According to earlier research, distributed decision support structures are susceptible to deception. We complement the existing works by analyzing group members' attempts to manipulate group decisions supported by distributed communications. Experimentally, we manipulated two systemic features of a distributed support structure: the members' information asymmetry and decision rule complexity. Both of these features refer to structural properties of aggregated information exchange. We confirmed several hypothesized effects: An increase in the information asymmetry in the aggregation of information increases the incidence of the members' manipulative tendency. It also increases the effectiveness of the members' manipulative imputations. However, the complexity of a decision rule negatively moderates both of these effects. We point out the theoretical relevance and managerial implications of our findings. We conclude that managing team members' information asymmetry and complexity of issues under their practical consideration may result in valuable disclosures.