Veracity Roadmap: Is Big Data Objective, Truthful and Credible?

This paper argues that big data can possess different characteristics, which affect its quality. Depending on its origin, data processing technologies, and methodologies used for data collection and scientific discoveries, big data can have biases, ambiguities, and inaccuracies which need to be identified and accounted for to reduce inference errors and improve the accuracy of generated insights. Big data veracity is now being recognized as a necessary property for its utilization, complementing the three previously established quality dimensions (volume, variety, and velocity), But there has been little discussion of the concept of veracity thus far. This paper provides a roadmap for theoretical and empirical definitions of veracity along with its practical implications. We explore veracity across three main dimensions: 1) objectivity/subjectivity, 2) truthfulness/deception, 3) credibility/implausibility – and propose to operationalize each of these dimensions with either existing computational tools or potential ones, relevant particularly to textual data analytics. We combine the measures of veracity dimensions into one composite index – the big data veracity index. This newly developed veracity index provides a useful way of assessing systematic variations in big data quality across datasets with textual information. The paper contributes to the big data research by categorizing the range of existing tools to measure the suggested dimensions, and to Library and Information Science (LIS) by proposing to account for heterogeneity of diverse big data, and to identify information quality dimensions important for each big data type

Veracity Roadmap: Is Big Data Objective, Truthful and Credible?

This paper argues that big data can possess different characteristics, which affect its quality. Depending on its origin, data processing technologies, and methodologies used for data collection and scientific discoveries, big data can have biases, ambiguities, and inaccuracies which need to be identified and accounted for to reduce inference errors and improve the accuracy of generated insights. Big data veracity is now being recognized as a necessary property for its utilization, complementing the three previously established quality dimensions (volume, variety, and velocity), But there has been little discussion of the concept of veracity thus far. This paper provides a roadmap for theoretical and empirical definitions of veracity along with its practical implications. We explore veracity across three main dimensions: 1) objectivity/subjectivity, 2) truthfulness/deception, 3) credibility/implausibility – and propose to operationalize each of these dimensions with either existing computational tools or potential ones, relevant particularly to textual data analytics. We combine the measures of veracity dimensions into one composite index – the big data veracity index. This newly developed veracity index provides a useful way of assessing systematic variations in big data quality across datasets with textual information. The paper contributes to the big data research by categorizing the range of existing tools to measure the suggested dimensions, and to Library and Information Science (LIS) by proposing to account for heterogeneity of diverse big data, and to identify information quality dimensions important for each big data type

Truth and Deception at the Rhetorical Structure Level

This paper furthers the development of methods to dis- tinguish truth from deception in textual data. We use rhetorical structure theory (RST) as the analytic framework to identify systematic differences between deceptive and truthful stories in terms of their coher- ence and structure. A sample of 36 elicited personal stories, self-ranked as truthful or deceptive, is manu- ally analyzed by assigning RST discourse relations among each story’s constituent parts. A vector space model (VSM) assesses each story’s position in multi- dimensional RST space with respect to its distance from truthful and deceptive centers as measures of the story’s level of deception and truthfulness. Ten human judges evaluate independently whether each story is deceptive and assign their confidence levels (360 evaluations total), producing measures of the expected human ability to recognize deception. As a robustness check, a test sample of 18 truthful stories (with 180 additional evaluations) is used to determine the reli- ability of our RST-VSM method in determining decep- tion. The contribution is in demonstration of the discourse structure analysis as a significant method for automated deception detection and an effective complement to lexicosemantic analysis. The potential is in developing novel discourse-based tools to alert information users to potential deception in computer- mediated texts