Authors
Rohini Kumar
Abstract
The present study aimed to explore the effect of the mode of crime, online versus offline, on the detection of deception by the Eye Detection Test (EDS) from a forensic psychological perspective. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A, instructed to commit a mock crime offline and lie during the EDS test, and Group B, instructed to commit a mock crime online via a social media platform (Instagram) and lie during the EDS test. Sampling was conducted using a random sampling method, resulting in a total of 12 participants divided equally between the two groups. Participants were tasked with performing the mock crime within a specified time frame and were subsequently evaluated using the EDS test. Analysis of the collected data suggests that the Eye Detection Test is efficient in detecting various types of deception. Given the limited existing research in this area, there is significant scope for further investigation. This research could potentially aid in preventing the wrongful punishment of innocent individuals who may falsely confess under pressure.
Deception Detection system is widely applied in different areas related to security, hiring new employees for business, criminal investigation, law enforcement, anti-terrorism, and others. The available detection of deception technology is either verbal or non-verbal. The verbal detection of deception technology and methods use speech, while non-verbal features are related to facial expressions, eye gaze, head moments, eye blinking and other body gestures. The non-verbal technology of Detection of Deception is important as it is difficult to manipulate the non-verbal communication like eye-behaviour, micro-expressions, etc. According to Ford (2006) one of the first methods to prove the veracity of a statement uttered by the accused was described in China circa 1000 BC (3). According to Forensic Psychological perspective, there are two types of deceptions, which are low-stakes (face saving) and high-stakes (malicious deception). Deception happens in both small and big situations, making it tricky in forensic and security work. It involves showing fake information by copying reality, making up new things, or diverting attention. Understanding these tricks is important for catching lies in investigations and keeping things safe and secure. (1)
In forensic psychology, detecting deception involves investigating whether someone is lying or telling the truth. Deception is divided into three types:
1) Stating Untruths - The act of providing false information.
2) Concealing the truth- it refers to the act of omission, choosing not to voice the truth by concealing at least some relevant facts. Purposefully concealing of the truth.
3)Paltering-it falls in the middle between deceiving by an act of commission and deceiving by omission. In Forensic Psychology, common deception detection techniques include polygraph tests, eye-tracking, speech analysis, and emotional response analysis.
Understanding these types helps experts analyse behaviour and statements to uncover deception during investigations. (2)
Deception frequently stems from three primary emotions: fear, guilt, or delight. These emotions can drive individuals to conceal or manipulate the truth in various situations, whether to avoid consequences, cover up wrongdoing, or gain advantage. Understanding the underlying emotions can provide insight into why someone might engage in deceptive behaviour.
In the present study, we explored the effect of the mode of crime, specifically online versus offline, on the detection of deception using the Eye Detect System (EDS). Our aim is to determine the efficiency of this deception detection tool in distinguishing between online and offline modes of crime. Cybercrime covers a wide range of illegal activities done using computers or the internet, like stealing information or money, threatening people, or bullying online. It's been increasing over the past 20 years, causing a lot of trouble, and costing a ton of money. Besides financial losses, cybercrime also hurts people emotionally and mentally through things like cyberbullying and online threats.Integrity-related cybercrimes involve actions that mess with the trust or accuracy of information, like changing data or spreading lies online. Perpetrators might do it for money, revenge, or just to cause chaos.
Computer-related cybercrimes target computer systems or networks, like hacking or spreading malware. Motives can include making money, spying, or pushing certain beliefs. Content-related cybercrimes involve sharing harmful or illegal stuff online, like cyberbullying or spreading hate speech. People do these crimes to harass others, push their beliefs, or intimidate people. The division of crimes related to the use of the internet into cyber-enabled crimes and cyber-dependent crimes may seem easy, but the types and forms of offenses within each category can vary significantly. In this article, we will explore the meanings of both cyber-enabled crimes and cyber-dependent crimes, as well as provide examples of each.
