A Study of Deception in Red Sparrow Movie 2018

A STUDY OF DECEPTION IN RED SPARROW MOVIE 2018

Submitted to the Department of Language Studies, Graduate School of Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Education

BY: QURNIA WIYASA NUGRAHAENI S.200 170 011

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE STUDIES GRADUATE SCHOOL MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA 2019

ii i iiiii

iviii

A STUDY OF DECEPTION IN RED SPARROW MOVIE 2018

ABSTRACT

In communication, sometimes people produce deceptive statements in order to be a good image in front of the others. This was curious thing to be investigated. Therefore, this research aimed to explore the deception categories and the motives used by people. This research was qualitative study. The data were the deception utterances of the main character; Dominika Egorova in Red Sparrow movie 2018. The result showed that from 40 scenes, there were 30 speech events included as deception. Totally from 30 speech events there were 79 deceptive statements. 8 statements were included as falsification category (10%). 29 statements were included as concealment category (37%). Equivocation were 36 statements (46%) and 6 statements (8%) were in understatement category. There were three main motives of deception found in this movie. Totally, there were 38 deception motives. 23 conversations included as Self-focused motive. For partner-focused motive, there were 2 conversations. There were 13 conversations included as relationship-focused motive. A person deceived in order to establish contact toward some people, to create good self-image, to avoid conflict and good relationship. The finding concluded that deception and the motives need to be studied further.

Keywords: Pragmatics, Interpersonal Deception, Red Sparrow Movie 2018

ABSTRAK

Dalam berinteraksi terkadang, seseorang melakukan suatu penipuan untuk pencitraan didepan orang lain. Ini merupakan suatu kasus yang menarik untuk dikaji. Oleh sebab itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menyelidiki tentang penipuan dan juga motifnya. Ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif yang subjeknya adalah tokoh utama Dominika Egorova pada film Red Sparrow 2018. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa 79 percakapan merupakan ujaran penipuan. Pada film Red Sparrow, terdapat 4 kategori penipuan. Delapan ujaran merupakan kategori pemalsuan (10%). 29 ujaran merupakan kategori penyembunyian (37%). Kategori penyangkalan adalah yang terbesar yaitu 36 statements (46%) dan 6 ujaran merupakan kategori pengurangan informasi (8%). Hasil juga menunjukkan bahwa terdapat 3 motif penipuan dalam film tersebut. Dari 38 percakapan, 23 percakapan termasuk motif pribadi. Untuk motif pasangan terfokus ada 2 percakapan. Yang terakhir, ada 13 percakapan yang termasuk motif relasi terfokus. Penipuan terjadi untuk membangun hubungan dengan yang lain, pencitraan, dan menghindari konflik. Penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa penipuan dan motifnya perlu untuk dikaji lebih lanjut.

Keywords: Pragmatik, Penipuan antar diri, film Red Sparrow 2018

1. INTRODUCTION In interpersonal communications, people need everything run well as expectation. Actually, there are a lot of people try to hide the truth information from the other people. People have possibility to lie in daily life such as about their job, personal identity, deceitful about their problem and else. There are so many reasons to lie. Perhaps, they use deception in conversation in order to give good self image or hide the truth about themselves. For example is phenomenon from Red Sparrow movie. She deceived that she was a translator in Embassy. Actually, she was a Russian spy that had a mission to investigate about the American agent. She intentionally deceived in order to get closer to Nate the CIA agent. So, according to Buller and Burggon (1996) one of the deception characteristics is the statement is irrelevant to the real context. Therefore, that phenomenon is investigated in pragmatics field. Pragmatics is a part of linguistics that analyzed about language meaning and the context (Levinson, 1983). It is used to investigate the meaning of what people said and what the contextual background of the speech. This research used theories for the basis of this research; pragmatics, speech act, Interpersonal Communication Theory and Interpersonal Deception Theory (IDT). There were also some previous studies that investigated deception. Such as studies by Burgoon et.al (2003), Zhou et.al (2004), and Farisha & Sakkeel (2015) that only investigated deception in generally, such as prediction in computer-mediated communication, the factors when people lying and the rank of how often people deceived in communication. The others previous studies are Newman (2003) and Hancock et.al (2008) which explained that when told true and when told false stories every person had different linguistic styles and linguistic pattern. The research aims to investigate and explore about how people use deception statements or utterances in conversation and what the motives they use deception statements. This research is important because until now there is limited research that investigates deeper about deception utterances

