Detecting deception through linguistic analysis
Download
1 / 17

Detecting Deception Through Linguistic Analysis - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 360 Views
  • Updated On :

Detecting Deception Through Linguistic Analysis. Judee K. Burgoon J. P. Blair Tiantian Qin Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr. Introduction. Intelligence analysts are required to sift through mountains of information Humans are generally bad at detecting deception

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Detecting Deception Through Linguistic Analysis' - nalani


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Detecting deception through linguistic analysis l.jpg

Detecting Deception Through Linguistic Analysis

Judee K. Burgoon

J. P. Blair

Tiantian Qin

Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr.


Introduction l.jpg
Introduction

  • Intelligence analysts are required to sift through mountains of information

  • Humans are generally bad at detecting deception

  • Mounting evidence suggests that CMC makes humans even less accurate at detecting deception

  • There is a need to develop tools to help humans detect deception


Background l.jpg
Background

  • Desert Survival

    • 2 (Deception – Truthful) X 2 (FtF or CMC)

    • All discussions were transcribed

    • Linguistic Analysis conducted on 27 possible indicators of deception

  • Mock Theft Pilot

    • 2 (Deception – Truthful) X 2 (FtF or Text)

    • Transcribed and Analyzed


Hypotheses l.jpg
Hypotheses

  • Deceivers will display higher

    • Quantity

    • Expressiveness


Hypotheses5 l.jpg
Hypotheses

  • Deceivers will display less

    • Complexity

      • Vocabulary

      • Grammatical


Method l.jpg
Method

  • Students recruited from a multi-sectioned communications class

  • Half were randomly assigned to be thieves and half to be innocents

  • Thieves “stole” a wallet that was left in their classroom

  • Innocents were told that a “theft” would occur on a given day


Method7 l.jpg
Method

  • Subjects were motivated to do well by telling them that they could earn $10 if they convinced the interviewer that they were innocent

  • An additional $50 was to be awarded to the person who was the most successful at convincing the interviewer.


Method8 l.jpg
Method

  • Participants were interviewed by trained interviewers using a standardized BAI format in one of three modalities

    • FtF

    • Text/Chat

    • Audio Conference

  • All interviews were recorded and transcribed


Method9 l.jpg
Method

  • Analysis was conducted using shallow parsers (Grok and Iskim) or look-up dictionaries

  • Classes of Cues

    • Quantity (Words, Syllables, Sentences)

    • Vocabulary Complexity (Big words and Syllables per word)

    • Grammatical Complexity (Short and Long Sentences, Flesch-Kincaid, and others)

    • Expressiveness (Rate of Adj and Adv, emotiveness index, affective terms)


Mock theft results l.jpg
MOCK THEFT RESULTS

Decision

Tree

Analysis

Note: Sample Tree from text modality with no duplicated cues


Mock theft results14 l.jpg
MOCK THEFT RESULTS

Decision

Tree

Analysis

Note: Sample tree from text modality, significant cues only


Decision tree improvement l.jpg

78.58%

75%

62.5%

60.42%

58.33%

Original

Significant

Only txt;Significant

No Duplicate

Only txt; Noduplicate

DECISION TREE IMPROVEMENT


Conclusions l.jpg
Conclusions

  • We were able to identify some linguistic indicators of deception

  • Modality also appears to affect several indicators

  • These indicators could be subjected to a pruned tree algorithm to classify subjects as truthful or deceptive

  • Future research will serve to further improve modeling


Future research l.jpg
Future Research

  • The linguistic model will be improved by

    • Adding more data

    • Improving dictionaries

    • Focusing on different models for different communication contexts

    • Adding subjective operator evaluations


ad