Abstract
When humans attempt to detect deception, they perform two actions: looking for telltale signs of deception and asking questions to attempt to unveil a deceptive conversational partner. There has been significant prior work on automatic deception detection that attempts to learn signs of deception. On the other hand, we focus on the second action, envisioning a dialogue systems that asks questions to attempt to catch a potential liar. In this paper, we describe the results of an initial analysis towards this goal, attempting to make clear which questions make the features of deception more salient. In order to do so, we collect a deceptive corpus in Japanese, our target language, perform an analysis of this corpus comparing with a similar English corpus, and perform an analysis of what kinds of questions result in a higher deception detection accuracy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
This is a superset of checkQ, so ProQ in this work indicates all ProQ that are not CheckQ.
References
Breiman L (1996) Bagging predictors. Mach Learn 24(2):123–140
DePaulo BM, Lindsay JJ, Malone BE, Muhlenbruck L, Charlton K, Cooper H (2003) Cues to deception. Psychol Bull 129(1):74
Ekman P (1985) Telling lies. W. W. Norton & Company, New York
Hirschberg JB, Benus S, Brenier JM, Enos F, Friedman S, Gilman S, Girand C, Graciarena M, Kathol A, Michaelis L, Pellom B, Shriberg E, Stolcke A (2005) Distinguishing deceptive from non-deceptive speech. In: Proceedings of Eurospeech, Losbon
Hung H, Chittaranjan G (2010) The IDIAP wolf corpus: exploring group behaviour in a competitive role-playing game. In: Proceedings of the international conference on multimedia. ACM, New York, pp 879–882
Kudo T, Yamamoto K, Matsumoto Y (2004) Applying conditional random fields to Japanese morphological analysis. Proc EMNLP 4:230–237
Meyer P (2011) Lie spotting. Griffin, New York
Ohmoto Y, Ueda K, Ohno T (2009) A method to detect lies in free communication using diverse nonverbal information: towards an attentive agent. In: Active media technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 42–53
Pérez-Rosas V, Mihalcea R (2014) Cross-cultural deception detection. In: Proceedings of association for computational linguistics (ACL), pp 440–445. http://aclweb.org/anthology/P14-2072
Povey D, Ghoshal A, Boulianne G, Burget L, Glembek O, Goel N, Hannemann M, Motlicek P, Qian Y, Schwarz P, Silovsky J, Stemmer G, Vesely K (2011) The Kaldi speech recognition toolkit. In: Proceedings of ASRU
Sjolander K (2004) Tcl/tk snack toolkit http://www.speech.kth.se/snack/
Takamura H, Inui T, Okumura M (2005) Extracting semantic orientations of words using spin model. Proceedings of association for computational linguistics (ACL), pp. 133–140
Vrij A, Granhag PA, Mann S, Leal S (2011) Outsmarting the liars: toward a cognitive lie detection approach. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 20(1):28–32
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tsunomori, Y., Neubig, G., Sakti, S., Toda, T., Nakamura, S. (2015). An Analysis Towards Dialogue-Based Deception Detection. In: Lee, G., Kim, H., Jeong, M., Kim, JH. (eds) Natural Language Dialog Systems and Intelligent Assistants. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19291-8_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19291-8_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19290-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19291-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)