Information Manipulation Theory Research Articles

Consumer perceptions of online review deceptions: an empirical study in China

Purpose To influence consumer perceptions, firms often manipulate online product reviews on their own websites or third-party forums by anonymously adding positive reviews, deleting unfavorable reviews or offering rewards to encourage favorable reviews. This study aims to investigate consumer perceptions of online review deceptions and how these perceptions influence their subsequent purchase behavior. In particular, consumers’ awareness, suspicion and detection are studied and specific manipulation tactics are evaluated. Design/methodology/approach Both qualitative and quantitative studies are relied upon to understand consumer perceptions of online review deceptions. In-depth interviews with 16 experienced online shoppers were conducted to collect the illustrative accounts concerning consumer awareness of online review deceptions, their suspicion, detection and evaluation of different manipulation tactics. A survey of 199 consumers was then followed to validate and corroborate the findings from the qualitative study and generalize the interview results onto the general public. Findings The results from in-depth interviews suggest that consumers take a negative view toward online review deceptions, but the degree of negativity varies across different manipulation tactics. Moreover, different types of manipulations vary in terms of perceived deceptiveness, ease of detection and unethicality, as well as their effect on consumer purchase intention and perceived helpfulness of online product reviews. The findings from the survey further confirmed the qualitative findings. Practical implications The findings have a number of meaningful managerial implications for industry associations and policymakers on whether and how to regulate online review deceptions. Originality/value This study applies and extends information manipulation theory and deception detection literature to an online context to increase the richness of the relevant theories. It is among the first to empirically investigate online review deceptions from a consumer’s perspective, as opposed to a firm’s perspective as previous studies have done.

Why Do We Think Politicians Are So Evasive? Insight From Theories of Equivocation and Deception, With a Content Analysis of U.S. Presidential Debates, 1996-2012

Politicians have a reputation for deception. Instead of blaming the politicians themselves, equivocation theory directs our attention to the situation in which politicians are asked questions. We draw on recent theories of deception detection—truth-default theory and information manipulation theory 2—to propose that a reason we think politicians are so evasive might be because, ironically, we believe them when they accuse their opponents of evasiveness in equivocal situations. We perform a content analysis of the question–answer sequences ( N = 810) in U.S. presidential debates 1996 to 2012. Our results indicate that politicians accuse each other of evasion to a significant degree. Meanwhile, they are not necessarily dodging questions to the extent that their overt allegations suggest. This study demonstrates how the predictions of equivocation theory and deception detection theories apply to the domain of U.S. presidential debates.

Is this a Joke? The Impact of Message Manipulations on Risk Perceptions

As we are continually confronted with increasingly sophisticated electronic messages, distinguishing messages that are valid from irrelevant, malicious, or otherwise undeserving of the recipient's attention has become an extremely important task. The present study leverages the lens of information manipulation theory (IMT) to analyze the impact of perceived message quality and quantity on perceived source competence and message honesty, and their subsequent impact on perceived risk, which is an individual's assessment of the potential harm that could result from accepting a deceitful message as valid. We administered phishing scenarios to subjects and evaluated their responses to survey items related to the given scenario. The data indicate that perceived message honesty, third-party support, and technology anxiety influence risk perceptions of a message. In addition, message quality, as defined by IMT, strongly influences individual perceptions of honesty.

Information Manipulation Theory 2

Information Manipulation Theory 2 (IMT2) is a propositional theory of deceptive discourse production that conceptually frames deception as involving the covert manipulation of information along multiple dimensions and as a contextual problem-solving activity driven by the desire for quick, efficient, and viable communicative solutions. IMT2 is rooted in linguistics, cognitive neuroscience, speech production, and artificial intelligence. Synthesizing these literatures, IMT2 posits a central premise with regard to deceptive discourse production and 11 empirically testable (that is, falsifiable) propositions deriving from this premise. These propositions are grouped into three propositional sets: intentional states (IS), cognitive load (CL), and information manipulation (IM). The IS propositions pertain to the nature and temporal placement of deceptive volition, in relation to speech production. The CL propositions clarify the interrelationship between load, discourse, and context. The IM propositions identify the specific conditions under which various forms of information manipulation will (and will not) occur.