in a movie. This research tries to strengthen and prove the theory and previous studies about deception in detail. This present research also gives the newest study in Red Sparrow movie because until now there is no research has investigated toward that movie. This research proposed two research questions; the main character deceptive statements and the main character’s motives of her deception. Based on that previous study and the phenomena, this research aims to conduct a research entitled: A Study of Deception in Red Sparrow Movie 2018. 2. METHODS The type of this research was descriptive qualitative research. In this research, the object of research was the deception or lying statements that are used by the main character Dominika Egorova in the Red Sparrow movie 2018. This research explored the main character Dominica Egorova in the Red Sparrow movie 2018. Here, the research focused on main character’s speech, expression and actions in the movie. The data was text or documents were taken from conversation utterances of main character. The primary data sources were the scripts or quotes from conversation of the main characters and screenshots of the scenes. The secondary data sources such as from website, article, internet sources and other related sources. The documentation was done by watching attentively and taking notes. Those notes were done in descriptive and reflective notes. The research used some steps to analyze the data such as involving collecting the data, reducing data, presenting the data and drawing conclusion. This research used data source triangulation and theoretical triangulation. 3. RESULTS 3.1 Deception Category It can be concluded totally from 30 scenes there were 79 deceptive statements. There were some speech events that had more than one deceptive statement. Eight (8) statements were included as falsification category. It meant that falsification had 10% from 79 deceptive statements. For concealment category there were 29 statements. It had 37% from 79 deceptive statements. Equivocation category was the biggest number; 36

3 statements. It had 46% from 79 deceptive statements. There was no exaggeration or hyperbole category. The last, 6 statements was in understatement category. It meant understatement category had 8% from 79 deceptive statements. 3.1.1 Falsification Category Dominika Egorova did some falsification statements such as gave fake identity, fake job, fake account, fake evidence and else. For example in Scene 17 Conversation 1, finally Dominika went to Budapest to get closer and investigate Nate Nash the American agent. In Budapest, she stayed with Marta (ex-Sparrow) in an apartment. The setting was in an apartment. Marta knew that Dominika name was Katerina not Dominika. This conversation involved Dominika and Marta. Marta gave warning about their boss. Dominika would work with Chief Volontov in the station office (SVR inferior in Budapest). This was friendly chat without tension speech. The channel of the conversation was verbal speech in Russia accent. The genre was friendly chat. (50:40) (50:42) Situation : “(DOG BARKING)” (51:00) (51:01) Marta :“You must be Katerina.” (51:01) (51:02) Dominika : “Hello.” (51:03) (51:05) Marta : “You're pretty.”

Falsification was used by Dominika in order to do her mission without any problem. Dominika falsified by using fake identity in Budapest as Katerina Zubkova. When Marta said “You must be Katerina”, Dominika just said “Hello”. Implicitly, it indicated that Dominika did not have any problem with the name. She could deceive smoothly without emotional leakage. This was Ivan’s planning and Dominika should do that for her mother, besides she also thought how to go away from Ivan. 3.1.2 Concealment Category In concealment category, Dominika Egorova concealed and hid the truth information. They are such as her relation with Nate, the real planning and else. One example in scene 28 conversation 1, Dominika brought to CIA agent in order to know Dominika was lying or not about

her agreement. The setting was in CIA hideout. There were Dominika, Nate, Trish and Marty. They used Deception Detector to know about it. They wanted to know about her seriousness. For the first, Marty just asked about daily activities. Then, it became more specific until they got negotiation. Everything run well, Dominika succeeded to hide the true. There was no emotional leakage that was showed by Dominika. She concealed and just said “The answer is no.” when Marty asked about her sexual intercourse. That was Concealment; she hid the true about crucial things. There were some deceiving from Dominika; about her willingness to work with CIA, her emotional involved and also about the money that she wants. That was appropriate with the dialogue below: (01:27:50) (01:27:51) Marty : “That's what you're trained for.” (01:27:51) (01:27:52) Marty : “Anybody ever tell you that...” (01:27:52) (01:27:54) Dominika : “Why do you need to know, bratok?” (01:27:55) (01:27:56) Marty : “Big brother?” (01:27:56) (01:27:58) Trish : “Please answer the question.” (01:27:58) (01:28:00) Trish : “We'd need to know if you're emotionally involved.” (01:28:00) (01:28:01) Dominika : “The answer is no.” (01:28:05) (01:28:06) Nate : “So, are you satisfied?”

