A communication study was conducted regarding the perception of deception through both face-to-face (FTF) and computer-mediated communication (CMC). This was achieved by altering previous studies conducted in this area to give the allocators (potential deceivers) the choice of being deceptive or honest. Method The allocators were given money to divide and the recipient was not aware of the full amount curator evaluate and determine the level of deception represented by the assigner. Once the exchange was completed, both participants answered a questionnaire about their experience. It was found that when assigners were seen to have dishonest behavior, it made the receivers more suspicious of deception. Furthermore, recipients' correct identification of deception was higher when using CMC compared to FTF. With a sample of 388 university students, Van Swol, Braun, and Kolb (2013) conducted this study empirically and qualitatively, adopting deductive reasoning and developing multiple hypotheses predicting relationships between variables. The results of this sample are not generalizable due to its size and lack of diversity. Using current and relevant sources from previous studies as background, this study was modified, whereby assigners were given the choice to lie or tell the truth. In previous studies, the researcher informed the assigner how he or she should behave regarding the deception. Results A major limitation of this study was the small sample size and lack of diversity. For this reason, the correlation is not significant to ensure conclusive evidence. The results of the questionnaire showed that 20.6% of the allocators lied to the recipients and 72.3% told the truth (Appendix II). This indicates that providers felt more comfortable being…in the center of the card…things that could be added to improve the overall message. By including Goffman's (1959) idea of ​​the Self, we would be able to gain a deeper understanding of what drives a person to be deceptive or honest and how certain platforms influence the ease of detecting this deception. As it stands, this article is very specific in terms of participants and cannot be generalized, leaving it open for further study. Works Cited Goffman, E. (1959). Self-presentation in everyday life. Garden City, New York: Doubleday. Schafer, J. R. (2013). Let them do the talking. Truth bias. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/let-their-words-do-the-talking/201306/truth-bias.Van Swol, L.M., Braun, MT, & Kolb, M.R. (in press ). Deception, detection, behavior, and truth bias in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Communication research.