DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !1 DECONSTRUCTING A HIGH STAKES DECEPTION: A CASE STUDY OF FALSE CLAIMS OF HEROISM by MARILYN J. CUDMORE A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Social and Applied Sciences in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Royal Roads University, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada Supervisor: Dr. Judee Burgoon ! Marilyn J. Cudmore, 2017 DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !2 COMMITTEE APPROVAL The members of Marilyn J. Cudmore's Dissertation Committee certify that they have read the dissertation titled Deconstructing a High Stakes Deception: A case study of false claims of heroism, and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Social Sciences: Dr. Michael Woodworth [signature on file] Dr. Leslie King [signature on file] Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate’s submission of the final copy of the dissertation to Royal Roads University. The acting supervisor confirms that he has read this dissertation and recommends that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirements: dr. matthew heinz, Dean of the College of Interdisciplinary Studies, Royal Roads University, acting on behalf of Dr. Judee Burgoon, Supervisor. DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !3 Creative Commons Statement This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Canada License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/ 2.5/ca/. Some material in this work is not being made available under the terms of this licence: • Third-Party material that is being used under fair dealing or with permission. • Any photographs where individuals are easily identifiable. DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !4 Author Statement This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at Royal Roads University and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part for commercial use may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: MARILYN J. CUDMORE DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !5 A high stakes deception surpasses other intentional forms of deceit because it is a strategic construction of distorted truths which supplies notable benefits to the Deceiver but purposely delivers deleterious outcomes to targeted Receivers. The level of risk necessary for the Deceiver to accomplish these desired results is tempered by the intense satisfaction of having successfully orchestrated it, of having "won". Specifically, some high stakes deception is unique in that it is well prepared, produced as revenge to a targeted person, and maintained over time using a developed public persona that is exemplary and seemingly credible. A historical, single case study was selected in order to deconstruct the multiple aspects of this type of high stakes deception, to further understand how contextual elements, personal characteristics and interpersonal communication tactics combined to enable a Deceiver to conceive and implement strategic manoeuvrings efficaciously. The case study exposed a deception by a Dutch Jewish individual who lived through both the Holocaust years in Amsterdam and a short incarceration in a Nazi transit camp at the end of World War II. Forty eight years after the war, he made a startling claim that he was the liberator of almost nine hundred Jewish prisoners from a Dutch transit camp, Kamp Westerbork. His survivor/hero script brought him considerable prestige and financial reward, the capstone being a knighthood conferred onto him by the Royal Dutch House of Orange, although Dutch historians later debunked his claim. The deconstruction of the deception broadens the understanding of how the Deceiver was able to effect a convincing deception to a wide Receiver audience, with minimal accountability. The study supports the Interpersonal Deception Theory. DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................5 TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................6 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................11 Objective of Study..............................................................................................................12 Rationale of case study selection.......................................................................................13 Comparison of empirical and qualitative inquiry...............................................................14 Biographical outlines of participants in the case study..................................................... 16 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................24 Differentiation between types of deception.......................................................................24 Conceptual and Operational definitions of high stakes deception.....................................26 Detecting high stakes deception.........................................................................................29 Theoretical support: Interpersonal Deception Theory.......................................................36 Historical literature specific to case study events..............................................................39 Dutch Jewry citizenship........................................................................................39 The German Occupation of the Netherlands........................................................41 History of Kamp Westerbork................................................................................42 CHAPTER 3: METHOD...............................................................................................................45 Rationale for using case study inquiry...............................................................................45 Participants.........................................................................................................................46 Clarification of key terms..................................................................................................48 Non random selective sample............................................................................................48 DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !7 Procedure...........................................................................................................................49 Framing questions..............................................................................................................50 Instrument for descriptive statistics...................................................................................50 Assigning of thematic meaning units to text......................................................................52 Supporting documentation.................................................................................................53 Procedural model of data analysis.....................................................................................54 Interpretation of the findings.............................................................................................54 Semantic validity................................................................................................................54 Construct validity...............................................................................................................55 Content validity..................................................................................................................55 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS...............................................................................................................57 Assignment of codes to participants..................................................................................57 Assignment of Theme Categories......................................................................................58 Expanded Results from Each Theme Designation.............................................................63 Theme 1: Deception Situations..............................................................................63 The Generational Deception......................................................................63 The Sibling Deception...............................................................................64 The Hero/Liberation Deception.................................................................67 Client 200 account.........................................................................67 Client 210 account.........................................................................69 Client 220 and 240 accounts..........................................................74 Client 230 account..........................................................................74 DECONSTRUCTING DECEPTION !8 Client 250 account.........................................................................78 Client 260 account.........................................................................79 Other sources..................................................................................81