87 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
87 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
# Appendix A: Recursive Pattern Lexicon for Insurance Fraud
|
||
|
||
This lexicon outlines key recursive linguistic patterns observed in fraudulent insurance claims.
|
||
Each entry includes a **name**, **definition**, and **common linguistic markers**.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 1. Narrative Overcontrol
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Excessive effort to manage the flow and precision of the story, often signaling anxiety or rehearsed fabrication.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- Overuse of timestamps (“At exactly 3:07 PM…”)
|
||
- Highly structured sequences (“First… Then… Finally…”)
|
||
- Repeated self-correction mid-sentence
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 2. Empathic Bypass
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Failure to acknowledge emotional resonance or human impact, especially when such acknowledgment would be expected.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- Clinical or distant tone (“The subject proceeded to fall.”)
|
||
- Avoidance of “I felt” or “They looked” statements
|
||
- Descriptive flatness in scenes involving harm or distress
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 3. Temporal Drift
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Shifting or vague timelines, often introduced subtly to obscure sequencing or causality.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- “Sometime later…”
|
||
- Ambiguous connectors (“and then,” “after that”)
|
||
- Time gaps with no transition
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 4. Claimant Displacement
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Shifting responsibility or focus from the claimant to external systems, agents, or vague forces.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- Passive voice (“It was handled by someone else.”)
|
||
- Deflection to bureaucracy or error (“The form was confusing.”)
|
||
- Focus on institutional failure rather than personal experience
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 5. Overjustification
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Unnecessary detail used to rationalize or justify behavior beyond the level of inquiry.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- “I only did it because…”
|
||
- Premature defenses (“You might think I’m lying, but…”)
|
||
- Layered alibis
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 6. Hedged Truths
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Truths surrounded by uncertainty cues to maintain plausible deniability.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- “I guess…”, “Maybe…”, “As far as I know…”
|
||
- Rising intonation or tentativeness in written phrasing
|
||
- Apologetic qualifiers
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
### 7. Denial Looping
|
||
**Definition:**
|
||
Recursive return to denial statements, often escalating or elaborating without provocation.
|
||
|
||
**Markers:**
|
||
- “I swear I didn’t…” (repeated multiple times)
|
||
- Rejection of implication before it's introduced
|
||
- Emphasis on moral character (“I’m not the kind of person who…”)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
This lexicon is a living framework.
|
||
New patterns are emerging with each recursive forensic case study.
|
||
We invite future analysts to contribute, extend, and refine.
|