Discriminative Models for Predicting Deception Strategies

Although a large body of work has previously investigated various cues predicting deceptive communications, especially as demonstrated through written and spoken language (e.g., [30]), little has been done to explore predicting kinds of deception. We present novel work to evaluate the use of textual cues to discriminate between deception strategies (such as exaggeration or falsification), concentrating on intentionally untruthful statements meant to persuade in a social media context. We conduct human subjects experimentation wherein subjects were engaged in a conversational task and then asked to label the kind(s) of deception they employed for each deceptive statement made. We then develop discriminative models to understand the difficulty between choosing between one and several strategies. We evaluate the models using precision and recall for strategy prediction among 4 deception strategies based on the most relevant psycholinguistic, structural, and data-driven cues. Our single strategy model results demonstrate as much as a 58% increase over baseline (random chance) accuracy and we also find that it is more difficult to predict certain kinds of deception than others.