographs, 68, 201-210. Read More

Actually, one of the reasons as to why the society has seriously failed is due to fact that it has not been abler to detect lies very easily. A good reason for such is that the society is lacking sufficient knowledge. This as a result leads to the situation of making decisions without the right information. To avoid that, there is a great need for the society to therefore, to avoid deception through adversaries, infiltration and manipulation by taking an action of safeguarding information (Lapinski & Levine 2000).

On the other hand, it is obvious that to achieve information that is of high assurance; a lot is needed to be taken into consideration. This because of the complexity with which correct information is demanded to be in form of volume, speed involves communication globality, complexity, demands and expectations as well as information exchange (Joyce, 1976). This means that also the fallibility with which the human beings detect deception should be taken into great consideration to be able to eliminate deception.

Also great care must be taken to ensure that the new technologies do not exacerbate vulnerability of the society to fall into deception. One of the reasons as to why getting rid of deception is so hard, is due to the fact that a human being are the source of deception. That is why it is very important to use other automated tools to help detect deception. Through these tools, there will be reliability as far as lies deception is concerned (Levine, 2001). One of the most important facts to take into consideration in trying to eliminate deception is the need for the society to incorporate all different fields as far information systems are concerned like criminology, communication, warfare, artificial intelligence and psychology.

The reason for incorporating all of the above fields is to ensure the concept of interest conflict is dealt with hence ensuring that decision-making is done with accurate information. By doing this, also the issue of manipulation and misrepresentation due to opportunistic agents of information is not given a chance to influence behaviours. This will then enable all the organizations to make decisions not basing their argument on misrepresented information (Levine, 2008). It is very amazing that many people believe that they are in a position to detect deception on the process of one-on-one communication.

This is whereby they claim that for them to achieve this they have to listen keenly as well as look at the other person’s nonverbal clues like eye contacts avoidance and shifting of the eyes. This method or theory of detection that has been adopted by many people has been found insufficient. This means that nonverbal behaviours are not the way to detect deception since many have been deceived even after applying them. In addition to that, it means that interpersonal interaction is not the way to detect deception.

This is then where the aspect of knowledge comes in (Burgoon & Levine 2008). Deception and motivation Motivation refers to a kind of behaviour that is goal oriented. motivation can either be extrinsic or intrinsic. This means that it can come from within or from without a an individual. It should be noted that any form of deception is usually motivated by some given factors. Deception has been encountered mainly in communications that are computer oriented. One kind of a deception that is very common includes the gender switching.

Identity concealment and attractiveness deception. This is whereby, different motivating factors leads to such kinds of deception. A study was done to investigate the motivating factor underlying the issue of identity concealment. The expectations of the results were not cut short. This is because, as a matter of fact, it was discovered that many people hide their identity due to privacy concerns. On he other hand, t was discovered that gender switching was caused by the fact that one suffers due to unknown self as well as the desire to play some new roles.

Read More