{"id":501,"date":"2021-07-28T21:34:34","date_gmt":"2021-07-28T21:34:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/?post_type=chapter&p=501"},"modified":"2021-08-09T16:05:25","modified_gmt":"2021-08-09T16:05:25","slug":"4-5-1-deceptive-discourse-synthesis","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/chapter\/4-5-1-deceptive-discourse-synthesis\/","title":{"rendered":"4.5.1 Deceptive discourse (synthesis)"},"content":{"raw":"

English 102, September 2020<\/h3>\r\nIn\u00a01989, an American\u00a0linguist named James Paul Gee wrote an academic article titled \u201cWhat is Literacy?\u201d The object of this article was (unsurprisingly) to define the word \u201cliteracy\u201d not in the way a common person could find in a dictionary, but rather the definition of the word as it is used in relation to the study of languages\u00a0(Gee, 1). However, for the purpose of this essay Gee\u2019s definition of \u201cliteracy\u201d is not directly important. Instead, I would like to focus on another word used in Gee\u2019s article and its definition in the context of literacy. The word I would like to bring\u00a0to\u00a0your attention is \u201cdiscourse.\u201d\r\n\r\nNow, I understand much of the previous paragraph may have been confusing or even hard to read, but you have my word that I will do my best to ease your reading experience from here on out. Gee\u2019s definition of \u201cdiscourse\u201d in terms of\u00a0literacy uses the word to refer to the social norms put in place by different groups of people. These norms that govern the group\u2019s language, non-verbal communication, and behavior are what Gee means when he uses the term \u201cdiscourse\u201d (Gee, 1).\u00a0For simplicity\u2019s sake,\u00a0Gee\u2019s definition of\u00a0\u201cdiscourse\u201d\u00a0is the definition I will use for the remainder of this essay, as I am going to be\u00a0relating\u00a0three other academic articles to Gee\u2019s publication.\r\n\r\nYou may ask what the subjects\u00a0of these articles\u00a0are, and that is, obviously,\u00a0an\u00a0important question\u00a0for me to answer. I\u00a0have\u00a0decided to\u00a0break down\u00a0three articles that pertain to the non-verbal discourse of people engaged in the act\u00a0(if done well,\u00a0some may call it an art) of deception.\u00a0Now I could tell you that I decided to write about this subject for many different reasons, all with scholarly merit and,\u00a0of course,\u00a0relevancy\u00a0to the time of this essay\u2019s writing, but that would be a lie. The truth is, I decided to write about this topic entirely as a form of entertainment to myself, as I have always found the psyche of a liar\u00a0to be incredibly interesting.\u00a0Part of what I find so interesting about deception is the ease with which\u00a0most people consider deceiving others, if only in small ways. For example,\u00a0I hardly consider myself to be an amoral person (although\u00a0I suppose few people do)\u00a0but the idea to embellish my reasons for writing\u00a0an essay on this topic\u00a0came concerningly quickly to me. You see, it can be surprisingly easy to deceive others through written communication. The written word relies solely on language to convey ideas to its readers,\u00a0and thus only requires the writing of false information to be deceptive. On the\u00a0other hand,\u00a0in-person interaction effectively utilizes all aspects of human discourses. Layers upon layers of subconscious\u00a0attitudes, actions, and inflections\u00a0of\u00a0speech\u00a0compound to create\u00a0the experience of personal\u00a0conversation, and it is these same subtleties that tend to expose\u00a0even the most skilled deceiver.\u00a0In the act of deception, one can only cover up something he knows he must hide.\u00a0This is why\u00a0an understanding of subconscious\u00a0cues in the discourse of deception is so important\u00a0when\u00a0determining the sincerity of an interaction.