Theorizing About Deception

This essay provides a unifying commentary concluding this special issue on new theories of deception. Information Manipulation Theory 2 (IMT2) and Truth-Default Theory (TDT) offer perspectives of deception that contrast with many past and current approaches. Key points of difference between these new theories and prior works include how deception is defined, the centrality of deception cues, the role of stakes in deception, the importance of communication media or channel, and whether or not deception is intrinsically more cognitively effortful than truthtelling. IMT2 and TDT shift focus away from deception cues and toward situated, contextualized information and communication content. Theory-data consistency is argued to be paramount. The overarching goal of these new theories is to chart the course for future deception research.

Just Looking Around

Information Manipulation Theory 2 (IMT2) is an example of the broad class of cognitive functionalist theories of message production. That is, IMT2 seeks to explicate message production (and in particular, deceptive message production) by recourse to the functional (rather than material) architecture of the system(s) that give rise to such messages. IMT2 is a welcome addition to theorizing in this area and certainly merits careful consideration and discussion. This essay examines the theory’s underlying architecture (particularly with respect to functionalist concerns of parsimony/elegance), formalisms that may not be sufficiently explicated, and aspects of deceptive-message production not explicitly addressed in the current version of IMT2. A final section of this essay invites a contrast between IMT2 and second-generation Action Assembly Theory.

Reconsidering the Role of Intentionality in Deceptive Communication

Traditional models of deceptive communication approach message production from a top-down, conscious-centric point of view. Information Manipulation Theory 2 and Truth Deception Theory challenge this assumption by arguing that the intent to deceive can occur during and after attempts to mislead have been enacted. I argue that this conceptual shift in our understanding of deceptive message production may be helpful to scholars studying the use of deception in relational contexts.

The Truth Comes Naturally! Does It?

Does the truth come naturally? And by implication, does this mean that a lie may not come as naturally as the truth? Truth-Default Theory and the Information Manipulation Theory 2 diverge in their opinion on whether people’s natural response is to lie or tell the truth. In line with Truth-Default Theory, cognitive psychology research supports the notion that the truth is the default in human communication. Information Manipulation Theory 2 holds that lying may come as naturally as, or even more naturally than, truth telling, and recent social psychology research supports this possibility. We suggest that motivation may explain the divergence between the two theories and the two lines of research. We raise the hypothesis that truth telling may be the natural response absent clear motivations to lie (hence, most human communication) and that lying may prevail as the automatic reaction when it brings about important self-profit. We hope that this hypothesis will stimulate new research that will allow for bridging the theoretical and empirical findings that seem discrepant at first and show when the truth (vs. the lie) comes naturally.

A Commentary on Information Manipulation Theory 2

Information Manipulation Theory 2 is a powerful, expansive account of deception, drawing on several models and theories, with potential to revolutionize how deception is understood and researched. In this commentary, Information Manipulation Theory 2’s most important contributions are reviewed. For instance, the theory debunks the myth that deception is intrinsically more cognitive load inducing than honesty. I also offer several suggestions for the refinement, elaboration, and expansion of the theory, including the need for specification of the processing modules crucial to deception as well as the need to clarify what is meant by “efficiency.”

Questioning the Assumptions of Deception Research

This article responds to Truth Default Theory (TDT) and Information Manipulation Theory II (IMT2). First, I discuss assumptions made by previous research on deception that TDT or IMT2 question. For example, TDT questions the assumption that nonverbal behaviors are important for detecting deception, and IMT2 questions the assumption that deception requires additional cognitive effort. Given TDT’s emphasis on context, I note that additional research is needed to identify antecedents of truth and lies. Furthermore, more research is needed to identify the characteristics of transparent liars. One suggestion is to integrate transparent liar research with IMT2’s proposition IM6. Further suggestions are offered about integrating research on prolific liars with IMT2 and integrating research on cognitive load and deception with IMT2.

Restatement Announcements: Sincerity Analysis Through Information Manipulation Theory

This study explore whether publicly held companies manipulate the restatement announcement arising from material errors and/or fraud. It analyzes the information provided in the press and in the 8-Ks (8K-PR) by applying Information Manipulation Theory. Results indicate that companies manipulating the quality and the timing of information released in the 8K-PR related to restatement are more likely to mislead investors. Precisely, we find that companies disclosing inaccurate information in the 8K-PR and delaying releasing the restated earnings are more likely to occur among fraudulent companies.

The relative impact of violation type and lie severity on judgments of message deceitfulness

This paper is part of a larger program of research assessing variables that underlie quantitative deceptiveness ratings. Several recent theoretical approaches, including Information Manipulation Theory (IMT), propose that deceptive messages are best understood as varying along two or more dimensions. At the same time, researchers have increasingly moved from dichotomous deception judgments to continuous deception ratings. This paper questions the validity of scaling degrees of deceptiveness along a single dimension, and argues that gradations in perceived deceptiveness reflect both the type of information manipulated and the severity of the consequences of the deception. This reasoning was tested with alxl experiment (N = 236) in which both the type of information manipulated and the severity of the consequences were systematically varied. As predicted, the results suggest that false messages (i.e., quality violations) are rated as more deceptive than lies of omission (i.e., quantity violations) when lie severity is low, but this difference diminishes as lie severity increases. In other words, false messages were rated as deceptive regardless of severity, but messages omitting information were rated as deceptive as false messages only when the consequences were serious. The implications for measuring deception are discussed.

Dichotomous and continuous views of deception: A reexamination of deception ratings in information manipulation theory

Several recent theoretical approaches, including Information Manipulation Theory (IMT), propose that deceptive messages are best understood as varying along two or more dimensions. At the same time, researchers have increasingly moved from dichotomous deception judgments to continuous deception ratings. This paper questions the validity of scaling degrees of deceptiveness along a single dimension, and argues that gradations in message features do not necessarily translate into degrees of deceit. Most conceptual definitions of deception treat deception as a binary construct, and the continuous scaling of perceptions of deceptiveness may confound perceptions of measure features, degrees of moral condemnation, and judgmental confidence with perceptions of deception. A study (N = 194) is reported that replicates previous tests of IMT with both continuous and dichotomous measures of deception. The results show that the data remain consistent with IMT when dichotomous judgments are examined. However, comparing the results from dichotomous and continuous measures, and examining of the distributions of continuous deception ratings qualify previous IMT findings. The implications for measuring deception are discussed.

Culture and information manipulation theory: The effects of self‐construal and locus of benefit on information manipulation

This paper offers a preliminary exploration into how culture and cultural orientation influence the perception of deceptive messages. Information manipulation theory (IMF) posits that covert violations of Grice's four conversational maxims give rise to messages that are functionally deceptive. This study (N = 323) attempted to replicate previous IMT results regarding the perceptions of information manipulation in an academic situation, and with a culturally diverse sample. Locus of benefit (self and other) was manipulated, and the respondents’ self‐construal was assessed. Previous IMT findings were replicated, and the effects for self‐construal on honesty ratings varied considerably by manipulation type. Explanations for these findings are provided, as are suggestions for future research.

Information manipulation theory and perceptions of deception in Hong Kong

This study tests McCornack's (1992) Information Manipulation Theory (IMT) in Hong Kong. IMT views deception as arising from covert violations of one or more of Grice's four maxims (quality, quantity, relevance, and manner). Previous studies conducted in the United States have found that messages violating one or more of the four maxims are rated as less honest than messages that do not violate the maxims. Based upon cultural differences in expectations and social roles, we predicted that only violations of quality (i.e., outright falsification) would be seen as universally deceptive. To test this prediction, McCornack, Levine, Solowczuk, Torres and Campbell's (1992) original study was replicated in Hong Kong (N = 310). The results indicated that violations of quality (falsification) and relevance (evasion) were rated as deceptive in Hong Kong. However, message ratings along all four dimensions were significantly correlated with deception ratings, suggesting that perhaps the results stem from differences in what counts as a covert violation rather than more fundamental differences in the appropriateness of the maxims.

