Abstract
Past research on deception detection has demonstrated the diagnostic value of attending to verbal content (e.g., message content) over nonverbal cues (e.g., gaze aversion; Vrij, 2008). Moreover, research has also demonstrated the value of computer-based text analysis programs for distinguishing truthful from deceptive communications (Hauch, Masip, Blandon-Gitlin, & Sporer, 2012). The aim of this research is to add to the corpus of studies examining linguistic features of deceptive communications by comparing existing linguistic models (e.g., Newman, Pennebaker, Berry, & Richards, 2003) to our own approach. Based on our model, the results demonstrated that lies contain more affective words, are less detailed, and are more uncertain. Implications are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.