Author Archive for Chris Site Author

References

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Resources And References

This website is a product of more than just my own opinion; it is the result of the synthesis of hundreds of sources. I am a nerd for primary research and hack and analyze the research into a format that is more practical and user-friendly. By reading through Body Language Project, you will gain the most useful and practical information derived from the resources listed below.

I am grateful for the contributions that these scientists have made toward the study of nonverbal communication and nonverbal behaviour: body language.

-A-

Abe, N., M. Suzuki, E. Mori, M. Itoh, and T. Fujii. 2007. Deceiving others: distinct neural responses of the prefrontal cortex and amygdale in simple fabrication and deception with social interactions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19: 287-295.

Adolphs, Ralph A. 2006. Landmark study finds that when we look at sad faces, the size of the pupil we look at influences the size of our own pupil Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 1(1): 3-4

Akehurst, L., G. Kohnken, A. Vrij, and R. Bull. 1996. Lay persons’ and police officers’
beliefs regarding deceptive behaviour. Applied Cognitive Psychology 10: 461-471.

Aiello, J. 1977. A further look at equilibrium theory. Visual interaction as a function of
interpersonal distance. Environmental Psychology & Nonverbal Behavior, 1: 122-140.

Andrea Kleinsmith P. Ravindra De Silva Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze. 2006. Cross-cultural differences in recognizing affect from body posture. Source: Interacting with computers. 18 (6): 1371 -1389

Ashton-James, C., R. B. van Baaren, T. L. Chartrand, J. Decety, and J. Karremans. 2007. Mimicry and me: the impact of mimicry on self-construal. Social Cognition 25 (4): 518-535.

Appelbaum, P.S. The new lie detectors: Neuroscience, deception, and the courts. Psychiatric Services. 2007. 58: 460-462.

Argyle, M. 1988. Bodily communication (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.

Argyle, Michael; Lefebvre, Luc; Cook, Mark 1974. The meaning of five patterns of gaze.
European Journal of Social Psychology. 4(2): 125-136.

Argyle, M., and Ingham, R. 1972. Gaze, mutual gaze, and proximity. Semiotica, 1, 32–49.

Argyle, M. The Psychology of Interpersonal Behaviour. London: Penguin Books, 1967.

Argyle, M. and Cook, M. Gaze and Mutual Gaze. London: Cambridge University Press, 1976.

Anat Rafaeli; Jane Dutton; Celia V Harquail; Stephanie Mackie-Lewis. Navigating by attire: The use of dress by female administrative employees. Academy of management journal. 1997. 40 (1): 9-45.

Allan Mazur; Eugene Rosa; Mark Faupel; Joshua Heller; Russell Leen; Blake Thurman. Physiological Aspects of Communication Via Mutual Gaze. The American Journal of Sociology. 1980; 86(1): 50-74.

Aziz-Zadeh L, Iacoboni M, Zaidel E, Wilson S, Mazziotta J. 2004. Left hemisphere motor facilitation in response to manual action sounds. European Journal of Neuroscience, 19 (9): 2609–2612.

-B-

Barber N. 1995. The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology 16: 395-424.

Buss, D. M. 1988. The evolution of human intrasexual competition: tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 616-628.

Benedict, M. E., and J. Hoag. 2004. Seating location in large lectures: are seating preferences or location related to course performance? Journal of Economic Education 35 (3): 215.

Buss, D.M. 1989. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12: 1-49.

Breed, G., Christiansen, E., & Larson, D. 1972. Effect of lecturer’s gaze direction upon
teaching effectiveness. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2: 115.

Beebe, S.A., Beebe, S.J., Redmond, M.V. 2008. Interpersonal Communication: 5th Edition. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Bailenson, J. N. & Yee, N. 2005. Digital Chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science, 16: 814-819.

Bailenson, J.N. & Yee, N. (in press). Virtual interpersonal touch: Haptic interaction and copresence in collaborative virtual environments. International Journal of Multimedia Tools and Applications.

Becker, F. D., R. Sommer, J. Bee, and B. Oxley. 1973. College classroom ecology. Sociometry 36 (4): 514-525.

Beatrice de Gelder. 2006. Towards the neurobiology of emotional body language. Source: Nature reviews. Neuroscience. 7 (3): 242 -249.

Birdwhistell, R. L. 1970. Kinesics and context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Bard, Kim A; Myowa-Yamakoshi, Masako; Tomonaga, Masaki; Tanaka, Masayuki; Costall, Alan; Matsuzawa, Tetsuro. 2005. Group Differences in the Mutual Gaze of Chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes). Developmental Psychology. 41(4): 616-624.

Brooks, C. I., Church, M. A., & Fraser, L. 1986. Effects of duration of eye contact on judgments of personality characteristics. Journal of Social Psychology. 126: 71–78.

Bradley, Margaret M; Codispoti, Maurizio; Sabatinelli, Dean; Lang, Peter J. 2001. Emotion and motivation II: Sex differences in picture processing Emotion. 1(3): 300-319

Brandt, David R. 1980. A systemic approach to the measurement of dominance in human face-to-face interaction Source: Communication quarterly. 28 (1):31-43.

Bressler, Eric R.; Balshine, Sigal 2006. The influence of humor on desirability.
Evolution and Human Behavior. 27(1): 29-39.

Bressler, E.R.; Martin, R.A.; Balshine, S. 2006. Evolution and Human Behavior. Production and appreciation of humor as sexually selected traits. 27 (2):

Blairy, S., P. Herrera, and U. Hess. 1999. Mimicry and the judgment of emotional facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 23 (1): 5-41.

Burgress R. and C. Baldassarre. 2006. Ultimate guide to poker tells: devastate opponents by reading body language, table talk, chip moves, and much more. Chicago, Triumph Books.

Brown, Clifford E.; Dovidio, John F.; Ellyson, Steve L. 1990. Reducing Sex Differences in Visual Displays of Dominance: Knowledge is Power. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin. 16(2): 358-368.

Burg, A. 1968. Lateral visual field as related to age and sex. Journal of Applied Psychology. 52: 10–15.

Brockner, J; B. Pressman, J. Cabitt and P. Moran. 1982. Nonverbal intimacy, sex, and compliance: A field study, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 6: 253–258.

Barry, Patrick L., 2007. Talk to the Hand. Science News. 171 (18):

Bohm. 1997. Effects of interpersonal touch, degree of justification, and sex of participant on compliance with a request. The Journal of social psychology. 137: 460-469.

-C-

Cashdan, E. 1993. Attracting mates: Effects of paternal investment on mate attraction strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology 14: 1-24.

Cameron C., S. Oskamp, and W. Sparks. 1978. Courtship American style: newspaper advertisements. Family Coordinator 26: 27-30.

Caso, L., A. Gnisci, A. Vrij, and S. Mann. 2005. Processes underlying deception: an empirical analysis of truth and lies when manipulating the stakes. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 2 (3): 195-202.

Cook, Mark. 1970. Experiments on orientation and proxemics. Human Relations 23 (1): 61-76.

Cooper, L. 1976. Mirroring: One vehicle to organizational clarity. International Journal Of Social Psychiatry 22 (4): 288-295.

Chowdhary, U. 1988. Instructor’s attire as a biasing factor in students’ ratings of an instructor. Clothing & Textiles Research Journal 6 (2): 17-22.

Chartrand, T. L. and V. Jefferis. 2003. Consequences of automatic goal pursuit and the case of nonconscious mimicry. In J. P. Forgas, K. D. Williams and W. von Hippel (Eds.) Responding to the social world: implicit and explicit processes in social judgments and decisions (290-305). Philadelphia, Psychological Press.

Chartrand, T. L. and J. A. Bargh. 1999. The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76: 893-910.

Cahoon, DD; Edmonds, EM 1989. Male-Female Estimates Of Opposite-Sex 1st Impressions Concerning Females Clothing Styles Bulletin of the psychonomic society. 27(3): 280-281.

Chaplin William F.; Phillips Jeffrey B; Brown Jonathan D.; Clanton Nancy R.; Stein Jennifer L.; 2000. Handshaking, gender, personality, and first impressions Journal of personality and social psychology. 79(1): 110-117.

Coreen Farris; Teresa A. Treat; Richard J. Viken; and Richard M. McFall. 2008. Perceptual Mechanisms That Characterize Gender Differences in Decoding Women’s Sexual Intent Psychological Science. 19(4):

Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P., Druen, P. B., & Wu, C. 1995. Their
ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours: Consistency and variability in the
cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 68: 261–279.

Cunningham, M. R. 1986. Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasiexperiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 50: 925–935.

Carney, Dana R.; Hall, Judith A. LeBeau, Lavonia Smith Beliefs about the nonverbal expression of social power Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 2005. 29(2):105.

Chang, Yanrong 2006. Nonverbal Communication in Friends.. Communication Teacher, 20(4): 97-99.

Carroll E. 1994. Innate and universal facial expressions: Evidence from developmental and cross-cultural research Izard, Psychological Bulletin. 115(2): 288-299.

