Interpersonal Deception Theory of David Buller and Judee Burgoon chapter 7, Em Griffin (4th ed.)

Verbal Deceit Three strategies to not telling the truth: 1. Falsification (a lie, creates a fiction) 2. Concealment (part truth, hides a secret) 3. Equivocation (vague, dodges the issue)

Getting Away with Deceit Could you tell if someone is lying to you? Research suggests we are not too good at detecting deception; Deception research shows that the nonverbal cues people look to for detection (looking in the eye, hurried speech, and nervous laughter) are not reliable indicators of deception; A chuckling, fast -talking person who avoids eye contact is just as likely to be telling the truth as someone who displays the socially accepted signs of sincerity;

Research Approach Buller & Burgoon reject the standard experimental approach that has Ss listening or viewing actors act out scripted messages to detect deception; They think that the fuller context of interpsersonal communication is crucial to the communication event; Interpersonal Deception Theory is the result of this thinking that context is crucial;

Key Propositions in the Interpersonal Deception Theory What deceivers and respondents think and do varies according to the amount of interactive give-and-take that’s possible in the situation; What deceivers and respondents think and do varies according to how well they know and like each other; Deceivers make more strategic moves and leak more nonverbal cues than truth tellers; With increased interaction, deceivers make more strategic moves and display less leakage; Deceivers and respondents’ expectation for honesty (truth bias) is positively linked with interactivity and relational warmth; [for more, see pp. 92 - 93]

Two Core Ideas 1. Interpersonal Communication is Interactive; People are constantly adjusting their behavior toward one another in response to feedback; Interaction rather than individual behavior is at the core of the theory;

Two Core Ideas 2. Strategic Deception Demands Mental Effort; A successful deceiver must manipulate a lot of information; At some point, the strategic requirements of deception could produce cognitive overload; Leakage refers to the unconscious nonverbal cues that signal an internal state; Griffin suggests that we think of a deceptive interaction we have taken part in, either as deceiver or respondent, and compare it to the propositions in Figure 7.1 (pp. 92-93);

Strategic Information Management Every deceptive act has at least 3 aims: 1. To accomplish a specific task or goal; 2. To establish or maintain a relationship with the respondent; 3. To “save face” or sustain the image of one or both parties;

Four Message Characteristics that Reflect Strategic Intent 1. Uncertainty and Vagueness 2. Nonimmediacy, reticence, and withdrawal; 3. Disassociation; 4. Image-and relationship -protecting behavior;

Message Characteristic of Strategic Intent Uncertainty and Vagueness: Short (lack of detail) and noncommittal answers (“I worked late”; speak in passive and indefinite ways (“It was impossible to get things done before then”];

Nonimmediacy, reticence, and withdrawal The desire to be out of the situation--shows up in nonverbal actions to turn away, sit apart, lean back; silence before answering, frequent pauses; nonimmediacy (symbolically removing yourself from the situation) in words as well, e.g., changing tense from present to past;

Disassociation A way of distancing yourself from what you’ve done; shifting responsibility to others; removing individual choice; shared responsibility; downplay the intensity of unwelcome news (“sometimes”); generally, sever the personal connection between the actor and the act of deception;

Image- and relationship-protecting behavior To mask the cues that leak out despite their best efforts, deceivers try to appear extra sincere; Deceivers in dialogue tend to nod in agreement when the respondent speaks, avoid interrupting, and smile frequently;

Multiple Factors & Deceiver’s Strategic Plan (p. 96) Plan-based activity increases when : the situation is highly interactive (prop. 4); parties know each other well (prop. 8); the deceiver particularly fears discovery (prop. 6); the deceiver’s motivation is selfish (prop. 7); the deceiver has good communication skills (prop. 9);

LEAKAGE Why leakage occurs: intense attempt to control information can produce too slick a performance; lying causes physiological arousal; the predominant felt emotions that accompany lying are guilt and anxiety--they are hard to cover; cognitive overload in attending to so much and some behaviors leak out;

Telltale Signs of Leakage (based on 35 leakage studies) Unintentional nonverbals that usually accompany deception: Fidgety hand movements; Increased blinking and enlarged pupils; Frequent speech errors (grammatical mistakes, repetitions, slips of the tongue]; Increased speech hesitations (awkward pauses, “ahs, ers, ums”); higher voice pitch; Increased discrepancies between verbal and nonverbal channels;

Respondent’s Dilemma Truth bias: our expectation that people will tell the truth; As in CMM theory (which is interpretive), Deception Theory (which is empirical) comes to the conclusion that persons-in conversation co-construct their own social realities. The construction project continues as the deceiver reacts to the respondent’s suspicions.

Putting Doubts to Rest: Deceiver Adjustment to Respondent Suspicion Deceivers are usually more successful at sensing suspicion than respondents are at spotting deception; As soon as deceivers see signs of doubt, they change their behavior in a way intended to alleviate their partner’s distrust; They usually reciprocate the mood and manner of the respondent;

Putting Doubts to Rest Reciprocation: A process of adjusting communication behavior to mesh with the other; If the respondent shows high involvement, so does the deceiver; If the respondent shows a nonchalant style, so does the deceiver; Truth tellers react the same way to accusation, often resulting in more suspicion (p. 99);

A Final Note (from Griffin’s critique) When talking with others, I should doubt my ability to detect deception; Most of us think we are great lie detectors; This theory , Interpersonal Deception Theory, suggests we are not great lie detectors;