HELLO AND WELCOME TO DECEPTION RESEARCH

This page is a result of a joint project funded by EPSRC and conducted by Cambridge University, UCL, Newcastle University and the University of Portsmouth. Here you will find info on researchers and literature on deception. Simply follow the links above.

We are eager to hear from you if you wish to contribute to this repository.

Drop us a line at: david.modic[@]cl.cam.ac.uk (as is usual, remove the square brackets).

 

 

 

Latest contributions in the "Research" category sorted by date - added (desc)

Summary
Financial Fraud and Fraud Susceptibility in the United States

Note. Amongst other things, they did FFM on victims of financial fraud. This is similar to DM's work for IAREP 2011 (preparing for publication).

The Scope of the Problem: An Overview of Fraud Prevalence Measurement

Abstract. Without accurate and reliable estimates of fraud, it is difficult to understand what works or does not work to protect victims from harm. Unfortunately, current estimates of fraud prevalence vary widely, making it difficult for law enforcement, researchers, and policymakers to appreciate the true scope of the problem. This report aims to reconcile the variability of fraud prevalence estimates, to explain why it is so difficult to obtain reliable and valid estimates, and to suggest ways to improve fraud prevalence measurement.

Highlights

Exploring consumer lying in information-based exchanges

Abstract. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of two studies that explored consumer misrepresentation (lying) during personal information disclosure in a commercial context. Disclosure strategies and mediating processes that might influence lying were also investigated. Design/methodology/approach – Two studies were carried out to examine the phenomenon of interest. The first study examined the extent of consumer lying in a consumer-commercial exchange context, the variation of lying about different kinds of personal information and a classification of consumers in terms of disclosure tendencies.

Who lies?

Abstract. Seventy-seven undergraduates and 70 demographically diverse members of the community com- pleted 12 individual-differences measures hypothesized to predict lie-telling in everyday life and then kept a diary every day for a week of all of their social interactions and all of the lies that they told during those interactions. Consistent with predictions, the people who told more lies were more manipulative, more concerned with self-presentation, and more sociable. People who told fewer lies were more highly socialized and reported higher quality same-sex relationships.

The acceptability of deception as a function of perceivers' culture, deceiver's intention, and deceiver‐deceived relationship

Abstract. This study explored the degree to which deception is perceived to be a socially acceptable form of communication. It was suspected that a liar's motivation for deceiving, a per- ceiver's cultural background, and the type of relationship between a liar and the target of a lie (e.g., spouse, friend, stranger, etc.) would affect the perceived acceptability of deceptive messages. Students from China and the United States rated the degree to which they perceived deceptive acts depicted in written scenarios as acceptable or unacceptable.

Pages