Detecting Online Deception and Responding to It
Rowe, Neil C.
MetadataShow full item record
Since many forms of online deception are harmful, it is helpful to enumerate possible detection methods. We discuss low-levels clues such as pauses and overgenerality as well as ?cognitive? clues such as noticing of factual discrepancies. While people are generally poor at detecting deception using their intuitions, the online environment provides the ability to automate the analysis of clues and improve the likelihood of detection by doing ?data fusion?. Appropriate responses to deception must differ with the type, as some deceptions like deliberate provocation are best handled by ignoring them while other deceptions like fraud are best handled by exposure.
This article appeared in the Encyclopedia of Virtual Communities and Technologies, Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2005.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Monroe, James D. (Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2012-06);This thesis explores the history of U.S. Army deception and doctrine, and combines the insights gained with the various works on deception, cognitive psychology, communications, and decision-making in order to distill a ...
Higginbotham, Benjamin I. (2001-12);This thesis addresses the use of deception as one means available to states for dealing with terrorists. It begins by exploring the body of theoretical literature to establish the foundation necessary for a thorough ...
Rowe, Neil C. (Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2008);We examine the main ethical issues concerning deception in cyberspace. We first discuss the concept of deception and survey ethical theories applicable to cyberspace. We then examine deception for commercial gain such as ...