1. Computer-Mediated Communication
Deceptions of Face and Time
September 2016

2. Do we use language differently when we lie in text-based CMC?
In asynchronous, text-based interaction: Liars used more words, were more expressive, non-immediate and informal, and made more typos (Zhou et al. 2004).
Similar findings in synchronous IM interaction: More words and fewer self-references
Those lied to also IMed differently, even when they didn’t realize the deceit: Shorter sentences, more questions.
Speaking of “detection” from last time…
Zhou, Lina, et al. "Automating linguistics-based cues for detecting deception in text-based asynchronous computer-mediated communications." Group decision and negotiation 13.1 (2004):
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

3. Detecting deception in CMC
Most people (even trained professionals, like police officers) detect deception at no better than a chance rate.
Some reliable markers of lying: Illustrative and other body movements, higher pitch, microexpressions.
People highly motivated to lie may be easier to detect (i.e., trying harder may give you away) — “motivation impairment effect”
In asynchronous, text-based interaction:
Liars used more words, were more expressive, non-immediate and informal, and made more typos (Zhou et al. 2004).
Similar in synchronous IM interaction:
More words and fewer self-references
Those lied to also IMed differently, even when they didn’t realize the deceit: Shorter sentences, more questions.
No consistent findings about whether certain media make it easier or harder to detect deception
In some studies, it’s easier in richer media; in others, in leaner media or no difference.
However, the motivation impairment effect may be lessened in CMC — less is “given off”: Hancock et al. (2005): Motivated liars detected more often than unmotivated ones in FtF, but less often in CMC. Motivated CMC liars least detected of all.
Hancock, Jeffrey T., et al. "Automated linguistic analysis of deceptive and truthful synchronous computer-mediated communication." System Sciences, HICSS'05. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, 2005.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

4. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
As of 2014 approximately 6% of Internet users who are in a marriage or other committed relationship met online, compared to 3% who reported this in Additionally, 42% of Americans know someone who has used an online dating site or app, an increase of 11% from 2005, and 29% of Americans know someone who has met their partner through this medium, compared with 15% who made this claim in 2005.
Catfishing as a term: intentional deception with social media for purposes of making a romantic connection (fake photos, fake bio, sometimes fake networks).
54% of online daters believe that someone else has presented false information in their profile,
and 28% have been contacted in a way that left them feeling harassed or uncomfortable.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

5. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

6. For Example: Deception, Norms and Perception in Photos
Loi Sessions Goulet’s study of MySpace photos (2009)
Users who post these photographs are conforming to a social trend at the expense of their individuality
The presentation of these photographs is narcissistic
These photographs purposefully conceal the body
(wrote this while finishing her PhD, worked as a manager at FB, now director of research at TripAdvisor)
So, *why* are people so critical/concerned about establishing things like ‘weight’? Why the assumption that someone has something to hide?
(e.g. research on gender and identity)
The classic “MySpace Angle” pose…
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

7. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
It is very common for people I know to take time out of their day or at a special event for which they are already dressed up, to take dozens of high-quality photographs of themselves with nice backgrounds, in hopes that one of them will be "Facebook profile picture worthy." …all of these pictures do intend on displaying the person in their most attractive light, so the concept of narcissism is still present. Just the fact that many of us do it to see how many "likes" we can get speaks enough about that aspect. – Aamna Khan
I think the fact that the pictures are still of the individuals themselves makes this practice furthers the point that this practice is not deceptive. If we call this deception, we must consider that we are also calling certain real life behaviors deceptive as well--wearing make up is then deceptive, wearing loose clothing is then deceptive. I disagree with this notion. – Anushee Sondi
This seems like a real limitation of the profile picture, the inability to selectively disclose yourself like you could your political affiliation or religion. I wonder if there could ever be a way of making one's visual appearance online acceptably ambiguous, without having to go to the full extent of replacing your features in high-definition like in Infinite Jest. – Andrew Head
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

8. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Elements of a Profile
So, lets consider online dating as a key area (with some real risks!) where deception can occur.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

9. Strategic vs. authentic vs. aspirational self-presentation
Anticipated future interaction?
Actual self vs. ideal self?
“Balancing accuracy and desirability”
Related to this: notion of actual self (who you are) and ideal self (who you would like to be).
Tension between presenting an enhanced or desired self (which, presumably, leads to greater success in attracting people) and the true self (the disclosure of which is part of establishing intimacy).
“Sure, I love to go hiking” — aspirational — “I’ve never known so many incredibly athletic women in my life!”
What happens when online persona becomes offline person? Anticipated future interaction (kind of like “shadow of the future” in game theory) shapes how people present themselves.
Dan Ariely: coffee and sex
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