Clements, A. M.; Rimrodt, S. L.; Abel, J. R.; Blankner, J. G.; Mostofsky, S. H.; Pekar, J. J.; Denckla, M. B.; Cutting, L. E. Sex Differences in Cerebral Laterality of Language and Visuospatial Processing. Brain and Language. 2006. 98 (2): 150-158.

Crusco, A. and C. Wetzel. 1984. The midas touch: the effects of interpersonal touch on restaurant tipping, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 10: 512–517.

-D-

Daniel, R. 1992. An effect of seating location on course achievement: Comment on Brooks and Rebeta. Environment and Behavior 24(3): 396-399.

Daigen, V. and J. G. Holmes. 2000. Don’t interrupt! A good rule for marriage. Personal Relationships 7 (2): 185-201.

Davidson, R. J. & Irwin, W. 1999. The functional neuroanatomy of emotion and affective style. Trends Cogn. Sci. 3: 11–21.

Davis 1978. Camera Eye-Contact by the Candidates in the Presidential Debates of 1976 Source: The journalism quarterly. 55 (3): 431 -437.

Darwin, C. 1965. The expression of the emotions in man and animals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1872)

David Lambert. 2008. Body Language 101. Skyhorse publishing. New York, NY.
Denise Dellarosa Cummins. 1996. Dominance Hierarchies and the Evolution of Human Reasoning. Minds and machines. 6 (4): 463-480.

DePaulo, B. M., J. J. Lindsay, B. E. Malone, L. Muhlenbruck, K. Charlton, and H. Cooper. 2003. Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin 129: 74-118.

DePaulo, B. M., & Kashy, D. A. (1998). Everyday lies in close and casual relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74: 63–79.

DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70: 979–995.

Dindia, K. 1987. The effects of sex of subject and sex of partner on interruptions. Human Communication Research. 13 (3): 345-371.

Dimitrus, J. and M. Mazzerella. 1998. Reading people: how to understand people and predict their behavior – anytime, anyplace. New York, Random House.

Davidio, F.M. Brown C.E. Heltman, K. Ellyson, S.L. and Keating, C.F. 1988. Power Displays between Women and Men in Discussion of Gender-linked Tasks: A Multichannel Study, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55: 580-7.

Duncan, W.J., Smeltzer, L.R. & Leap, T.L. Humor and work: Applications of joking behavior to management. Journal of Management, 1990. 16: 255–78.

Duncan, S. Jr. 1972. Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 23(2): 283-292.

Desmond Morris. Peoplewatching: The Desmond Morris Guide to Body Language. Published 2002 by Vintage

Dovidio JF, Ellyson SL, Keating CF, Heltman K, Brown CE. 1988. The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance between men and women. Source: Journal of personality and social psychology. 54: 233-42.

Dilts, R.B., Grinder, J., Bandler, R., & DeLozier, J. 1979. Neuro-linguistic programming L Cupertino, CA: Meta Publications.

Doohan, E. 2007. Listening behaviors of married couples: An exploration of nonverbal presentation to a relational outsider. International Journal of Listening, 21 (1): 24-41.

Danielle Jackson, Erika Engstrom and Tara Emmers-Sommer. 2007. Think Leader, Think Male and Female: Sex vs. Seating Arrangement as Leadership Cues. Sex Roles. 57 (9/10): 713-723.

-E-

Elaad, E. 2003. Effects of feedback on the overestimated capacity to detect lies and the underestimated ability to tell lies. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17(3): 349-363.

Edelstein, R. S., T. L. Luten, P. Ekman, and G. S. Goodman. 2006. Detecting lies in children and adults. Law and Human Behavior 30(1): 1-10.

Edmonds, Ed M.; Cahoon, Delwin D.; Hudson, Elizabeth 1992. Male-female estimates of feminine assertiveness related to females’ clothing styles. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 30(2): 43-144.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. 1989. Human ethology. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Ekman, Paul and W. Friesen. 1969. “The repertoire of nonverbal behavior. Categories, origins, usage, and coding.” Semiotica (1): 49-98.

Ekman, Paul. 1994. Strong evidence for universals in facial expressions: A reply to Russell’s mistaken critique Psychological Bulletin. 115(2): 268-287.

Ekman, Paul. 1986. A new pan-cultural facial expression of emotion. Source: Motivation and Emotion Ekman. 10(2): 159-168.

Ekman, Paul and Friesen, W. V. 1987. Universals and cultural differences in the judgments of facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53(4): 712-717.

Ekman. 1982. Felt, false, and miserable smiles. Journal of nonverbal behavior. 6(4): 238-258.

