Deception in Business Networks: Is It Easier to Lie Online?

This article synthesizes research presented in several models of unethical behavior to develop propositions about the factors that facilitate and mitigate deception in online business communications. The work expands the social network perspective to incorporate the medium of communication as a significant influence on deception. We go beyond existing models by developing seven propositions that identify how social network and issue moral intensity characteristics influence the probability of deception in online business communication in comparison to traditional communication channels. Remedies to detect and discourage deception in online business networks are also offered, as well as limitations and future research directions.     

Deception and its Detection Under Synchronous and Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communication

As part of an ongoing research program investigating features of computer-mediated communication (CMC) that affect deception and its detection, an experiment was conducted to test the impact of synchronicity on communication processes, credibility assessments, deception detection, and team performance. At issue is whether various forms of CMC enable or deter successful deception. Synchronous (real-time) CMC was hypothesized to foster more involvement and mutuality during communication, more credibility for team members, and hence less detection of deception when it was present. Team performance was hypothesized to suffer under deception due to deceivers capitalizing on synchronous communication to build their credibility. Two-person teams conducted a decision-making task in real time (synchronous) or over the course of several days (asynchronous). In half of the pairs, one party was asked to be deceptive. The results indicated that participants in the synchronous mode were more involved, perceived more mutuality, and viewed their partners in a more favorable light, than participants in the asynchronous mode. Deceivers portrayed themselves as somewhat more credible than truthtellers. However, they were not perceived as more persuasive than truth-tellers. Participants in the deceptive condition made poorer decisions than participants in the truthful condition. Implications for CMC and future study are discussed.     

Deceitful when insecure: The effect of self-efficacy beliefs on the use of deception in negotiations

This article investigates if and how negotiators' self-efficacy beliefs affect their use of deception in negotiation. Specifically, we propose that self-efficacy can be interpreted as a threat to self-concept, which encourages individuals to temporarily bypass self-regulatory obstacles by morally disengaging their cognitive moral filters, thereby enabling them to use deception in negotiation. We test our hypotheses in three independent experimental studies involving an interactive negotiation simulation, totalizing 460 participants. We find that negotiators with low self-efficacy regarding their negotiation abilities are more likely to use deception than those with high self-efficacy beliefs. Furthermore, we find that moral disengagement mediates the effects of self-efficacy on deception. Our findings suggest that self-efficacy plays a key role in shaping negotiators' ethical behaviors and we identify the psychological mechanism underlying this relationship.     

An ethical analysis of deception in advertising

This paper examines several issues regarding deception in advertising. Some generally accepted definitions are considered and found to be inadequate. An alternative definition is proposed for legal/regulatory purposes and is related to a suggested definition of the term deception as it is used in everyday language. Based upon these definitions, suggestions are offered for detecting and regulating deception in advertising. This paper additionally considers the grounds for the generally held but largely unquestioned assumption that deceptive advertising is unethical. It is argued that deceptive advertising can be shown to be morally objectionable, on the weak assumption that it is prima facie wrong to harm others. Finally, the implications of this analysis with respect to current regulation of deceptive advertising by the FTC are considered. Thomas L. Carson is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. He was previously Lecturer at the University of California at Los Angeles and was holder of an NEH Fellowship for College Teachers. His most important publication is The Status of Morality, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984. Forthcoming (in Philosophy and Public Affairs) is: Bribery, Extortion, and The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.Richard E. Wokutch is Associate Professor of Management at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University where he teaches in the social issues and policy areas. He previously held positions as Visiting Assistant Research Professor at the Values Center, University of Delaware, and as Visiting Fulbright Research Fellow, Science Center, Berlin, West Germany. He has published several recent articles in the areas of bluffing and deception in business and ethical/social investing. James E. Cox, Jr., is Assistant Professor of Management and Marketing at Illinois State University. Formerly, he was at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (from September 1979 until August 1983). He was a fellow at the 1979 American Marketing Association Ph. D. Consortium and his research has been published in the Journal of Forecasting, the Journal of Marketing Education, the Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, and the Proceedings of the National Council of Physical Distribution Management. He is also co-author of the book Sales Forecasting Methods: A Survey of Recent Developments.     

