Year 2012, Volume 2 , Issue 3, Pages 59 - 66 2012-04-15

Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic
ÇEK CUMHURİYETİNDE BİR İLETİŞİM ŞEKLİ OLARAK ALDATMA

Mgr. Lenka MYNARIKOVA [1]


Deception is a wide-spread form of communication and according to foreign researches, more than 90 % of people admit to lie at least sometimes, with the number of lies varying between 1 a day to 1 or 2 in every 10 minute-long conversation. As those results come mostly from the USA studies, we addressed deception in the Czech Republic and compared our results with those from American studies. We used an on- line questionnaire to collect data from 112 respondents. An SPSS analysis showed that 100 % of respondents lied at least sometimes with men admitting more lies than women. Similar to foreign researches respondents most frequently lie about their relationships, incomes and work or education successes. Men would more probably lie to protect a close person, women lie more often to gain advantages from others, which contradicts foreign results. Lying to children is easier for 75 % of respondents and lying to strangers is easier to 97 % of them.

Aldatma yaygın bir iletişim şeklidir ve yabacı araştırmacılara göre insanların yüzde 90 ’ından daha fazlası bazen yalan söylediğini kabul eder. Yalan sayısı günde 1 kez veya 10 dakikalık bir sohbette 1 ila 2 kez olduğu belirtilir. Sonuçlar çoğunlukla ABD’de yapılan çalışmalardan alındığı için, biz bu çalışmada Çek Cumhuriyeti’nde “aldatma” konusunu değerlendirdik ve bulgularımızı Amerika’daki çalışmalar ile kıyasladık. 112 kişiden bilgi almak üzere online bir anket kullandık. Bir SPSS analizi, yanıt verenlerin yüzde 100 yalan söylediğini ve erkeklerin kadınlara oranla yalan söylemeye daha yatkın olduğunu gösterdi.

Yabancı araştırmacıların bulgularına göre benzer olarak, katılımcıların aksine, bu çalışmada erkeklerin yakın bir arkadaşını korumak için kadınlarınsa başkalarından faydalanmak için yalan söylediği gözlendi. Katılımcıların yüzde 75’ine göre çocuklara, yüzde 97’sine göre ise yabancılara yalan söylemenin daha kolay olduğu saptandı.

  • Aune, R.K., & Waters, L.L. (1994). Cultural differences in deception: Motivations to deceive in Samoans and North Americans. International Journal of. Intercultural Relations, 19, 159-172.
  • Boon, S.D., & McLeod, B.A. (2001). Deception in romantic relationships: Subjective estimates of success at deceiving and attitudes toward deception. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 463 - 476.
  • DePaulo, B.M., Kashy, D.A., Kirkendol, S.E., Wyer, M.M., & Epstein, J.A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979-995.
  • Ennis,E., Vrij, A., & Chance, C. (2008). Individual differences and lying in everyday life. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(1), 105-118.
  • Fu, G., Xu, F., Cameron, C.A., Heyman, G., & Lee, K. (2007). Cross-cultural differences in children’s choices, categorizations, and evaluations of truths and lies. DevelopmentalPsychology, 43, 278-293.
  • Fu, G., Lee, K., Cameron, C. A., & Xu, F. (2001). Chinese and Canadian Adults’ Categorization and Evaluation of Lie- and Truth-Telling about Pro- and Anti-Social Behaviors. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32, 740-747.
  • Gneezy, U. (2005). Deception: The Role of Consequences. American Economic Review, 95, 384-94.
  • Granhag, P.A., & Vrij, A. (2005). Deception detection. In: M. Brewer, & D.W. Kipling (Eds.), Psychology and law: an empiricalperspective (pp. 43-92). New York: Guilford Press.
  • Gudjonsson, G.H. (1994). Psychological evidence in court. In: S.J.E. Lindsay, & E.P. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of clinical adultpsychology (pp. 705-721), New York: Routledge.
  • Hancock, J.T., Thom-Santelli, J., & Ritchie, T. (2004). Deception and design: The impact of communication technologies on lying behavior. Proceedings, Conference on Computer Human Interaction, 6, 130-136.
  • Lewis, M., & Saarni, C. (1993). Lying and deception in everyday life. New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Mealy, M. Stephan, W., & Urrutia, I.C. (2007). The acceptability of lies in the United States and Ecuador. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(6), 689-702.
  • Nyberg, D. (1993). The Varnished Truth: Truth Telling and Deceiving in Ordinary Life. Chicago: Chicago University.
  • Reddy, V. (2007). Getting back to the rough ground: deception and ‘social living’. Biological Sciences, 362, 621-637.
  • Talwar, W., Gordon, H.M., & Lee, K. (2007). Lying in the Elementary School Years: Verbal Deception and Its Relation to Second-Order Belief Understanding. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 804810.
  • Talwar, V., Murphy, S.M., & Lee, K. (2007). White lie-telling in children for politeness purposes.
  • International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31(1), 1-11.
  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit. Chichester, England: Wiley.
  • Westcott, H.L, Davies, G.M., & Clifford, B.R. (1991). Adult's perceptions of childern's videotaped truthful and deceptive statements. Children & Society, 5(2), 123-135.
  • Whitty, M.T. (2002). Liar, liar! An examination of how open supportive and honest people are in chat rooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(4), 343-352.
Primary Language en
Subjects Social
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Author: Mgr. Lenka MYNARIKOVA (Primary Author)

Dates

Publication Date : April 15, 2012

Bibtex @research article { busbed401021, journal = {Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi}, issn = {1309-6672}, eissn = {2618-6322}, address = {Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Müdürlüğü 12100, Merkez Bingöl}, publisher = {Bingol University}, year = {2012}, volume = {2}, pages = {59 - 66}, doi = {}, title = {Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic}, key = {cite}, author = {Mynarıkova, Mgr. Lenka} }
APA Mynarıkova, M . (2012). Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic . Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi , 2 (3) , 59-66 . Retrieved from http://busbed.bingol.edu.tr/en/pub/issue/29513/401021
MLA Mynarıkova, M . "Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic" . Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2 (2012 ): 59-66 <http://busbed.bingol.edu.tr/en/pub/issue/29513/401021>
Chicago Mynarıkova, M . "Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic". Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2 (2012 ): 59-66
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic AU - Mgr. Lenka Mynarıkova Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 N1 - DO - T2 - Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 59 EP - 66 VL - 2 IS - 3 SN - 1309-6672-2618-6322 M3 - UR - Y2 - 2021 ER -
EndNote %0 Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic %A Mgr. Lenka Mynarıkova %T Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic %D 2012 %J Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi %P 1309-6672-2618-6322 %V 2 %N 3 %R %U
ISNAD Mynarıkova, Mgr. Lenka . "Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic". Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2 / 3 (April 2012): 59-66 .
AMA Mynarıkova M . Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2012; 2(3): 59-66.
Vancouver Mynarıkova M . Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2012; 2(3): 59-66.
IEEE M. Mynarıkova , "Deception as a Form of Communication in the Czech Republic", Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 59-66, Apr. 2012