Abstract
Humans are very important sources of information for intelligence purposes. They are multi-modal: they see, hear, smell, and feel. However, the information which they relay is not simply that which they personally experience. They may pass on hearsay, they form opinions, they analyze and interpret what they hear or see or feel. Sometimes they pass on ambiguous, vague, misleading or even false information, whether intentional or not. However, whether imprecise or vague, when humans communicate information, they often embed clues in the form of lexical elements in that which they pass on that allows the receiver to interpret where the informational content originated, how strongly the speaker herself believes in the veracity of that information. In this chapter, we look at the ways in which human communications are uncertain, both within the content and about the content. We illustrate a methodology which helps us to make an initial evaluation of the evidential quality of information based upon lexical clues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
J.A. Gans Jr, “‘This is 50-50’: Behind Obama’s decision to kill Bin Laden”, The Atlantic, Oct 10, 2012, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/10/this-is-50-50-behind-obamas-decision-to-kill-bin-laden/263449/
R. de Gourmont, Philosophic Nights in Paris (J.W. Luce, Boston, 1920), p. 127
V. Dragos, K. Rein, “What’s in a message? Exploring dimensions of trust in reported information”, Proceedings of Fusion 2016, IEEE, 2016
M. Bednarek, Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus (Continuum, London, 2006)
G.A. Gross, R. Nagi, D. R. KedarSambhoos S.C. Schlegel G.T. Shapiro, Towards Hard+Soft Data Fusion: Processing Architecture and Implementation for the Joint Fusion and Analysis of Hard and Soft Intelligence Data. Proceedings of Fusion 2012, pp. 955–962
http://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/how-many-languages-are-there-world
D. Claeser, D. Felske, S. Kent, Token level code-switching detection using Wikipedia as a lexical resource, in Language Technologies for the Challenges of the Digital Age. GSCL 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. by G. Rehm, T. Declerck, vol. 10713, (Springer, Cham, 2018)
K. Sherman, “Words of Estimative Probability“, Studies in Intelligence, Fall 1964, Central Intelligence Agency, https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/sherman-kent-and-the-board-of-national-estimates-collected-essays/6words.html, (1964)
R.J. Heuer Jr., “Psychology of intelligence analysis”, Center for the Study of Intelligence (1999)
S. Rieber, “Communicating Uncertainty in Intelligence Analysis”, http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p100689_index.htmlf (2006)
G. Lakoff, Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of Fuzzy concepts. J. Philos. Logic 2, 458–508 (1973). D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland
K. Rein, I believe it’s possible it might be so.... exploiting lexical clues for the automatic generation of evidentiality weights for information extracted from English text. Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Bonn, (2016). http://hss.ulb.uni-bonn.de/2016/4471/4471.htm
Z. Frajzyngier, Truth and the indicative sentence. Stud. Lang. 9(2), 243–254 (1985)
B. Goujon, Uncertainty detection for information extraction, International Conference RANLP 2009, Borovets, Bulgaria, (2009), pp. 118–122
J.I. Marin-Arrese, “Epistemic Legitimizing Strategies, Commitment and Accountability in Discourse”, {Discourse Studies}, vol 13 (Sage Publications, 2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611421360c
E.D. Liddy, N. Kando, V.L. Rubin, “Certainty Categorization Model”, The AAAI Symposium on Exploring Attitude and Affect in Text AAAI-EAAT, vol 2004 (American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Stanford, 2004)
K.H. Hyland, Hedging in Scientific Research Articles (John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 1998)
Russell, Bertrand, “Am I an Atheist or an Agnostic?”, Literary Guide Rationalist Rev. 64, 7, July, 1949, pp. 115–116
K.H. Teigen, W. Brun, Yes, but it is uncertain: Directions and communcativeitention of verbal probabilistic terms. ActaPsychologica 88, 233–258., Elsevier Science B.V. (1995)
W. Brun, K.H. Teigen, Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 41(3), 390–404 (1988)
S. Renooij, C.L.M. Witteman, Talking probabilities: Communicating probabilistic information with words and numbers. Int. J. Approximate Reason. 22(3), 169–195. Elsevier (1999)
C.L.M. Witteman, S. Renooij, P. Koele, BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 7(13) (2007). BioMed Central Ltd, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/7/13
B.M. Ayyub, G.J. Klir, Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis in Engineering and the Sciences (J. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rein, K. (2019). Fact, Conjecture, Hearsay and Lies: Issues of Uncertainty in Natural Language Communications. In: Bossé, É., Rogova, G. (eds) Information Quality in Information Fusion and Decision Making. Information Fusion and Data Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03643-0_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03643-0_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03642-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03643-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)