Academic Employees’ Workplace Deception Detection Knowledge
Apple Grace Bonhoc | Maico Demi B. Aperocho
Discipline: Education
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 cognitive and psychological processing of cues
when detecting WD, and examined how their WD detection knowledge influenced their communication
behavior in the organization. Non-equivalent Control Group pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was
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). The
researchers believe that much is yet to be discovered in the field of detecting deceptive communication
involving academic employees. The outbreak of the Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) in the Philippines
might have caused disruptions and disadvantages, but these limitations may be turned into a light that brings
in fresh perspectives. Hence, it is recommended that more studies in deception detection be conducted in the
Philippines.
References:
- Aamodt, M. & Custer, H. (2006). Who can best catch a liar? A meta-analysis of individual differences in detecting deception. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232424344_Who_can_best_catch_a_liar_A_meta-analysis_of_individual_differences_in_detecting_deception
- Bryant, E. & Sias, P. (2011). Sensemaking and relational consequences of peer coworker deception. Communication m o n o g r a p h s , 1 , 115-137. https://www.academia.edu/18024001/Sensemaking_and_Relational_Consequences_of_Peer_Coworker_Deception
- Driskell, J. E. (2012). Effectiveness of deception detection training: A meta-analysis. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 18, 713–731. Ekman, P. (1970). Universal facial expressions of emotion. California Mental Health Research Digest, 8(4), 151-158. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1972-06605-001%20Ekman,%20P.% 20(1985).%20Telling%20lies,%20clues%20to%20deceit%20in%20t he marketplace, politics, and marriage. New York, NY: W.W. Norton
- Ekman, P. (1992). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, p o l i t i c s a n d m a r r i a g e . http://communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/telling_lies_clues_t o_deceit_in_the_marketplace_politics_and_marriage.pdf
- Ekman, P. (2006). Darwin, deception, and facial expression. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,1000(1), 205-221. doi: 10.1196/annals.1280.010
- Ekman, P. & O'Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar? The American Psychological Association, 46(9), 913-920. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4387/dcd6339f9f070ea9915f5b62a05c77ebd5a8.pdf
- Ekman, P., O'Sullivan, M. & Frank, M. (1999). A few can catch a liar. The American Psychological Association, Inc. Vol. 10, No.(3), https://www.paulekman.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/A-Few-Ca n-Catch-A-Liar.pdf
- Griffin, D. J., San Bolkan, & Goodboy, A. K. (2015). Academic dishonesty beyond cheating and plagiarism: Students’ interpersonal deception in the college classroom. ResearchGate; Taylor & Francis( R o u t l e d g e ) . https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283793358_Academic_Dishonesty_Beyond_Cheating_and_Plagiarism_Students%E2%80%99_Interpersonal_Deception_in_the_College_Classroom
- Goman, C. (2013). The truth about lies in the workplace. BerretK o e h l e r P u b l i s h e r s , I n c . https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751- 9020.2010.00344.x
- Izotovas, A., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Strömwall, L. A., Granhag, P. A., & Mann, S. (2020). Deception detection in repeated interviews: The effects of immediate type of questioning on the delayed accounts. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 17(3), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1561
- Jordan, S., Brimbal, L., Wallace, D. B., Kassin, S. M., Hartwig, M., & Street, C. N. H. (2019). A test of the micro‐expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection? Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 16(3), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1532
- Josephson Institute of Ethics. (2012). Report card on American youth. http://www.josephsoninstitute.org/reportcard
- Miller, K. (2015) Organizational communication: Approaches and processes. Arizona State University: Cengage Learning
- Nemenzo, N. B. (2018, April 20). Problems encountered by teachers in the teaching-learning process: A basis of an action plan. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324606765_Problems_Encountered_by_Teachers_in_the_TeachingLearning_Process_A_Basis_of_an_Action_Plan
- Nortje, A. & Tredoux, C. (2019). How good are we at detectingdeception? A review of current techniques and theories. South African Journal of Psychology, 49(4), 491–504. h ttp s://do i.o rg/1 0.1177 /008 12 4631 8822 953
- R o l l s , D. ( 2 0 1 1 ) H o w t o s p o t a liar. https://www.slideshare.net/danrolls1/how-to-spot-a-liar
- Stel, M., Schwarz, A., Dijk, E., Knippenberg, A. (2020) The limits of conscious deception detection: When reliance on false deception cu es c o n t r i b u t e s to i n a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s . https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01331/full
- Tamayo, A. (2014). Virtues of honesty in a higher education institution. American Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1),1-6
- Ulatowska, J. (2017) Teachers’ beliefs about cues to deception and the ability to detect deceit. Educational Psychology. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308051468_Teachers'_beliefs_about_cues_to_deception_and_the_ability_to_detect_deceit