After Dominika was investigated, she requested money to make a deal; she wanted much money to transfer in Vienna account. In the end, they agreed for working together for the Swan mission. This conversation was in serious manner. This was verbal and used yes or no questions. This was editorial chat in getting information. 3.1.3 Equivocation Category One example is in scene 23 conversation 2. By hearing Dominika’s conversation with Ivan, Marta was so mad with her. Marta assumed Dominika took over her mission; Swan. Marta felt Dominika was deceiving her. This conversation was in the living room of their apartment. The situation was in high tension. She had prepared her gun.

But Dominika could apprehend her angry. She offered for working together. This conversation was serious chat and had high tension. This was verbal in face to face manner. This was informal chat. Equivocation, she equivocated that she did it for helping Marta to get the money whereas she only took the benefit from it. Finally, Marta did not have a choice because she also needed the money. That was appropriate with the dialogue below: (01:14:41) (01:14:42) Marta : “(GUN COCKING)” (01:14:46) (01:14:50) Marta : “I've waited a lifetime for something like Swan.” (01:14:50) (01:14:52) Marta : “I worked a year developing her.” (01:14:53) (01:14:55) Marta : “She's not yours to trade.” (01:14:55) (01:14:57) Dominika : “Now you have the money to make the exchange.” (01:14:57) (01:14:59) Dominika : “I will make sure you get the credit.” (01:14:59) (01:15:02 Dominika : “I just need more time. Please.”

3.1.4 Understatement Category In scene 25 conversation 3, the deception statement was included as Understatement category, Dominika answered the detective questions was not complete and clear enough. She was silent for all detectives’ statements. That was appropriate with the dialogue below: (01:19:54) (01:19:56) Detective : “You know something, don't you?” (01:19:58) (01:20:00) Detective : “Whoever it is you're shielding...” (01:20:00) (01:20:03) Detective : “whoever you are scared of...” (01:20:03) (01:20:05) Detective : “we can protect you.” (01:20:04) (01:20:05) Dominika : “May I go?”

On arriving in the apartment after in Vienna, Dominika found that Marta was dead. Actually, the SVR assassin did it. He killed Marta for warning Dominika so she could keep secrets. The conversation was in police station. The conversation involved Dominika and a Budapest detective. In police, Dominika tried to hide all of the things about Marta and about herself. She deceived and told that she did not know everything about Marta.

By reducing and concealing the real information, Dominika asked to go home because it was not necessary to talk too much there. Finally, she could go from that detective. This was verbal speech and face to face manner. This was serious and tension chat. This conversation was informal chat and had little bit sarcastic from Dominika. This conversation was riddle chat which was made by Dominika because she did not answer the questions clear enough. 3.2 Deception Motives From three main motives, all of them were found in Red Sparrow movie. There were self-focused motive, partner-focused motive and relationship-focused motive. It be concluded totally there were 38 motives of deception. There were several scenes that had more than one motive. There were 23 conversations included as Self-focused motive. It had score 61%. For partner-focused motive, there were 2 conversations. It had 5% score. The last, there were 13 conversations included as relationship-focused motive. It had 34% score. She deceived in order to establish contact toward some people, to create good self-image, to avoid conflict and good relationship. 3.2.1 Self-focused Motive Dominika Egorova deceived in order to create self-image and protect herself from anger, criticism and else. The example was in Scene 5 Speech Event 1 (Monolog 1). Dominika defense and protect herself from accusation. That was appropriate with the dialogue. (16:14) (16:16) Dominika : “There's been an accident at the Bolshoi Theatre.” (16:17) (16:19) Dominika : “Women's locker room, Please hurry.” Narrated, this was the first deceptive statement of the main character has been produced. She deceived about the accident in the Bolshoi Theatre. She concealed the truth from the police that she was the actor of Sonya and Konstantin accident. She did not want police knew about it; it could be worse if the police knew the truth. She tried to defense herself. She avoided the harm thing and protected herself image. She just said “There's been an accident at the Bolshoi Theatre”.

