Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Base Rates, Deception Detection, and Deception Theory: A Reply to Burgoon (2015)

Full metadata record
DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorPark, Hee Sun-
dc.contributor.authorLevine, Timothy R.-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-04T14:54:00Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-04T14:54:00Z-
dc.date.created2021-06-16-
dc.date.issued2015-07-
dc.identifier.issn0360-3989-
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/93190-
dc.description.abstractThis essay continues a debate about the relative scientific merits of the Park-Levine Model (PLM) and Interpersonal Deception Theory (IDT) with regard to accuracy in deception detection. Key points of disagreement include (a) the degree to which message recipients are sensitive to sender veracity and (b) the extent to which interactivity moderates the veracity and base-rate effects specified by PLM. According to PLM, people are truth-biased, truth-bias makes people insensitive to deception, and as a consequence, base rates affect accuracy regardless of interactivity. IDT, in direct contrast, holds that people are sensitive to the veracity of other's communication and that interactivity is a key moderator. Consistent with PLM, data repeatedly show that people are insensitive to other's veracity and that this insensitivity is general across media affordances including interactivity. This rejoinder uses Burgoon's (2015) own interactive data to demonstrate the empirical superiority of PLM over IDT.-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherOXFORD UNIV PRESS INC-
dc.subjectINTERPERSONAL DECEPTION-
dc.subjectDETECTION ACCURACY-
dc.subjectPROBABILITY MODEL-
dc.subjectLIES-
dc.subjectPARK-
dc.titleBase Rates, Deception Detection, and Deception Theory: A Reply to Burgoon (2015)-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorPark, Hee Sun-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/hcre.12066-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84930976208-
dc.identifier.wosid000356337500003-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationHUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, v.41, no.3, pp.350 - 366-
dc.relation.isPartOfHUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH-
dc.citation.titleHUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH-
dc.citation.volume41-
dc.citation.number3-
dc.citation.startPage350-
dc.citation.endPage366-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassssci-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaCommunication-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryCommunication-
dc.subject.keywordPlusINTERPERSONAL DECEPTION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusDETECTION ACCURACY-
dc.subject.keywordPlusPROBABILITY MODEL-
dc.subject.keywordPlusLIES-
dc.subject.keywordPlusPARK-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorDeception-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorLies-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorTruth Bias-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorVeracity Effect-
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
School of Media & Communication > School of Media & Communication > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Park, Hee Sun photo

Park, Hee Sun
미디어학부 (미디어학부)
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE