Undercover Deception Clues

A Case of Restrictive Deterrence

Datos Bibliográficos

ID9681233
AutoresBruce A Jacobs (autor de correspondencia)
Año1993
Volumen31
Número2
Páginas281-299
Fecha de publicación1993-05-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaCriminology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0011-1384 • E-ISSN: 1745-9125
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01131.x
OpenAlexW2099613304
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas25
Referencias citadas35

Although studies on drug dealing have examined techniques sellers use to ensure against undercover infiltrations, none has explored the use of such techniques at the interactional level. The objective here is to address this void by exploring the perceptual shorthand dealers use to determine whether buyers in question are undercover. This perceptual shorthand processes one of two types of deception clues in making this judgment: trend discontinuity and interpersonal illegitimacy. Trend discontinuity is associated with police in formants and results from situations in which (I) familiar customers suddenly introduce unfamiliar others who wish to buy drugs and (2) familiar customers suddenly and signifcantly increase quantities they themselves desire to purchase. Interpersonal illegitimacy is associated with undercover agents and results from situations in which unfamiliar buyers emit certain physical and verbal “vibes” believed to be indicative of covert law en forcement personnel. Discussion focuses on the data's presuppositional and microstructural implications for restrictive deterrence (Gibbs, 1975). Data were drawn from semi‐structured interviews with 32 semi‐institutionalized heroin user‐dealers located in a very large western US. city

Covert · Criminology · Deception · Deterrence (psychology · Interpersonal communication · Linguistics · Perception · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Crime, Illicit Activities, and Governance · Psychology · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending · Social Psychology