Deception in cyberspace: A comparison of text-only vs. avatar-supported medium

Abstract

The use of anthropomorphic avatars provides Internet users the opportunity and freedom to manipulate their identity. As cyberspace becomes a haven for deceptive behavior, human–computer interaction research will need to be carried out to study and understand these deceptive behaviors. The objective of this research is to investigate the behavior of deceivers and non-deceivers (or truth-tellers) in the cyberspace environment. We examine if the intention to deceive others influences one's choice of avatars in the online chat environment. We also investigate if communication medium (text-only vs. avatar-supported chat) influences one's perception of trustworthiness of the communication partner. A lab experiment was conducted in an online chat environment with dyads. The results indicate that in the text-only chat environment, subjects who were deceiving their partner experienced higher anxiety levels than those who were truthful to their partner; however, the same phenomenon was not observed in the avatar-supported chat environment. This suggests that “wearing a mask” in cyberspace may reduce anxiety in deceiving others. Additionally, deceivers are more likely to choose avatars that are different from their real selves. The results also show that the use of avatars in a computer-mediated chat environment does not have an impact on one's perceived trustworthiness.

Introduction

… Han Sang, a 14-year-old boy in Seoul, stole $35 from his parents to buy sunglasses and other accessories. The petty thievery was bad enough, but what really irked his dad, Kim Sung Bae, was that none of the stuff he bought was real. They were for the animated character, or avatar, the boy used as a stand-in for himself on the Internet. Han was spending four hours each night hanging out online with his friends and wanted his virtual stand-in to look as cool as possible…

Forbes Magazine 7/21/2003

… In real life, Rebecca Nesson—slight, 30, short hair—is a lawyer working on a doctorate in computer science who teaches at Harvard Extension School. Her Second Life avatar, or cartoon self, is Rebecca Berkman, who looks like Nesson and who, standing in a virtual amphitheater, leads avatars from as far away as Korea and Houston in a discussion section of the Extension School course CyberOne…

The Boston Globe 10/25/2006

The use of humanoid/anthropomorphic avatars provides new ways for people to interact. An avatar is a virtual representation of oneself that other users can see or interact with in a virtual environment. Avatars were first used in computer gaming and online chat rooms. The use of avatars on the Internet has become very popular, such as in Korea and the United States. More than 3.6 million Koreans possess their own individualized avatars, or virtual selves, that are used to represent them in chat rooms and e-mails (Fulford, 2003). The use of avatars has also extended beyond entertainment, including education, virtual meeting rooms, sales activities, fashion, trade shows, and government.

Avatars offer a new form of visual representation and a different type of anonymity on the Internet. The use of avatars may help to overcome problems associated with the lack of social cues in computer-mediated communication (CMC). Having information about the identity of those with whom you communicate is essential for understanding and evaluating an interaction (Donath, 1998), but in CMC, many of these cues are eliminated or attenuated (Carlson and George, 2004). Interpersonal cues in communication are also important for determining the truthfulness of the message delivered (Carlson et al., 2004). To overcome problems with lean CMC media, avatars are commonly used in chat rooms or instant messaging (IM) environments to provide visual and social cues (Walther, 1992; Scheidt, 2004).

This paper examines the use of avatars in IM in the context of deceptive communication. According to the literature, deception is a part of our everyday personal life (Zhou et al., 2003; Hancock et al., 2004) and business life (Zuckerman et al., 1981; Cialdini et al., 2004). People deceive about all kinds of issues “from the mundane, such as opinions about appearance, to the essential, such as courtroom testimony or military interrogations” (Carlson et al., 2004). The number of people being victimized by deceptive practices over the Internet (e.g., frauds, misleading advertisements) is also on the rise (Grazioli and Wang, 2001; Internet Fraud Watch, 2006).

Similarly, deception is common in CMC (Walther and Tidwell, 1996; Bowker and Tuffin, 2003). Relational processes in CMC can be exaggerated because CMC offers more opportunities for managing self-presentation (Carlson et al., 2004). The anonymity provided by CMC may foster deception (Bowker and Tuffin, 2003), as the deceiver is able to disassociate himself/herself from the deceiving message. This is especially true on the Internet, where high anonymity is possible and where it is difficult to assess identity and accountability regarding deception. For example, the number of Internet frauds, on average, grew more than 250% annually (Grazioli and Jarvenpaa, 2003). The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) (2005), which was created by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National White Collar Crime Center, has also received increased numbers of complaint submissions over the years.

As stated by Suler (1999), “the beauty (and misfortune) of the Internet is that it offers the opportunity for users to experiment with their identity”. Users are limited only by technology and imagination in presenting their virtual selves. With the anonymity provided by the Internet, users may take on a false identity or engage in deceptive communication without being detected. Detecting deception is generally difficult. Studies have shown that lie detection rates are between 45% and 65% in face-to-face settings (Kraut, 1980; Zuckerman et al., 1981; Kalbfleisch, 1992). This means that the probability of detecting deception is only about 50/50. This probability is even lower in CMC. Consequently, as cyberspace becomes a haven for deceptive behaviors, it is important to study these deceptive behaviors. A better understanding of deception in CMC can help to educate Internet users in online deception and more importantly, to design and foster an online communication environment that promotes truthfulness and inhibits deception.

As companies are increasingly using IM and avatars, it is important to study and understand deception in avatar-supported online chat environments. IM is increasingly used in organizations to support internal and external communication. Intel, for example, is taking advantage of the IM technology to facilitate communication and coordination among its geographically distributed teams that work in different regions of the world (Intel Corporation, 2004). Other companies are using IM to communicate with customers to provide a variety of customer services including answering questions, resolving problems, making clarifications, and giving advice. For example, one of the factors identified for Lands’ End's success in their e-commerce initiative is the use of online IM (Dukcevich, 2002). As IM becomes increasingly popular in organizations, we need a better understanding of cues and behavior associated with deception in the online IM environment.