Cyber-enabled crimes are basically traditional crimes, but computers or the internet make them bigger or able to reach more people. Unlike cyber-dependent crimes, you don't always need computers to commit them. Fraud and theft are two common examples of cyber-enabled crimes that you might have heard about a lot. (4)
There are various types of cyber-enabled frauds:
Electronic Financial Frauds: This includes online banking frauds and internet-enabled card-not-present (CNP) fraud. CNP fraud happens when transactions occur remotely over the internet, without the physical presence of the card or the cardholder. E-commerce frauds, which involve fraudulent financial transactions related to online retail sales, also fall into this category. Both businesses and customers can be victims of these frauds. (4)
Fraudulent Sales on Online Platforms: This involves scams on online auction or retail sites or through fake websites. Sellers may offer goods or services that they never provide, or they may sell counterfeit products while claiming they are authentic. Online ticketing fraud is another example of misrepresentation in online retail. (4)
Mass-Marketing Frauds and Consumer Scams: These include advance fee scams like the infamous 419 frauds, inheritance frauds, fake charity or disaster relief scams, fake lotteries, and pyramid schemes. In these scams, individuals are tricked into giving money upfront with the promise of receiving a larger sum later. (4)
Phishing Scams: Phishing scams involve fraudulent emails that pretend to be from legitimate sources and ask for personal or corporate information, such as passwords or bank account details. These emails aim to deceive recipients into revealing sensitive information. In some cases, attackers personalize their phishing attempts by gathering specific information about their targets, a tactic known as spear-phishing, to increase the likelihood of success.
Cybercriminals may target access credentials to corporate accounts, including usernames, passwords, and other authentication details. Once they gain access, they can perpetrate fraud through unauthorized transactions, manipulation of financial records, or even business email compromise (BEC) schemes.Protecting these types of data requires robust cybersecurity measures, including encryption, multi-factor authentication, regular security audits, employee training, and implementing best practices for data handling and storage. Additionally, organizations should stay vigilant for emerging threats and continuously update their defences to mitigate the risk of cyber-enabled data theft.
Cyber-dependent crimes are illegal activities that can only happen using computers or other tech gadgets. These crimes involve using these devices to carry out the offense and targeting them to cause harm. For example, making and spreading harmful software to make money, or breaking into computer systems to steal, mess up, or delete data or disrupt online activities.
Cyber-dependent crimes can be divided into two main types:
• Illicit intrusions into computer networks - refers to unauthorized access or breaches into computer systems or networks. This involves entering digital spaces without permission, often for malicious purposes such as stealing sensitive information, disrupting operations, or causing damage. E.g.: hacking
• Disrupting or damaging computer functions and online spaces, such as using malware or launching Denial of Service (DOS) or Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attacks.
• Cyber-dependent crimes are carried out by various entities for different motives, such as:
• Skilled individuals or groups who create and distribute software to attack computer systems for criminal purposes or to assist others in doing so.
• Individuals or groups with advanced skills but non-malicious intentions, like hacktivists using cyber means to protest.
• Individuals or groups with limited skills who utilize cyber tools developed by others.
• Organized crime syndicates.
Most cyber criminals possess relatively low levels of technical expertise. However, their attacks are becoming more prevalent due to the expanding online criminal marketplace. This platform offers easy access to advance the knowledge, empowering less skilled cybercriminals to exploit various vulnerabilities effectively. (5)
Cyber-dependent offenders rely on samples drawn from either student populations or organizational employees. Consequently, many of these studies focus on relatively low-level acts of cyber-dependent crimes. These offenses include activities such as guessing passwords to computers, emails, and social media accounts, misusing computers, and computer networks, and violating information security policies. These provide valuable insights into the behaviours and motivations of individuals engaging in cyber-dependent offenses, it's essential to recognize the limitations of generalizing findings from these populations to more serious cybercrimes. Cyber-dependent offenses committed by individuals may not fully capture the complexity and severity of cybercrimes such as hacking, malware distribution, online fraud, and cyberstalking, which can have significant societal and economic impacts.
Studies identify various key actors who facilitate the illicit activities of cyber-dependent criminals. These enablers encompass coders or programmers of malicious software, distributors and vendors who trade and sell hacking tools and stolen data, teachers who exchange information regarding cyber-dependent crime techniques and tools, as well as moderators and administrators of online marketplaces who maintain the criminal infrastructure, vouch for the goods, and enforce social norms in these marketplaces.
Online offenders and enablers of cyber-dependent crimes often convene in both offline and online environments. For instance, Leukfeldt and colleagues (2017) examined Dutch police records involving investigations of cybercriminal groups and found that cyber-dependent crime offenders residing in nearby neighbourhood’s often gather in various locations throughout the city. However, despite these offline interactions, online forums and markets remain central to facilitating interactions and recruitment efforts between offenders and enablers (Hutchings & Holt, 2015).
Under the Information Technology Act (IT) Act 2000 stated that both cyber-dependent and traditional crimes are recognized, and it outlines certain actions that are considered unlawful:
a) Unauthorized Access: If an individual, without permission from the owner or any authorized person, accesses a computer, computer system, or computer network, and downloads, copies, or extracts any data, computer database, or information from it, it is deemed an offense.
b) Source Code Theft or Alteration: Similarly, if someone steals, conceals, destroys, or alters any computer source code used for a computer resource with the intention to cause damage, it constitutes a violation under the IT Act.
These provisions aim to safeguard digital assets and prevent unauthorized access, theft, or manipulation of computer resources and data.
The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has recently released its annual report titled "Crime in India for 2022," offering a comprehensive overview of crime trends in the country. Here's a summary of the key findings:
Total Cognizable Crimes: Over 58,00,000 cognizable crimes were registered in 2022, including offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Special & Local Laws (SLL). This marked a 4.5% decline compared to 2021.
Crime Rate Decline: The crime rate per lakh population decreased from 445.9 in 2021 to 422.2 in 2022, indicating a drop in overall crime rates adjusted for population growth.
Safest City: Kolkata retained its position as the safest city in India for the third consecutive year, with the lowest number of cognizable offenses per lakh population among metropolises. Pune and Hyderabad secured the second and third positions, respectively.
Suicides and Causes: India witnessed a concerning increase in suicides, totalling over 1.7 lakh cases in 2022, reflecting a 4.2% rise compared to 2021. The suicide rate also increased by 3.3%. Major causes included family problems, marriage-related issues, bankruptcy, unemployment, and illness. Maharashtra reported the highest number of suicides, followed by Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, and Telangana. Daily wage earners, agricultural workers, farmers, and unemployed individuals were among the most affected groups. Additionally, over 12,000 student suicides were reported in the year.
These findings highlight both improvements and challenges in the realm of crime and public safety in India, emphasizing the need for continued efforts to address emerging threats such as cybercrime while tackling underlying socio-economic issues contributing to suicides.
References
Podlesny, John A., and David C. Raskin. “Effectiveness of Techniques and Physiological Measures in the Detection of Deception.” Psychophysiology, vol. 15, no. 4, July 1978, pp. 344–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1978.tb01391.x.
Lee, So-Hyun, et al. “Understanding Cybercrime From a Criminal’s Perspective: Why and How Suspects Commit Cybercrimes?” Technology in Society, vol. 75, Sept. 2023, p. 102361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102361.
“Cyber Crime: A Review of the Evidence Summary | Exercises Statistics Docsity.” Docsity.com, 2022, www.docsity.com/en/docs/cyber-crime-a-review-of-the-evidence-summary/8800256/. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.
Vicianova, Martina. “Historical Techniques of Lie Detection.” Europe’s Journal of Psychology, vol. 11, no. 3, 20 Aug. 2015, pp. 522–534, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873061/, https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v11i3.919.
Maimon, David, and Eric R. Louderback. “Cyber-Dependent Crimes: An
Interdisciplinary Review.” Annual Review of Criminology, vol. 2, no. 1, Oct. 2018, pp. 191–216. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092057
NCRB’s Crime in India 2022 Report.” Drishti IAS, www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/ncrbs-crime-in-india-2022-report
How to cite this article?
| APA Style | hh. |
| Chicago Style | |
| MLA Style | |
| DOI | |
| URL |