\u00a0But\u00a0that\u2019s\u00a0enough about the general subject of this essay;\u00a0what specifically does each of the three academic articles I\u2019ve selected have to say about the discourse of deception?\r\n\r\nThe first article I want to use to describe the discourse of deception is \u201cDeception and\u00a0truth\u00a0detection when\u00a0analyzing\u00a0verbal and\u00a0non-verbal\u00a0cues,\u201d\u00a0which was written in 2019 by\u00a0Aldert\u00a0Vrij\u00a0of Portsmouth University, UK. In this article,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0focuses heavily on the advancement of interrogation techniques used by investigators since 1988 (3).\u00a0Vrji\u00a0notes that while it is traditional\u00a0for investigators\u00a0to observe\u00a0a\u00a0suspect\u2019s non-verbal cues, in practice this strategy tends to be ineffective\u00a0due to the\u00a0stressful nature of police questionings\u00a0regardless of\u00a0the suspect\u2019s\u00a0innocence\u00a0(5). This is not to say, however, that a liar does not exhibit changes in behavior in an effort to deceive others; rather, the approach of direct confrontation simply makes the visible nervousness of a person non-indicative of their honesty. Instead,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0suggests that the greatest giveaway of dishonesty is a person\u2019s verbal reactions to questioning (5-6).\u00a0It has\u00a0been found that an innocent suspect tends to overshare information because of their nervousness, giving highly detailed or potentially rambling answers to investigator\u2019s inquiries\u00a0(6). In contrast, someone engaged in the discourse of deception will\u00a0usually\u00a0answer in short form without supplying many (potentially incriminating) details to their accuser\u00a0(6,10).\u00a0However, most deceivers realize that omitting details of their account makes their story seem suspicious, so they will compensate by giving a reason as to why they are not able to provide more information\u00a0(13). It is common for a liar to use excuses such as trauma, ignorance, or forgetfulness to avoid providing a detailed story\u00a0(13).\u00a0Ironically,\u00a0liars tend to create\u00a0these\u00a0stories but fail to remember\u00a0their details\u00a0just moments after\u00a0they\u2019ve\u00a0told them.\u00a0As a result,\u00a0the deceiver may backtrack\u00a0on their original story\u00a0when\u00a0it is\u00a0no longer supported by the evidence of the case\u00a0(8).\r\n\r\nI find the\u00a0information presented by\u00a0Vrij\u00a0to be especially interesting because of the high stress situation a liar finds themselves in while being questioned, and the contrasting reaction of an innocent person who is faced with the same accusation.\u00a0Because of the unreliability of physical cues in the situation,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0emphasizes the importance of speech and language in the discourse of deception.\u00a0If\u00a0you\u00a0(as I do) agree with his article when it suggests that language is the greatest indicator of honesty, you may raise the question of what effect might this have on individuals who are in a place where they do not speak the native language? To answer this question, I\u00a0sourced\u00a0a research article from the University of Ontario\u00a0that speaks on exactly this issue.\r\n\r\nThe aforementioned article is titled \u201cLooks like a liar? Beliefs about native and non-native speakers' deception.\u201d Written in 2019, the article\u2019s research team included Amy-May Leach, Cayla S. DaSilva, Christina J. Connors, and Michael R. T.\u00a0Vrantsidis\u00a0\u2013 all from the University of Ontario\u2014in\u00a0collaboration with Christian A. Meissner of Iowa State University and Saul M.\u00a0Kassin\u00a0of John Jay College. The purpose of \u201cLooks like a Liar\u2026\u201d was to\u00a0research individual\u2019s biases and believed stereotypes in relation to native and non-native speaker\u2019s perceived honesty (1). In general, the article reveals that a non-native speaker is considered less trustworthy than someone who speaks the native language fluently (2). There are two prominent explanations for why this bias may occur. First, an individual may feel a non-native speaker is less trustworthy simply because their speech pattern or accent is\u00a0foreign,\u00a0and the individual is naturally guarded against\u00a0things that are\u00a0unfamiliar (2). Secondly, a non-native speaker must go through more mental processes before speaking and may not use words as accurately or confidently as a native speaker (3). These added \u201croadblocks\u201d to a non-native speaker\u2019s communication are an issue\u00a0because, while\u00a0pausing between words or stuttering\u00a0is common\u00a0when speaking a foreign language,\u00a0these\u00a0may be\u00a0indicators of deception in someone who speaks the language fluently (3).\r\n\r\nFor the purpose of\u00a0this essay, \u201cLooks like a liar\u2026\u201d shows how deeply\u00a0ingrained the discourse of deception is in every other discourse that we take part in. No matter the language spoken or national demographic of the group, every person is wary of being lied to and has had first-hand experience with the universal discourse of deception. So\u00a0far\u00a0we have looked at two articles focused on the utilization of speech in deception, but what other forms does this discourse take? Surely there must be some physical indications of a person\u2019s honesty.\r\n\r\nTo\u00a0answer this\u00a0question\u00a0I consulted a third academic article\u00a0entitled\u00a0\u201cThe Liar\u2019s Walk<\/em>: Detecting Deception with Gait and Gesture\u201d by Tanmay\u00a0Randhavane, Kyra\u00a0Kapsaskis, and Kurt Gray from the University of North Carolina, as well as\u00a0Uttaran\u00a0Bhattacharya, Aniket\u00a0Bera, and Dinesh\u00a0Manocha\u00a0from the University of Maryland. The purpose of the research documented in this article was to teach an artificial intelligence program to recognize outward signs of deception exhibited by\u00a0human\u00a0subjects (1). The\u00a0team of researchers collected video examples of interaction and movement from 162 subjects, some of whom were being deceitful and others who were acting truthfully (6). The sample videos were then analyzed by the computer system, which determined that specific postures, movements, and expressions were exhibited more often by the group of deceitful subjects than by the truthful subjects\u00a0(15).\u00a0Specifically, even when individual subjects of the study tried to conceal their deceit, they were found far more likely to touch their face, look around, or place a hand in their pockets than innocent subjects (15). Now, given the relatively small test group size, the information found in this study is far from\u00a0definitive\u00a0-\u00a0at least until more research has been conducted - but this\u00a0particular study\u00a0supports the\u00a0long held\u00a0theory that many of our physical motions are impacted when we take part in the discourse of deception.\r\n\r\nBy James Gee\u2019s definition of discourse, and the research brought forth by these mentioned academic articles, it\u00a0can be\u00a0concluded\u00a0that deception truly has its own\u00a0form of\u00a0discourse. However, the discourse of deception cannot stand on its own; rather, it distorts a person\u2019s actions and speech within whatever larger discourse the liar is engaged in at the time. In his article \u201cWhat is Literacy?\u201d,\u00a0Gee\u00a0mentions\u00a0a different type of\u00a0\u201csecondary\u00a0discourse\u201d\u00a0that may be better\u00a0suited to describe the discourse of deception (5). Of course, regardless of the official classification of the discourse of deception, one thing is clear: because the\u00a0desire\u00a0to lie is built in to human nature, the discourse of deception may be one of the only truly universal discourses\u00a0in\u00a0society.\r\n

Works Cited<\/p>\r\n

Gee, J.\u00a0(1987), \u2018What is Literacy?\u2019,\u00a0Journal of Education<\/em>, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 1-5.<\/p>\r\n

Vrij, A.\u00a0(2019), \u2018Deception and truth detection when analyzing nonverbal and verbal cues\u2019,\u00a0Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth<\/em>, pp. 3-13.<\/p>\r\n

Leach, A., Da Silva, C., Connors, C.,\u00a0Vrantsidis, M., Meissner, C.,\u00a0Kassin, S., (2019) \u2018Looks like a liar? Beliefs about native and non-native speakers' deception\u2019,\u00a0Appl Cognit Psychol<\/em>, pp.\u00a01-3.<\/p>\r\n

Randhavane, T., Bhattacharya, U.,\u00a0Kapsaskis, K., Gray, K.,\u00a0Bera, A.,\u00a0Manocha, D., (2020) \u2018The Liar\u2019s Walk Detecting Deception with Gait and Gesture\u2019,\u00a0University of North Carolina<\/em>,\u00a0University of Maryland<\/em>, pp. 1-15.<\/p>","rendered":"

English 102, September 2020<\/h3>\n

In\u00a01989, an American\u00a0linguist named James Paul Gee wrote an academic article titled \u201cWhat is Literacy?\u201d The object of this article was (unsurprisingly) to define the word \u201cliteracy\u201d not in the way a common person could find in a dictionary, but rather the definition of the word as it is used in relation to the study of languages\u00a0(Gee, 1). However, for the purpose of this essay Gee\u2019s definition of \u201cliteracy\u201d is not directly important. Instead, I would like to focus on another word used in Gee\u2019s article and its definition in the context of literacy. The word I would like to bring\u00a0to\u00a0your attention is \u201cdiscourse.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now, I understand much of the previous paragraph may have been confusing or even hard to read, but you have my word that I will do my best to ease your reading experience from here on out. Gee\u2019s definition of \u201cdiscourse\u201d in terms of\u00a0literacy uses the word to refer to the social norms put in place by different groups of people. These norms that govern the group\u2019s language, non-verbal communication, and behavior are what Gee means when he uses the term \u201cdiscourse\u201d (Gee, 1).\u00a0For simplicity\u2019s sake,\u00a0Gee\u2019s definition of\u00a0\u201cdiscourse\u201d\u00a0is the definition I will use for the remainder of this essay, as I am going to be\u00a0relating\u00a0three other academic articles to Gee\u2019s publication.<\/p>\n

You may ask what the subjects\u00a0of these articles\u00a0are, and that is, obviously,\u00a0an\u00a0important question\u00a0for me to answer. I\u00a0have\u00a0decided to\u00a0break down\u00a0three articles that pertain to the non-verbal discourse of people engaged in the act\u00a0(if done well,\u00a0some may call it an art) of deception.\u00a0Now I could tell you that I decided to write about this subject for many different reasons, all with scholarly merit and,\u00a0of course,\u00a0relevancy\u00a0to the time of this essay\u2019s writing, but that would be a lie. The truth is, I decided to write about this topic entirely as a form of entertainment to myself, as I have always found the psyche of a liar\u00a0to be incredibly interesting.\u00a0Part of what I find so interesting about deception is the ease with which\u00a0most people consider deceiving others, if only in small ways. For example,\u00a0I hardly consider myself to be an amoral person (although\u00a0I suppose few people do)\u00a0but the idea to embellish my reasons for writing\u00a0an essay on this topic\u00a0came concerningly quickly to me. You see, it can be surprisingly easy to deceive others through written communication. The written word relies solely on language to convey ideas to its readers,\u00a0and thus only requires the writing of false information to be deceptive. On the\u00a0other hand,\u00a0in-person interaction effectively utilizes all aspects of human discourses. Layers upon layers of subconscious\u00a0attitudes, actions, and inflections\u00a0of\u00a0speech\u00a0compound to create\u00a0the experience of personal\u00a0conversation, and it is these same subtleties that tend to expose\u00a0even the most skilled deceiver.\u00a0In the act of deception, one can only cover up something he knows he must hide.\u00a0This is why\u00a0an understanding of subconscious\u00a0cues in the discourse of deception is so important\u00a0when\u00a0determining the sincerity of an interaction.\u00a0But\u00a0that\u2019s\u00a0enough about the general subject of this essay;\u00a0what specifically does each of the three academic articles I\u2019ve selected have to say about the discourse of deception?<\/p>\n

