Skip to main content

Fact, Conjecture, Hearsay and Lies: Issues of Uncertainty in Natural Language Communications

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Information Fusion and Data Science ((IFDS))

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. 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/

  2. R. de Gourmont, Philosophic Nights in Paris (J.W. Luce, Boston, 1920), p. 127

    Google Scholar 

  3. V. Dragos, K. Rein, “What’s in a message? Exploring dimensions of trust in reported information”, Proceedings of Fusion 2016, IEEE, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Bednarek, Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus (Continuum, London, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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

    Google Scholar 

  6. http://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/how-many-languages-are-there-world

  7. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  8. 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)

  9. R.J. Heuer Jr., “Psychology of intelligence analysis”, Center for the Study of Intelligence (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Rieber, “Communicating Uncertainty in Intelligence Analysis”, http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p100689_index.htmlf (2006)

  11. 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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. 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

  13. Z. Frajzyngier, Truth and the indicative sentence. Stud. Lang. 9(2), 243–254 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. B. Goujon, Uncertainty detection for information extraction, International Conference RANLP 2009, Borovets, Bulgaria, (2009), pp. 118–122

    Google Scholar 

  15. 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

  16. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  17. K.H. Hyland, Hedging in Scientific Research Articles (John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 1998)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Russell, Bertrand, “Am I an Atheist or an Agnostic?”, Literary Guide Rationalist Rev. 64, 7, July, 1949, pp. 115–116

    Google Scholar 

  19. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  20. W. Brun, K.H. Teigen, Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 41(3), 390–404 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 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)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 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

  23. B.M. Ayyub, G.J. Klir, Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis in Engineering and the Sciences (J. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kellyn Rein .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics