One of the most interesting ideas is that no single tells indicates a lie, but clusters of them together are strong signals. A few would be: 1) pausing before you answer (lies take longer to compose than truths); 2) touching your face with your hand (blood rushes from your face when the fight-or-flight response kicks in, prompting an itching sensation); 3) fidgeting at the place where your body rests on something more solid (floor, chair, armrest); 4) vacillating between an appeasing and angry tone; 5) leaning away and closing your body language.
These books sound like they're pushing type of pop psychology that the article says is bunk. From the article:
When someone is lying, he looks up and to the side,
as if searching for something. A liar fidgets and
seems somehow nervous. Sometimes, he’ll scratch or
pull his ear. He’ll hesitate, as if he’s not sure
he wants to tell you something. These, however, are
all “old wives’ tales,” Leanne ten Brinke, a
psychologist at the University of California at
Berkeley whose work focuses on detecting deception,
told me. “The empirical literature just doesn’t
bear that out.”
This might be somewhat of an unfortunate list, as I tend to do 1, 2, 3, and 5 when I'm answering a nuanced question that requires a careful answer (i.e. non-technical family member asking if it's really possible for the NSA to spy on all of us)
Yeah, I totally get it. I'm not saying they are absolute tells. But let's say you talk with somebody about an easy subject, during which they behave one way, and then you turn the discussion to a more sensitive topic that you suspect they may lie about. If they change their behavior from the established benchmark, then that can be one indicator in your diagnosis.
Couldn't it also just indicate that you've switched from an easy to a difficult subject? All you're really reading is emotion, which may or may not indicate deception.
Sure. But if you're asking someone where they were at the time of a crime -- e.g. Were you at Nicole Brown Simpson's house yesterday at 7pm? -- and that turns out to be a really difficult question for a person to answer, then maybe that's a signal that something more is going on.
The author's approach is that you must observe a "baseline" of what is normal behavior for an individual in order to accurately read body language. He suggests looking for deviations from normal behavior along with clusters.
You are starting with the assumption Police officer would be interested in the truth. Well, they are not, they are only interested in confessions/convictions.
Comments
The article's OK, but it doesn't actually deliver on the headline by illustrating the "tells" of a lie. This book is much more practical.
http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Lie-Former-Officers-Deception/dp/1...
One of the most interesting ideas is that no single tells indicates a lie, but clusters of them together are strong signals. A few would be: 1) pausing before you answer (lies take longer to compose than truths); 2) touching your face with your hand (blood rushes from your face when the fight-or-flight response kicks in, prompting an itching sensation); 3) fidgeting at the place where your body rests on something more solid (floor, chair, armrest); 4) vacillating between an appeasing and angry tone; 5) leaning away and closing your body language.
These books sound like they're pushing type of pop psychology that the article says is bunk. From the article:
This might be somewhat of an unfortunate list, as I tend to do 1, 2, 3, and 5 when I'm answering a nuanced question that requires a careful answer (i.e. non-technical family member asking if it's really possible for the NSA to spy on all of us)
Yeah, I totally get it. I'm not saying they are absolute tells. But let's say you talk with somebody about an easy subject, during which they behave one way, and then you turn the discussion to a more sensitive topic that you suspect they may lie about. If they change their behavior from the established benchmark, then that can be one indicator in your diagnosis.
Couldn't it also just indicate that you've switched from an easy to a difficult subject? All you're really reading is emotion, which may or may not indicate deception.
Sure. But if you're asking someone where they were at the time of a crime -- e.g. Were you at Nicole Brown Simpson's house yesterday at 7pm? -- and that turns out to be a really difficult question for a person to answer, then maybe that's a signal that something more is going on.
Part of using these to test lies requires first establishing a baseline. For instance, they would ask:
- What's your name? Where were you born? How much do you weigh? (or similar questions to understand your non-verbal).
It's super super important to first establish that baseline.
I totally agree.
Answering questions empathetically takes a lot of effort.
These are also all traits of social awkwardness
Socially awkward people put as much effort into crafting their responses that a liar might. So the effect is in full force.
This book is a decent guide to decoding body language (including, but not limited to, deception): http://www.amazon.com/What-Every-BODY-Saying-Speed-Reading/d...
The author's approach is that you must observe a "baseline" of what is normal behavior for an individual in order to accurately read body language. He suggests looking for deviations from normal behavior along with clusters.
You are starting with the assumption Police officer would be interested in the truth. Well, they are not, they are only interested in confessions/convictions.