Lair of Lies: A Quasi-Experimental Approach to Validating Deception Theories

Abstract

Humans are known as fallible lie detectors, often considered inept and nescient in unmasking deceit. To unravel the truth behind this speculation, this organizational communication study assessed the academic employees’ workplace deception (WD) detection knowledge when using Facial micro-expressions (FME), context, verbal, vocal, and non-verbal cues. It determined the significant difference in their WD knowledge after exposure to the treatments. Investigated their ways in the cognitive and psychological processing of cues when detecting WD, and examined how their WD detection knowledge influenced their communication behavior in the organization. Convergent Parallel Mixed Method and Non-equivalent Control Group pretest-posttest quasi-experimental designs were employed for this purpose. Results indicate that both control and treatment groups were much knowledgeable when using FME before and after exposure to Facial Micro-Expression Training (FMET). While findings reveal no significant difference in the treatment group’s WD detection knowledge after FMET, the said group shows an increase from less to moderate knowledge after Online Deception Detection Training (OODT). Through online semi-structured interviews (SSI), the participants described their cognitive and psychological processing of cues when detecting WD. Results suggested that they (1) cluster FME, context, verbal, vocal, and non-verbal cues as signals, (2) use background information and evidence as keys and maximize (3) context and probing as gateways. These processes were accomplished through a combination of basic, complex mental, and psychological operations. Their WD detection knowledge also influenced their communication behavior in the organization by heightening their awareness of communication cues and enabling them to recommend strengthening the culture of transparency, trust, and respect; and enhancing communication mechanisms. This study validates the Interpersonal Deception Theory, Information Manipulation Theory, and Adaptive Lie Detector theories using the interview responses. Addenda to the claims were recommended to extend the theories’ application to less interactive deceptive communicative instances and highlight the influence of relationships, profession, job rank, and knowledge on deception detection episodes. The theorizing for Information Manipulation Theory (IMT) resulted in the proposal of examining silence as a form of exploiting information. New perspectives related to probing and relevance of relationships in gathering context-general cues are also pitched for pondering and further exploring ALIED’s claims.