Dominika tried to protect herself from accusation so it was not necessary for her to confess her brutalism. That was Dominika’s motive. She deceived because of self-focused motive. This is the motive to protect individual from anger or criticism and/or to protect self image from harm thing. She protected herself from accusation so she did not have obligation to give information or became witness in this accident. 3.2.2 Partner-focused Motive According to Buller and Burgoon (1996), partner-focused motive is a trick to avoid hurting spouses, to help partners to improve or retain their self-esteem, to avoid couples worry, and to protect partner relationships with third parties. The example is in scene 33 conversation 2, Dominika went back to Budapest. She was back to Nate. Nate was so glad Dominika went back to him. He was so worried about her. When Nate asked about her next planning, she said that she wanted to go to America where she could be saved. In fact, she said it because she did not want Nate became worry about her. That was appropriate with the conversation below: (01:51:32) (01:51:35) Nate : “They just let you go? Why would they do that?” (01:51:35) (01:51:38) Dominika : “Because I told them that you would trust me now.” (01:51:39) (01:51:41) Dominika : “Enough to give me the name of the mole.” (01:51:44) (01:51:46) Nate : “But you know that I can't do that.” (01:51:46) (01:51:48) Dominika : “Of course I do.” (01:51:49) (01:51:50) Nate : “So what next, then?” (01:51:50) (01:51:52) Dominika : “I want to go to America...” (01:51:53) (01:51:55) Dominika : “where I can be safe. Please.” (01:51:57) (01:51:57) Nate : “All right.” (01:51:57) (01:51:58) Dominika : “And my mother?” (01:51:59) (01:52:02) Nate : “It'll take some time, but we can get her out, yeah.”

It was not only self-focused motive but also was included as Partner-focused motive because Dominika did not want Nate became worry. In fact, Dominika wanted to trap Ivan because he was the director of these entire situations. She wanted much more money; she deceived

for her mother. There was no resettlement; the money was used for trapping Ivan. Finally, Nate agreed about transferring some money. By Nate’s sympathy, she could get closer again and took the benefit. 3.2.3 Relationship-focused Motive Based on Buller and Burgoon (1996), relationship-focused motive means that using deceptions to limit harm to relationships by avoiding conflict or relational trauma. The example is in Scene 7 Conversation 1, this scene was not only self-focused motive but also included as Relationship-focused motive. Dominika deceived Ustinov in order to win his trust and to get closer to Ustinov. She aimed to make good relationship with him, so she could get information for the mission. That was appropriate with the dialogue below: (20:07) (20:10) Ustinov : “There is no such thing as luck.” (20:10) (20:12) Ustinov : “Just like you being here.” (20:13) (20:15) Ustinov : “There is no friend, is there?” (20:18) (20:20) Ustinov : “Tell me the real reason you are here.” (20:31) (20:32) Dominika :”(DRINKS BEFORE ANSWERING) I came to see you” (20:32) (20:35) Ustinov : “And what is it you want from me?” (20:35) (20:38) Dominika : “All I ever wanted was to be a dancer.” (20:55) (20:57) Dominika : "I'm not like them...” (20:58) (21:00) Dominika : "and I never will be...” (21:01) (21:02) Dominika : "because I'm special." (21:05) (21:07) Dominika : “I want to be special again.”

Here, Ustinov knew that real reason was not about waiting friends but purposely Dominika wanted to meet him. When her deception was broken up by Ustinov, she tried to think the other reason and she did it. By saying about she wants, finally Ustinov wanted to help her with requirement she had to serve him. Here, her motive to get his trust was successful. 3.3 Discussion In interpersonal communication, sometimes people produce deceptive statements in order to be a good person in front of the other. At least, people do deception for protecting themselves from harm things when interact with the others. That is appropriate with Buller and Burgoon (1996),

9 they stated that deception is the deliberate manipulation of information, behavior, and imagery to make others believe in false conclusions or beliefs. There are also some people do deceptions to get benefits from the others. They manipulate true message or create fake information to get the main information from the recipients. Such as the research from Burgoon et al (2003), Zhou et al (2004) and Meibauer (2011) explained that people deceived in order to interact with other and get benefits from it. People deceived the other intentionally. Those research investigated deception in generally. Different with previous research above, this present research focused more about deception category and the motive. Based on this research, people consciously deceive in several ways. They are falsification data or information, concealing information and also equivocating or twisting the fact. The other ways are hyperbole the information and understatement or limitation the information for the receiver. Based on the data, the using of deception categories could be investigated from the context of the conversations. The result is consistent with the previous study by Picornell (2013) that the deception cues are not always consistent. It depends on the context and the relation of each others. It is also almost same with previous study by Gupta et.al (2013) that types of deception can be used to attain more than one belief manipulation goal. The result is also consistent with the previous studies by Newman (2003) and Hancock et.al (2008) which explained that when told true and when told false stories every person had different linguistic styles, linguistic pattern. In Red Sparrow, the main character should change her identity from Dominika Egorova became Katerina Zubkova when she did a mission in Budapest. During in Budapest she used Katerina Zubkova even with her boss Volontov and her partner Marta. This result of this research is consistent with the previous study by Warkentin et.al (2010) report that real name, photo and presence of real-world contacts are usually hidden by people in social media.

