Deception exists in media, among prestigious universities, and perhaps most commonly in the workplace. According to Dunleavy (2010), reasons for deception in the workplace include: competitiveness, conflict, or a response to a supervisor or fellow employee (p. 241). Dunleavy develops hypotheses’, conducts experiments, and collects data to determine what is considered acceptable and unacceptable behavior as it applies to deception in the workplace. Ultimately, the reason for deceiving and the method in which one deceives, through either withholding (omission) or distortion (commission), directly effects the perception of coworkers’ credibility, power, and trustworthiness (Dunleavy, p.241). This article focuses on two different approaches of deception: withholding information versus distorting information, and how that may or may not change employees’ perception of the deceiver (Dunleavy, p.239). Dunleavy defines deception as “the conscious attempt to create or perpetuate false impressions among other communicators” (Dunleavy, p.240). Three hypotheses’ are presented in the article...
Author Allison Kornet in her article (1997) “The Truth about Lying: Has Lying Gotten a Bad Rap” states that deception or lying has become a part of everyone’s life. A person lies or deceives as often as he brushes his teeth or combs his hair. Many psychologists have neglected or ignored the concept of deception or lying and its effects on everyone’s life. Kornet explains that in the previous two to three decades, the psychologists started noticing or analyzing the effects of a person’s deception on others or why a person lies so many times in his day-to-day life. The person might learn lying from childhood
One of the last types of ways investigators are coached to detect deception is in the behavioral attitudes of a person being interviewed such as being unconcerned or over anxious (Kassin, 2005). The success rate of looking for these cues are very successful in telling if an individual is being deceitful and has surpassed any laboratory tests conducted on the subject. The laboratory test however did reveal some interesting facts. The research showed that people who had training and experience did not score better than the control group who received no training. In fact all individuals scored at the chance level with the people who had training scored just above chance or at the chance level. To check if special training in the detection of deception was more accurate a study ...
A person once said “the truth does not cost a person anything, but a lie costs a person everything”. The aim of the study is to take an in depth look at how the kinds of lies and sex differences in lying demonstrated in the scientific article are related with Pamela Meyer's tedtalk.
No, not at all deceived, just not well informed. America’s government refrains itself from telling the population the entire truth considering major contemporary political issues, which ultimately leads to confusion as to what rumors are true and which aren’t, due to the suspicious actions that America’s speakers take.
When initially asked about the morality of lying, it is easy for one to condemn it for being wrong or even corrupt. However, those asked are generally guilty of the crime on a daily basis. Lying is, unfortunately, a normal aspect of everyday life. In the essay “The Ways We Lie,” author Stephanie Ericsson makes note of the most common types of lies along with their consequences. By ordering the categories from least to most severe, she expresses the idea that lies enshroud our daily lives to the extent that we can no longer between fact and fiction. To fully bring this argument into perspective, Ericsson utilizes metaphor, rhetorical questions, and allusion.
While reading the play “Julius Caesar”, deception, betrayal, and exaggeration were perceived throughout. Cassius was the character that fit these qualities the most. He can be compared to the former president, Richard Nixon. He was the United States 37th President of the United States. He was voted into office receiving great admiration for his speeches, and work he had previously done. When he was elected, it was the time during the Vietnam War. His goal as president was to have reconciliation (Sidey and Freidel). He gave great speeches by using rhetoric; a famous speech is 425 - Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam, November 3, 1969 rhetorical devices that he used in that speech was by saying “Good evening, my fellow Americans” (Peters) it gave the audience a sense of familiarity within the audience, and Nixon (Zielenski). In Nixon’s “Checker’s Speech” he tells his side of the story and his role in the Watergate Scandal. In his speech he uses rhetorical devices including repetition and anaphora, “I say that it was morally wrong if any of that $18,000 went to Senator Nixon, for my personal use. I say that it was morally wrong if it was secretly given and secretly handled. And I say that it was morally wrong if any of the contributors got special favors for the contributions that they made” (The History Place ). In the same speech, he uses the rhetorical question, “Well, how do you pay for these and how can you do it legally?” (The History Place ). Lastly, in the “Checker’s Speech” he uses irony when he states “I have a theory, too, that the best and only answer to a smear or an honest misunderstanding of the facts is to tell the truth. And that is why I am here tonight. I want to tell you my side of the case. This is a us...