See No Evil: The Effect of Communication Medium and Motivation on Deception Detection

The present study reports an experiment that examines the role of communication medium and liar motivation on deception detection. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two dyadic communication conditions, text-based, computer-mediated environment or face-to-face, and to one of two motivation conditions, high or low. Participants engaged in a discussion of four topics, in which one participant was deceptive during two topics and truthful during the other two. No main effect of communication medium or motivation level was observed. However, an interaction effect suggests that highly motivated liars interacting in a text-based, computer- mediated environment were the most successful in deceiving their partners. The implications of these results are discussed both in terms of the elimination of non- verbal cues, as well as the potential advantages to the motivated liar offered by text-based media.     

Criminal Identity Deception and Deception Detection in Law Enforcement

Criminals often falsify their identities intentionally in order to deter police investigations. In this paper we focus on uncovering patterns of criminal identity deception observed through a case study performed at a local law enforcement agency. We define criminal identity deception based on an understanding of the various theories of deception. We interview a police detective expert and discuss the characteristics of criminal identity deception. A taxonomy for criminal identity deception was built to represent the different patterns that were identified in the case study. We also discuss methods currently employed by law enforcement agencies to detect deception. Police database systems contain little information that can help reveal deceptive identities. Thus, in order to identify deception, police officers rely mainly on investigation. Current methods for detecting deceptive criminal identities are neither effective nor efficient. Therefore we propose an automated solution to help solve this problem.     

Ethics, Deception and Labor Negotiation

There has been widespread emphasis on the importance of trust amongst parties to the employment relationship, associated with a call for increased "integrative bargaining". Trust is bound up with ethical action, but there has been some debate about the ethics of deception in bargaining. Because it is possible for cooperative bargainers to be exploited, some writers contend that deceptive behavior is ethical and established practice. There are several problems about that view. It is questionable how clear and uniform such a practice has been. An appearance of deceptive bluffing can often be explained as exchange of genuine concessions. Recent trends have seen increased devolution of bargaining from professionals to non-professionals, which dilutes any shared understandings there have been in the past, while practices that do exist may not be freely or voluntarily accepted and the existence of such practices is not enough to compensate for inequalities of power and skill. It is questionable to what extent bluffing and deception are necessary for self-defense. There other techniques available by which parties can guard themselves against exploitation.     

Perceptions of High Integrity Can Persist After Deception: How Implicit Beliefs Moderate Trust Erosion

Scholars have assumed that trust is fragile: difficult to build and easily broken. We demonstrate, however, that in some cases trust is surprisingly robust—even when harmful deception is revealed, some individuals maintain high levels of trust in the deceiver. In this paper, we describe how implicit theories moderate the harmful effects of revealed deception on a key component of trust: perceptions of integrity. In a negotiation context, we show that people who hold incremental theories (beliefs that negotiating abilities are malleable) reduce perceptions of their counterpart’s integrity after they learn that they were deceived, whereas people who hold entity theories (beliefs that negotiators’ characteristics and abilities are fixed) maintain their first impressions after learning that they were deceived. Implicit theories influenced how targets interpreted evidence of deception. Individuals with incremental theories encoded revealed deception as an ethical violation; individuals with entity theories did not. These findings highlight the importance of implicit beliefs in understanding how trust changes over time.     

Deception Performance in Online Group Negotiation and Decision Making: The Effects of Deception Experience and Deception Skill

Deception in computer-mediated group Negotiation and decision making presents a variety of risks. Gaining a better understanding of online deception has important implications for both individuals and organizations. Despite the rapidly increasing number of online deception cases reported in recent years, extant deception research has not considered the context beyond individuals or small groups. Additionally, there has been a mismatch between the important role of individual characteristics of the deceiver in theory and the lack of empirical investigation of their impact in research. This study aims to assess deception performance in mid-sized online groups by building a model of individual differences in deception experience and deception skill. We conceptualize deception performance in terms of deception success and two other new constructs, namely survivability and productivity. The model has been tested with a dataset collected from a real-world online community. The results show that deception skill has a positive effect on deception success, but deception experience has a negative effect. Although deception experience and deception skill are found to have opposite effects on the success of deceivers, both contribute positively to the survivability of deceivers. The findings of this study have significant implications for future deception research in online group communication and negotiation.     

Consumer brand confusion: A conceptual framework

A definition and theoretical framework for consumer brand confusion are developed. Brand confusion is distinguished from related terms, such as uncertainty, miscomprehension, infringement, and deception. The factors affecting the likelihood of brand confusion are extended beyond stimulus similarity to include individual and situational factors, and propositions regarding the effects of individual and situational factors are developed. The value of a better understanding of consumer brand confusion to managers and policy makers is discussed.     