The first article I want to use to describe the discourse of deception is \u201cDeception and\u00a0truth\u00a0detection when\u00a0analyzing\u00a0verbal and\u00a0non-verbal\u00a0cues,\u201d\u00a0which was written in 2019 by\u00a0Aldert\u00a0Vrij\u00a0of Portsmouth University, UK. In this article,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0focuses heavily on the advancement of interrogation techniques used by investigators since 1988 (3).\u00a0Vrji\u00a0notes that while it is traditional\u00a0for investigators\u00a0to observe\u00a0a\u00a0suspect\u2019s non-verbal cues, in practice this strategy tends to be ineffective\u00a0due to the\u00a0stressful nature of police questionings\u00a0regardless of\u00a0the suspect\u2019s\u00a0innocence\u00a0(5). This is not to say, however, that a liar does not exhibit changes in behavior in an effort to deceive others; rather, the approach of direct confrontation simply makes the visible nervousness of a person non-indicative of their honesty. Instead,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0suggests that the greatest giveaway of dishonesty is a person\u2019s verbal reactions to questioning (5-6).\u00a0It has\u00a0been found that an innocent suspect tends to overshare information because of their nervousness, giving highly detailed or potentially rambling answers to investigator\u2019s inquiries\u00a0(6). In contrast, someone engaged in the discourse of deception will\u00a0usually\u00a0answer in short form without supplying many (potentially incriminating) details to their accuser\u00a0(6,10).\u00a0However, most deceivers realize that omitting details of their account makes their story seem suspicious, so they will compensate by giving a reason as to why they are not able to provide more information\u00a0(13). It is common for a liar to use excuses such as trauma, ignorance, or forgetfulness to avoid providing a detailed story\u00a0(13).\u00a0Ironically,\u00a0liars tend to create\u00a0these\u00a0stories but fail to remember\u00a0their details\u00a0just moments after\u00a0they\u2019ve\u00a0told them.\u00a0As a result,\u00a0the deceiver may backtrack\u00a0on their original story\u00a0when\u00a0it is\u00a0no longer supported by the evidence of the case\u00a0(8).<\/p>\n

I find the\u00a0information presented by\u00a0Vrij\u00a0to be especially interesting because of the high stress situation a liar finds themselves in while being questioned, and the contrasting reaction of an innocent person who is faced with the same accusation.\u00a0Because of the unreliability of physical cues in the situation,\u00a0Vrij\u00a0emphasizes the importance of speech and language in the discourse of deception.\u00a0If\u00a0you\u00a0(as I do) agree with his article when it suggests that language is the greatest indicator of honesty, you may raise the question of what effect might this have on individuals who are in a place where they do not speak the native language? To answer this question, I\u00a0sourced\u00a0a research article from the University of Ontario\u00a0that speaks on exactly this issue.<\/p>\n

The aforementioned article is titled \u201cLooks like a liar? Beliefs about native and non-native speakers’ deception.\u201d Written in 2019, the article\u2019s research team included Amy-May Leach, Cayla S. DaSilva, Christina J. Connors, and Michael R. T.\u00a0Vrantsidis\u00a0\u2013 all from the University of Ontario\u2014in\u00a0collaboration with Christian A. Meissner of Iowa State University and Saul M.\u00a0Kassin\u00a0of John Jay College. The purpose of \u201cLooks like a Liar\u2026\u201d was to\u00a0research individual\u2019s biases and believed stereotypes in relation to native and non-native speaker\u2019s perceived honesty (1). In general, the article reveals that a non-native speaker is considered less trustworthy than someone who speaks the native language fluently (2). There are two prominent explanations for why this bias may occur. First, an individual may feel a non-native speaker is less trustworthy simply because their speech pattern or accent is\u00a0foreign,\u00a0and the individual is naturally guarded against\u00a0things that are\u00a0unfamiliar (2). Secondly, a non-native speaker must go through more mental processes before speaking and may not use words as accurately or confidently as a native speaker (3). These added \u201croadblocks\u201d to a non-native speaker\u2019s communication are an issue\u00a0because, while\u00a0pausing between words or stuttering\u00a0is common\u00a0when speaking a foreign language,\u00a0these\u00a0may be\u00a0indicators of deception in someone who speaks the language fluently (3).<\/p>\n