Modeling the psychometric properties of information manipulation ratings

This paper provides a reanalysis of two large data sets (Jacobs, Dawson & Brashers, 1996a; McCornack, Levine, Solowczuk, Torres, & Campbell, 1992) involved in a recent dispute over the validity of Information Manipulation Theory (IMT) (McCornack, 1992; McCornack et al., 1992). McCornack, Levine, Morrison and Lapinski's (1996) results were consistent with a second‐order factor model predicted by IMT while Jacobs, Brashers and Dawson (1996b) found that the same data were first order multidimensional with quality and honesty ratings loading on the same factor. Because the results of exploratory factor algorithms, especially when coupled with varimax rotations, are suspect when second‐order unidimensionality present, the Jacob et al. (1996b) results are dubious, and published errors may exist. The reanalyses reported here demonstrate that the second order model predicted by IMT provides an excellent fit to the data, while the first order model advanced by Jacobs et al. does not. The curren t results provide further evidence that the use of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with varimax rotations produce erroneous results in the context of second‐order unidimensionality.

情報操作理論に基づく発言内容の欺まん性の分析

The present study examined, based on Information Manipulation Theory, four hypotheses concerning perceived deceptiveness of verbal message, derived from preliminary research. The hypotheses were: (1) An ambiguous message is perceived as more deceptive than an unambiguous one. (2) A message with contents of low frequency of occurrence and low verifiability is perceived as more deceptive than otherwise. (3) Perceived deceptiveness has a U-shaped relationship with length of message. (4) A message violating two maxims is perceived as more deceptive than that violating only one. An examination using a questionnaire, with 102 business college students, supported hypotheses (1) and (2). Examination of hypotheses (3) and (4) is left for future research. The computer program “GPOWER” was used in order to obtain appropriate sample size.

Information manipulation theory: A replication and assessment

>Information manipulation theory (IMT) applies Grice's (1975; 1989) conversational maxims to the design of deceptive messages, but ignores the role of implicatures in deception. As a result, IMT proposes a dubious editing model of deception and an implausible conception of what it is that makes a deceptive message misleading. An alternative model, based on Grice's theory of implicature, proposes that deception involves the manipulation of information so as to generate false implicatures. McCornack's (1992; McCornack et al., 1992) studies are replicated with the inclusion of explicit checks to determine the covertness of the purported deceptive messages and to check manipulation of information‐type (Quantity, Quality, Relevance, and Manner violations). None of the results are consistent with IMT predictions. Instead, the results uniformly support a model of deceptive message design based on conversational implicature.

Interpersonal deception: XII. Information management dimensions underlying deceptive and truthful messages

Interpersonal Deception Theory (IDT) proposes that among the strategies deceivers use to create credible messages is information management. Delineated here are five fundamental dimensions along which verbal content and style can be altered to manage information: (1) completeness (informational and conversational), (2) veridicality (actual and apparent), (3) directness/relevance (semantic and syntactic/pragmatic), (4) clarity (semantic and syntactic/pragmatic), and (5) personalization. Two studies employing encoding and decoding methodologies are presented that assess the degree to which (1) senders can vary discourse on demand along these dimensions and (2) receivers (observers) can recognize such variations. Participants in the first experiment engaged in separate truthful and deceptive interviews; during the latter, they enacted one of three different forms of deception (falsification, equivocation, concealment) representing different combinations of the five dimensions. Participants in the second experiment gave truthful and deceptive answers during a single interview and again enacted different deception forms. Participants and observers then rated interviewee responses on the five dimensions. Results from both studies confirmed that deceptive communication is less complete, honest (veridical), direct/relevant, clear, and personalized (attributable to the speaker) than truthful communication. Falsifications were the least truthful but seen as most complete. Equivocations were the least clear and direct/relevant and seen as such. They were also seen as the most personalized. Findings are discussed in light of IDT, McCornack's Information Manipulation Theory, and Jacobs, Dawson, and Brashers' replication of McCornack's work.

Information manipulation theory

One way of thinking about how deceptive messages are generated is in terms of how the information that interactants possess is manipulated within the messages that they produce. Information Manipulation Theory suggests that deceptive messages function deceptively because they covertly violate the principles that govern conversational exchanges. Given that conversational interactants possess assumptions regarding the quantity, quality, manner, and relevance of information that should be presented, it is possible for speakers to exploit any or all of these assumptions by manipulating the information that they possess so as to mislead listeners. By examining various message examples, it is demonstrated that IMT helps to reconcile previous disagreement about the properties of deceptive messages.