Disentangling the Effects of Perceived Deception and Anticipated Harm on Consumer Responses to Deceptive Advertising

Previous behavioral research on advertising deception has focused on the extent to which consumers would be misled by claims and implications of advertisements. The present research examines the effect of an important, but largely neglected, dimension: the severity of anticipated harm as a result of being deceived. Two experiments disentangle the effect of anticipated harm on consumer brand attitudes and purchase intentions from that of perceived deception. Interestingly, greater harmfulness increases diagnosticity of perceived deception, which partially accounts for consumers’ negative reactions to deceptive advertising. Theoretical, methodological, and ethical implications are discussed.     

Loose with the Truth: Predicting Deception in Negotiation

Using a simulated, two-party negotiation, we examined how characteristics of the actor, target, and situation affected deception. To trigger deception, we used an issue that had no value for one of the two parties (indifference issue). We found support for an opportunistic betrayal model of deception: deception increased when the other party was perceived as benevolent, trustworthy, and as having integrity. Negotiators’ goals also affected the use of deception. Individualistic, cooperative, and mixed dyads responded differently to information about the other party’s trustworthiness, benevolence, and integrity when deciding to either misrepresent or leverage their indifference issue. Mixed dyads displayed opportunistic betrayal. Negotiators in all-cooperative and all-individualistic dyads used different information in deciding whether to leverage their indifference issues and used the same information (benevolence) differently in deciding whether to misrepresent the value of their indifference issue. Mara Olekalns is a Professor of Management (Negotiations) at the Melbourne Business School, University of Melbourne. Her research focuses on communication processes in negotiation. In her research, she has investigated how strategy sequences shape negotiation outcomes. She is extending this research to investigate how impressions and communication shape trust in negotiation. Her work on communication processes in negotiation has been published in Journal of Applied Psychology, Human Communication Research, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Philip L. Smith is a Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne. His primary research interest is in building quantitative models of the human visual system. He also applies his modeling expertise to analyses of communication processes in negotiation, focusing on the relationships between situational and dispositional factors, strategy sequences and negotiation outcomes. It has been published in leading management and psychology journals, including Human Communication Research, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Authors' Note The research reported in this paper was supported by a Discovery Grant from the Australian Research Council. We thank Ania Ratzik and Rudi Crncec for assistance with data coding. Correspondence should be addressed to Mara Olekalns, Melbourne Business School, University of Melbourne, 200 Leicester St, Carlton, Victoria, 3053, Australia or via email to m.olekalns@mbs.edu     

Maybe It’s Right,Maybe It’s Wrong: Structural and Social Determinants of Deception in Negotiation

Context shapes negotiators’ actions, including their willingness to act unethically. Focusing on negotiators use of deception, we used a simulated two-party negotiation to test how three contextual variables—regulatory focus, power, and trustworthiness—interacted to shift negotiators’ ethical thresholds. We demonstrated that these three variables interact to either inhibit or activate deception, providing support for an interactionist model of ethical decision-making. Three patterns emerged from our analyses. First, low power inhibited and high power activated deception. Second, promotion-focused negotiators favored sins of omission, whereas prevention-focused negotiators favored sins of commission. Third, low cognition-based trust influenced deception when negotiators experience fit between power and regulatory focus, whereas affect-based trust influenced deception when negotiators experience misfit between these structural context variables. We conclude that regulatory focus primes different moral templates: promotion-focused negotiators’ decision to deceive is determined by moral pragmatism, whereas prevention-focused negotiators’ decision to deceive is determined by opportunism. Because each combination of power and regulatory focus was tied to a specific subcomponent of trust, we further conclude that negotiators engage in motivated information search to determine whether they should deceive their opponents.     

Automating Linguistics-Based Cues for Detecting Deception in Text-Based Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communications

The detection of deception is a promising but challenging task. A systematic discussion of automated Linguistics Based Cues (LBC) to deception has rarely been touched before. The experiment studied the effectiveness of automated LBC in the context of text-based asynchronous computer mediated communication (TA-CMC). Twenty-seven cues either extracted from the prior research or created for this study were clustered into nine linguistics constructs: quantity, diversity, complexity, specificity, expressivity, informality, affect, uncertainty, and nonimmediacy. A test of the selected LBC in a simulated TA-CMC experiment showed that: (1) a systematic analysis of linguistic information could be useful in the detection of deception; (2) some existing LBC were effective as expected, while some others turned out in the opposite direction to the prediction of the prior research; and (3) some newly discovered linguistic constructs and their component LBC were helpful in differentiating deception from truth.     

The Influence of Consumers’ Cognitive and Psychographic Traits on Perceived Deception: A Comparison Between Online and Offline Retailing Contexts

In this article, we examine the role of several consumers’ cognitive and psychographic traits in their perceptions of retailers’ deceptive practices (perceived deception) and the different effects on perceived deception associated with online vis-à-vis in-store shopping. Building on theoretical models of persuasion in consumer behavior, we hypothesize that the antecedents of perceived deception in traditional settings are the same as those on the Internet, while the intensity of the impact of these antecedents differs between the online and the offline environment. Results suggest that the effects of individual’s cognitive traits (Internet-based information search and perceived Internet usefulness) and risk aversion on perceived deception are more relevant when consumers shop online than when they purchase from traditional stores. Conversely, psychographic traits (shopping enjoyment and materialism) play a more important role in explaining perceived deception in the traditional shopping context as compared to the online channel. Several theoretical and managerial implications are derived from these findings.     

A tangled web: views of deception from the customer's perspective

While there has been extensive research on deception, extant literature has not examined how deception is processed solely from the customer's perspective. Extensive qualitative interviews were conducted and analyzed to inform the proposed framework. Cognitive dissonance theory and attribution theory are used to frame the process consumers go through when deception is perceived. When consumers perceive deceit, they will consider attribution before determining intentionality. Internal attributions relieve the company of wrongdoing to some extent, whereas external attributions lead consumers to examine several elements of deception including intent. Unintentional deceit will trigger assessments of magnitude, stability, and switching costs; while less is considered when deceit is intentional. The findings of this research are important for advancing theory in relation to deceit and for helping practitioners understand the importance of changing consumer cognitions before consumers decide to change their behavior by discontinuing the relationship.     

Consumer cynicism and perceived deception in vanity sizing: The moderating role of retailer (dis)honesty

While prior scholarship has acknowledged the overall positive influence of vanity sizing on consumer outcomes, no work to date has addressed the psychological process that occurs when consumers suspect retailers of dishonest sizing information. This is an important process to understand because perceptions of deceptive retailer motives lead consumers to react negatively to the product and the retailer, regardless of the retailer's actual motives. Thus, this research utilizes attribution theory to examine perceived deception as a mediator between consumer cynicism (a dispositional trait) and consumer outcomes. The results reveal that at higher levels of consumer cynicism, prior knowledge of deceptive sizing practices has an amplifying effect on the influence of consumer cynicism on perceived deception, while retailer honesty with sizing issues helps to block this influence. Further, perceived deception leads to reduced consumer outcomes, confirming prior findings in the literature.     

Lying and Smiling: Informational and Emotional Deception in Negotiation

This study investigated attitudes toward the use of deception in negotiation, with particular attention to the distinction between deception regarding the informational elements of the interaction (e.g., lying about or misrepresenting needs or preferences) and deception about emotional elements (e.g., misrepresenting one’s emotional state). We examined how individuals judge the relative ethical appropriateness of these alternative forms of deception, and how these judgments relate to negotiator performance and long-run reputation. Individuals viewed emotionally misleading tactics as more ethically appropriate to use in negotiation than informational deception. Approval of deception predicted negotiator performance in a negotiation simulation and also general reputation as a negotiator, but the nature of these relationships depended on the kind of deception involved.     

The ethics of impression management

There are differences among forms of impression management that are relevant to its ethical evaluation. Sometimes, moral appraisal is to do with impression management as a tactic of influence, but not about deception. In other cases, an audience is given a true or a false impression, and ethical questions of deception arise, but they are made more complex by the need to consider the responsibility of an audience in reaching its conclusions. Cases where that is an issue blend into a third category in which impression management is joint social performance. Such cases raise additional possibilities of the problematic influence of one agent by another, but also begin to move ethical concerns from the behaviour of an individual agent to the social practices that sustain their expectations. Such social practices invite ethical appraisal because they may impose constraints. But they may also provide opportunities for achievement and pursuit of excellence.