10. Some Participant Quotes from Nicole Ellison’s Online Dating Research:
“In their profile they write about their dreams as if they are reality.”
“I’ve never known so many incredibly athletic women in my life!”
“I checked my profile and I had lied a little bit about the pounds, so I thought I had better start losing some weight so that it would be more honest.”
Ellison, N., Heino, R. and Gibbs, J. (2006), Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11: 415–441.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

11. Forming impressions in online dating profiles
“Cognitive misers”: Making the most of limited cues
Social Information Processing (SIP) (Walther)
Reciprocal re-use of what they notice in others (refinement based on emergent norms)
SIP: ‘sip instead of a gulp’ – idea that we build relationships slooowly via cmc compared to f2f. This can build intimacy via verbal cues over time. (think of being set up on a blind date, but a week in advance you start ing just to coordinate).
Incremental refinement of self-presentation based on observed norms and practices
Learning how to proceed through stages of communication
“Circumvention” — strategies employed by users to exploit capabilities and minimize constraints of a medium. Humans are very clever — we find ways to self-present as best we can in a given medium. E.g., rounding your age to avoid certain hard age boundaries.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

12. Virtue in vagueness: Norah Jones
The persona in her songs — let’s not call it Ms. Jones herself, because her life couldn't be this dull — might have lived practically anywhere in the developed world, at any time during the last century. Somehow Ms. Jones’s work has managed to make a virtue of vagueness.
— The New York Times, Feb. 8, 2004, via Norton, Frost, & Ariely (2007)
Vagueness in two senses: limited scope of information (few cues), and limited depth of information (informationally sparse cues).
Limited scope of cues: Norton, Frost, & Ariely (2004, 2007):
— People think they’ll like someone better given more information about them. (Study 1)
— In fact, they like them less the more pieces of information they are given.
— This trend reversed in the last trial of the experiment, and then subjects liked people better given more information.
— (So the proper conclusion is unclear.)
Norton MI, Frost JH, Ariely D. Less is more: the lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007 Jan;92(1):
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

13. Vagueness…or Deception?
Profile-based
Self-Presentation
Observed
Self-Presentation
In lab measure:
Height
Weight
Age
Income
Photograph
What if vagueness is actually pretty consistent with some things more than others…might that indicate something more systematic, like a tendency to *want* to deceive others a bit?
Cross-Validation
Hancock, Jeffrey T., Catalina Toma, and Nicole Ellison. "The truth about lying in online dating profiles." Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 2007.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

14. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Deception?
… or strategery?
(Hancock et al. 2007)
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

15. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Deception?
(Hancock et al. 2007)
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

16. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Deception?
(Hancock et al. 2007)
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

17. Managing Social Information, and Information Control
Its not just about online dating…online interaction often involves information control to manage our presentation of self for different people in different contexts (e.g., who you want to see or not see specific photos of you online, whether you want to connect your online commentary with your real name, etc).
Again, we see this link between self-presentation of self, power of ambiguity, and importance of our perception of the audience.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

18. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Deceptions of Time…
Again, an often grey area between outright deception and “little” lies that smooth out social situations.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

19. “Interpersonal Awareness Narratives”
Ambiguity of send/receive in asynchronous messaging.
Whereas IM supports ongoing conversation, SMS should be more concerned with arranging future social interactions.
Many feel ‘compelled to respond’ – tendency to preserve relationship from response failures.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

20. “On My Way” Birnholtz et al. 2010
Sample: 194 students, 18-20, ~5 years of SMS experience
Recorded and rated their own last 30 SMS outbox messages as deceptive or not (along with other info about the message
Deceptive messages were then coded by the researchers as butler lies or just jocular
Butler lies were further coded as either entry, exit, or arranging communication.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

21. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Results…
3 out of 100 messages was a butler lie.
30% of all the coded lies were butler lies.
81.5% involve arranging social interaction
12.14% entering communication
6.36% exiting communication
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

22. Qualitative Assessments of Butler Lies
Temporal Ambiguity
Activity Ambiguity
Location Ambiguity
“sorry sorry I just saw ur txt!”
“I’m eating now. Can I call u later?”
“almost there! lol”
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication

23. Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication
Do we value knowing when people read our messages more, or do we value the ability to take advantage of ambiguity more? In the past, I've used extensions like Facebook Unseen so I can read a Facebook message without feeling the pressure to come up with quick decisions and make sound responses.
"the absence of information then becomes a source of information itself." …do we want to control what information is visible at risk of appearing that we are telling butler lies or similar fabrications, or are we okay with a constant default setting that decides for us what information is visible? – Riyana Basu
Importance of having this type of control…the ability to control ambiguity.
9/11/2018
Cheshire & King — Computer-Mediated Communication