Richard Gunderman asks the question, "Isn 't there something inherently wrong with lying, and “in his article” Is Lying Bad for Us?" Similarly, Stephanie Ericsson states, "Sure I lie, but it doesn 't hurt anything. Or does it?" in her essay, "The Ways We Lie.” Both Gunderman and Ericsson hold strong opinions in regards to lying and they appeal to their audience by incorporating personal experiences as well as references to answer the questions that so many long to confirm.
Traditionally, it is agreed that any and every form of telling the truth is always the best thing to do. In the essays of Stephen L Carter and Stephanie Ericsson, this ideal is not exactly true. It is expressed in "The Insufficiency of Honesty" as well as "The Ways We Lie" that honesty is hard to come by and that there is more to it than believed. The authors convey their views by first defining what the concept is, picking it apart, and then use common occurrences for examples of the points they had made.
In “The Ways We Lie”, Ericsson describes the different types of lies: white lie, facades, ignoring
In a more structured or interview type of format people tend to lie in ways to make them appear of a higher social status. The types of positions or jobs they have held before, accomplishments of the past, and how much they were earning are a few of such examples. One popularly noted survey assess people into one of three category groups to predict how people will lie based on their desire to appeal to a certain social standing. People of low assessment scores which is about one in six will respond truthfully even if it negatively affect their social desirability. People of high assessment scores which is also one in six will respond almost always towards a lie in order to appear more socially desirable. The other four out of six average person will sway to the low or high in based off of ethics and many other factors. However in a relaxed environment where the need to be held under a social construct is absent. The reasons for lying are not for social standing and power, but to protect them from harm emotionally and
Something that complicates the concept of passive deception is what I call the question of importance. Passive deceit does not exist in every occasion in which information is withheld, but something is withheld in every instance of passive deception. So, what determines whether or not the withholding of information is sufficient enough to also qualify as deception? I contend that the two qualities, which I call determinants of deception, that separate deception from simple withholding are importance and likelihood, the latter is only necessary in situations with a certain level of doubt or during
Each day an individual will make a decision that will affect their life in some way. Should I wear the green shirt or the yellow shirt? Should I order a shake or lemonade? Should I wash the car today or wait until tomorrow? These simple decisions often happen without serious thought. Why? Because these decisions are not life changing ones. But what happens when the decision is not so easy to make, when it’s life changing. Sometimes a person’s conscious greatly affects one’s decision making, especially when the topic of whistle blowing arises. In this paper, I will discuss and analyze whistle-blowing, where it occurs, the effects of whistle-blowing, the consequences of whistle-blowing, and finally I close my paper with a conclusion.
Honesty is absolutely necessary in order to foster healthy and functioning workplace environments. Honesty breeds transparency, and according to a 2013 study, management transparency is THE number one factor in determining long-term employee happiness, (Shannon, 2013). Honesty between employers and employees about workplace expectations is essential to fostering effective relationships.
Being deceptive, many feel, is a habit that everyone picks up on at a young age; as he or she gets older, the lies get bigger. After extensive research one can see that lying can be spotted by studying background details and information, facial clues, body language, statistics, emotional gestures, remarks or statements, and speech habits. Fredrich Nietzsche sums up the art of reading body language to tell if one is lying by saying, “One may sometimes tell a lie, but the grimace that accompanies it tells the truth”(npa).
The two plays deal with similar issues of deception and hypocrisy present in the society and how people wear masks in order to conform to the social norms of their respective societies. Both the authors, Henrik Ibsen and Moliere have made effective use of ‘deception’ in order to bring their ideas and views through to their audience.’ Ghosts’ is a perfect example of a realistic play which attacks the hypocrisy present in the society and in its value systems. Ibsen therefore was known as the father of modern theatre. Tartuffe was written by Moliere in the age of reason. During this period writers usually wrote in a common genre which was known as the comedy of manners. As a form of satire, the genre of comedy was aimed at ridiculing human vices and follies in order to bring about a change in the society.