For the purpose of\u00a0this essay, \u201cLooks like a liar\u2026\u201d shows how deeply\u00a0ingrained the discourse of deception is in every other discourse that we take part in. No matter the language spoken or national demographic of the group, every person is wary of being lied to and has had first-hand experience with the universal discourse of deception. So\u00a0far\u00a0we have looked at two articles focused on the utilization of speech in deception, but what other forms does this discourse take? Surely there must be some physical indications of a person\u2019s honesty.<\/p>\n

To\u00a0answer this\u00a0question\u00a0I consulted a third academic article\u00a0entitled\u00a0\u201cThe Liar\u2019s Walk<\/em>: Detecting Deception with Gait and Gesture\u201d by Tanmay\u00a0Randhavane, Kyra\u00a0Kapsaskis, and Kurt Gray from the University of North Carolina, as well as\u00a0Uttaran\u00a0Bhattacharya, Aniket\u00a0Bera, and Dinesh\u00a0Manocha\u00a0from the University of Maryland. The purpose of the research documented in this article was to teach an artificial intelligence program to recognize outward signs of deception exhibited by\u00a0human\u00a0subjects (1). The\u00a0team of researchers collected video examples of interaction and movement from 162 subjects, some of whom were being deceitful and others who were acting truthfully (6). The sample videos were then analyzed by the computer system, which determined that specific postures, movements, and expressions were exhibited more often by the group of deceitful subjects than by the truthful subjects\u00a0(15).\u00a0Specifically, even when individual subjects of the study tried to conceal their deceit, they were found far more likely to touch their face, look around, or place a hand in their pockets than innocent subjects (15). Now, given the relatively small test group size, the information found in this study is far from\u00a0definitive\u00a0–\u00a0at least until more research has been conducted – but this\u00a0particular study\u00a0supports the\u00a0long held\u00a0theory that many of our physical motions are impacted when we take part in the discourse of deception.<\/p>\n

By James Gee\u2019s definition of discourse, and the research brought forth by these mentioned academic articles, it\u00a0can be\u00a0concluded\u00a0that deception truly has its own\u00a0form of\u00a0discourse. However, the discourse of deception cannot stand on its own; rather, it distorts a person\u2019s actions and speech within whatever larger discourse the liar is engaged in at the time. In his article \u201cWhat is Literacy?\u201d,\u00a0Gee\u00a0mentions\u00a0a different type of\u00a0\u201csecondary\u00a0discourse\u201d\u00a0that may be better\u00a0suited to describe the discourse of deception (5). Of course, regardless of the official classification of the discourse of deception, one thing is clear: because the\u00a0desire\u00a0to lie is built in to human nature, the discourse of deception may be one of the only truly universal discourses\u00a0in\u00a0society.<\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/p>\n

Gee, J.\u00a0(1987), \u2018What is Literacy?\u2019,\u00a0Journal of Education<\/em>, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 1-5.<\/p>\n

Vrij, A.\u00a0(2019), \u2018Deception and truth detection when analyzing nonverbal and verbal cues\u2019,\u00a0Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth<\/em>, pp. 3-13.<\/p>\n

Leach, A., Da Silva, C., Connors, C.,\u00a0Vrantsidis, M., Meissner, C.,\u00a0Kassin, S., (2019) \u2018Looks like a liar? Beliefs about native and non-native speakers’ deception\u2019,\u00a0Appl Cognit Psychol<\/em>, pp.\u00a01-3.<\/p>\n

Randhavane, T., Bhattacharya, U.,\u00a0Kapsaskis, K., Gray, K.,\u00a0Bera, A.,\u00a0Manocha, D., (2020) \u2018The Liar\u2019s Walk Detecting Deception with Gait and Gesture\u2019,\u00a0University of North Carolina<\/em>,\u00a0University of Maryland<\/em>, pp. 1-15.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":253,"menu_order":10,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":["jkopmeyer"],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[88],"license":[],"class_list":["post-501","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","contributor-jkopmeyer"],"part":71,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/253"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/501\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":563,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/501\/revisions\/563"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/71"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/501\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=501"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=501"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/understanding-literacy-in-our-lives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}