The other deception category is concealment. Concealment is usual category which is used by people. Based on data analysis, in Red Sparrow there is also some concealment that was done by Dominika Egorova. According to Buller and Burgoon (1996) naturally concealment which is often used by people in daily life. One example, when the main character attacked her friends in Bolshoi theatre. After attacking them, she called police and said that there was an accident in Bolshoi theatre. In order not to become suspected, she gave fast report moreover she did not say about her identity. The result is equal with previous study by Moreno et.al (2016) that studied about processing of social lies. People concealed by using positive statements and it did not influent the increasing detection in deception detector. The other was Equivocation; people tried to avoid the receiver’s unbelievable. Avoidance is intended for the recipient to believe that the communicator does not perform an act or believe that the communicator performs the right deed (Buller and Burgoon, 1996). Obscuring, avoiding, pretending, twisting and also equivocating are included as equivocation category. Based on data analysis, there were several equivocations. For example, in the first mission Dominika purposely met Ustinov in Hotel Andarja. She said that she was there for waiting a friend but Ustinov broke up her deception; there was no friend there. So, Dominika pretended that she was there to meet him, she needed a help to become special again like before. There was an emotional leakage from Dominika; seemed nervous and took few minutes (drank before saying her equivocation) to say the other reason. According to data analysis, there are several statements included as understatements category. Understatement means that people give limited data or information moreover they can decrease the data, so the others do not know the fact. For example based on data analysis, understatement was occurred when Dominika gave her witness to detective after her partner Marta was dead. She did not answer all detective’s statements and questions. Dominika minimized her statement and almost did not answer all

11 the questions. That is little bit different with the previous study by Picornell (2013), but the main point is same that to detecting deception in written witness statements, it could see from linguistic strategy that used by a witness. According to Buller and Burgoon (1996), the basic motive why people do deception is because they are in crucial or pressure situation. The data showed that the three motives were occurred in Red Sparrow movie. Based on Buller and Burgoon (1996), every deceptive utterances have own motives, one of them is Self-focused motive. Self-focused motive means that people are using tricks to improve or protect their self-image, want to protect themselves from anger, shame, or criticism. In this research, Dominika Egorova did do self-focused motive in her action. One example, when she got anger from Marta because she stole the information about Boucher, she pretended that she tried to help Marta in getting money. Here, she was defense herself from anger. Dominika tried to protect her and her own planning. Self-focused motive occurred when Dominika tried to protect herself. She avoided for getting anger or harm thing from Marta, because Marta had been ready with her gun. The other example, when Dominika was asked by Ivan to do a mission in Budapest. She just said “yes, Uncle” for all Ivan commands and statements. Here, Dominika deceived in order to protect herself from Ivan’s suspicion. She gave good self-image so Ivan can trust her. Self-focused motive is also included as basic motive in deception. Those results of this research are consistent with the previous study by Farisha and Sakkeel (2015). Their study gave report that deception arises from human’s psychology needs; avoid pain and increase pleasure. There are also partner-focused motive was found in this research. Based on Buller and Burgoon (1996), Partner-focused motives is using tricks to avoid hurting spouses, to help partners to improve or retain their self-esteem, to avoid couples worry, and to protect partner relationships with third parties. In Red Sparrow movie, Dominika went back to Nate after getting interrogation from SVR. When Nate asked about her next planning,

she said that she wanted to go to America where she could be saved. In fact, she said it because she did not want Nate became worry about her. She also wanted to finish her own planning to trap Ivan. The result is consistent with previous study by Cole (2001) that people assumed that their partner might not deceive and more honest than themselves. People can do deception to establish relationship. In this research, there are some relationship-focused motives which motivate Dominika Egorova as the main character did deceptions. One example based on data analysis is when Dominika had first meeting to Nate Nash the CIA agent. She falsified that she was a translator for the Embassy. In fact, she purposely came to Budapest for investigating him; as an SVR agent. She tried to establish contact Nate, so she could get closer to him and got his trust. The result of this research is consistent with previous study by Burgoon (2015) that showed sender factors, context factors and relationship factors that should enable predictions of deception will be more effortful. It means relationship also the important factors for deceiving to be successful or not. That equals with the study was done by Mc Nelis (2013). Mc Nelis studied about the relational deception. The results showed that male participants and participants who spend more than 11 hours or more on Facebook per week, write reporting individually which indicates that fraud on romantic relationships on Facebook tends to be very high. It means that the participants deceived in order to create good self-image, avoid conflict and establish good relationship with others. 4. CONCLUSION First, in Red Sparrow movie, the main character Dominika Egorova did some deception when she became an agent. From 40 speech events, there were 30 included as deception. There were falsification category, concealment category, equivocation category and understatement category. It can be concluded totally from 30 scenes there were 79 deceptive statements. Eight statements were included as falsification category (10%). Dominika Egorova did some falsification statements such as gave fake

13 identity, fake job, fake account, fake evidence and else. For concealment category there were 29 statements (37%). For concealment category, Dominika Egorova concealed and hid the truth information. Equivocation category was the biggest number; 36 statements (46%). Dominika Egorova equivocated and pretended when her deceptions were broken up by the other characters. The last, 6 statements was in understatement category (8%). Second, it be concluded totally there were 38 motives of deception. There were several scenes that had more than one motive. There were 23 conversations included as Self-focused motive (61%). Dominika Egorova deceived in order to create self-image and protect herself from anger, criticism and else. For partner-focused motive, there were 2 conversations (5%). The last, there were 13 conversations (34%) included as relationship- focused motive. She deceived in order to establish contact toward some people, to create good self-image, to avoid conflict and good relationship.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Buller, D & Burgoon, J. (1996). Communication Theory: Interpersonal Deception Theory. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 12 (2), P: 13-16. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.com/pdf accessed on April 28th 2018

Burgoon, J. (2015).When is Deceptive Message Production More Effortful than Truth-Telling?A Baker’s Dozen of Moderators. Fronteirs in Psychology, Vol 6. Retrieved from https://www.frontierain.org/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018

Burgoon, J. & Stoner, G & Bonito, J & Dunbar, N.E. (2003). Trust and Deception in Mediated Communication. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03) 0-7695-1874-5/03. Retrieved from https://www.IEEE.Xplore/html/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018

Cole, T. (2001). Lying to The One You Love: The Use of Deception in Romantic Relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 18 (1): P.107-129. DePaul University: SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://www.academica.edu/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018

Farisha, A. & Sakkeel, K. (2015). Psychology of Lying. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, Vol. (2). Retrieved from http://www.ijip.in/pdf accessed on April 24th 2018

Gupta, S., Sakamoto, K. & Ortony, A. (2013). Telling it like it isn't: A Comprehensive Approach to Analyzing Verbal Deception. London: College Publications

Hancock, J.T. & Curry, L. & Goorha, S. & Woodworth, M. (2008). On Lying and Being Lied To: A Linguistic Analysis of Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication. Discourse Processes, Vol.45: P.1-23. doi: 10.1080/01638530701739181. Retrieved from E-mail: [email protected]/pdf accessed on April 25th 2018

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

McNelis, M.J. (2013). Relational Deception: ‘Til Facebook Due Us Part. Alabama: Auburn University Press

Meibauer, J. (2011). On lying: intentionality, implicature, and imprecision. Intercultural Pragmatics, Vol. 8(2): P.277-292. Retrieved from https://[email protected]/pdf accessed on April 24th 2018

Moreno, E. & Casado, P. & Loeches, M. (2016). Tell me sweet little lies: An event-related potentials study on the processing of social lies. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. Psychonomic Society, Inc. Retrieved from https://[email protected]/html/pdf accessed on April 25th 2018

Newman, M. (2003). Lying Words: Predicting Deception from Linguistic Styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (PSPB), Vol. 29 (5): P. 665-675. Retrieved from https://www.academica.edu/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018

Picornell, I. (2013). Analysing Deception in Written Witness Statements. Linguistics Evidence in Security Law and Intelligence, Vol. 1 (1). Retrieved from https://lesli-journal.org accessed on April 25th 2018

Warkentin, D. & Woodworth, M. & Hancock, J.T. & Cormier, N. (2010). Warrants and Deception in Computer Mediated Communication. CSCW 2010. Retrieved from https://www.academica.edu/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018

Zhou, L. & Burgoon, J. & Twitchell, D. & QIN, T & Nunamaker, J. (2004). A Comparison of Classification Methods for Predicting Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication. Journal of Management Information Systems 2004, Vol. 20 (4): P.139–165. Retrieved from https://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/HICSS36/apahome36/pdf accessed on April 29th 2018