TY - JOUR
T1 - Testing interpersonal deception theory
T2 - The language of interpersonal deception
AU - Buller, David B.
AU - Burgoon, Judee K.
AU - Buslig, Aileen
AU - Roiger, James
PY - 1996/8
Y1 - 1996/8
N2 - An analysis of verbal behavior was undertaken to test principles of interpersonal deception theory (IDT). It was predicted that language choice in deceptive messages would reflect strategic attempts to manage information through nonimmediate language. This linguistic profile, though, was expected to be altered in response to preinteractional factors - relational and behavioral familiarity - and interactional factors - form of deception and receiver suspicion. Results from two investigations are reported: a secondary analysis on interactions in an earlier study (Burgoon, Buller, Dillman, & Walther, 1995) and analysis of a primary experiment employing a 2 (relationship) × 2 (receiver expertise) × 2 (receiver suspicion) × 2 (truth/deception) within-subjects factorial design. As expected, senders displayed greater verbal nonimmediacy when deceiving. Expertise had a greater effect on linguistic behavior than a prior relationship with the receiver, with senders using more verbal nonimmediacy with novice receivers. Senders were more verbally nonimmediate when equivocating. Suspicion produced a mixed pattern of linguistic cues. The possibility that changes produced by preinteraction and interactional factors were strategic attempts to bolster credibility is discussed.
AB - An analysis of verbal behavior was undertaken to test principles of interpersonal deception theory (IDT). It was predicted that language choice in deceptive messages would reflect strategic attempts to manage information through nonimmediate language. This linguistic profile, though, was expected to be altered in response to preinteractional factors - relational and behavioral familiarity - and interactional factors - form of deception and receiver suspicion. Results from two investigations are reported: a secondary analysis on interactions in an earlier study (Burgoon, Buller, Dillman, & Walther, 1995) and analysis of a primary experiment employing a 2 (relationship) × 2 (receiver expertise) × 2 (receiver suspicion) × 2 (truth/deception) within-subjects factorial design. As expected, senders displayed greater verbal nonimmediacy when deceiving. Expertise had a greater effect on linguistic behavior than a prior relationship with the receiver, with senders using more verbal nonimmediacy with novice receivers. Senders were more verbally nonimmediate when equivocating. Suspicion produced a mixed pattern of linguistic cues. The possibility that changes produced by preinteraction and interactional factors were strategic attempts to bolster credibility is discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030201358&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030201358&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00129.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00129.x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0030201358
SN - 1050-3293
VL - 6
SP - 268
EP - 289
JO - Communication Theory
JF - Communication Theory
IS - 3
ER -