Ekman, Paul; Friesen, Wallace V. 1974. Detecting deception from the body or face
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 29(3): 288-298.

Ekman, Paul; Friesen, Wallace V. 1971. Constants across cultures in the face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 17(2): 124-129.

Ekman, Paul. 1972. Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. In J. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1971. 19: 207-282. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Ekman, Paul. 1996. Why Don’t We Catch Liars? 63(3):

Ekman, Paul; O’Sullivan, Maureen. 1991. Who can catch a liar? American Psychologist. Vol 46(9): 913-920.

Ekman, Paul; Davidson, Richard J and Friesen, Wallace V. 1990. The Duchenne smile: Emotional expression and brain physiology: II . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 58(2): 342-353.

Estow, S., J. P. Jamieson, and J. R. Yates. 2007. Self-monitoring and mimicry of positive and negative social behaviors. Journal of Research in Personality 41 (2): 425-433.

Ellsworth, Phoebe; Carlsmith, J Merrill. 1973. Eye contact and gaze aversion in an aggressive encounter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 28(2): 280-292.

Eric Berne. Games People Play: The Basic Handbook of Transactional Analysis. Ballantine Books. 1996.

-F-

Firestone, Shulamith. 1977. The dialectic of sex: the case for feminist revolution. London: Cape.

Foddy, Margaret 1978. Patterns of Gaze in Cooperative and Competitive Negotiation
Human Relations. 31(11):925-938.

Fugita, Stephen S.; Hogrebe, Mark C.; Wexley, Kenneth N. 1980. Perceptions of Deception: Perceived Expertise in Detecting Deception, Successfulness of Deception and Nonverbal Cues. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin. 6(4): 637-643.

Forsythe, S., M. F. Drake, and C. E. Cox. 1985. Influence of applicant’s dress on interviewer’s selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 70 (2): 374-378.

Forsythe, S. M. 1990. Effect of applicant’s clothing on interviewer’s decision to hire.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 20 (19, 1): 1579-1595.

Forsythe, S. M., M. F. Drake, and C. A. Cox Jr. 1984. Dress as an influence on the perceptions of management characteristics in women. Home Economics Research Journal 13 (2): 112-121

Forgas. J.P., O’Connor, K.V., and Morris, S.L. 1983. Smile and punishment: The effect of facial expression on responsibility attribution by groups and individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9: 587-596.

Fulcher, J. S. “Voluntary” facial expression in blind and seeing children. Archives of Psychology, 1942. 38: 272.

Frank, M.G; Ekman, P; Friesen, W. V. 1993. Behavior markers and reconcilability of the smile of enjoyment. Journal of personality and social sychology. 64 (1): 83-93.

Friesen, W. V. 1972. Cultural differences in facial expressions in a social situation: An experimental test of the concept of display rules. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Francisco.

Field, T. 2001. Touch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fatt, J. P. T. 1998. Nonverbal Communication and Business Success. Management Research News 21(4): 1-10.

Frank M.G. and Ekman P. 1997. The ability to detect deceit generalizes across different types of high-stake lies. Source: Journal of personality and social psychology. 72: 1429 -39

Fisher, J; Rytting, M and Heslin, R. 1976. Hands touching hands: affective and evaluative effects on interpersonal touch, Sociometry 39: 416–421.

-G-

Gangestad, S. W., J. A. Simpson, A. J. Cousins, C. E. Garver-Apgar, and P. N. Christensen. 2004. Women’s preferences for male behavioral displays change across the menstrual cycle. Psychological Science 15: 203-207.

Gangestad, S. W., R. Thornhill, and C. E. Garver-Apgar. 2005. Adaptations to ovulation: implications for sexual and social behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14 (6): 312-316.

Gangestad, S.W., Thornhill, R., Garver, C., 2002. Changes in women’s sexual interests and their partners’ mate retention tactics across the menstrual cycle: Evidence for shifting conflicts of interest. Proc. R. Soc. London, B 269: 975–982.

Gangestad, S.W., Thornhill, R., Garver-Apgar, C.E., 2005a. Adaptations to ovulation. In: Buss, D.M. (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 344–371.

Gangestad, S.W., Thornhill, R., Garver-Apgar, C.E., 2005b. Women’s sexual interests across the ovulatory cycle depend on primary partner fluctuating asymmetry. Proc. R. Soc. London, B 272: 2023–2027.

Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L. & Rizzolatti, G., 1996. Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119: 593-609.

Gallese, V. & Goldman, A., (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 12: 493-501.

Gordon, A. K. and A. G. Miller. 2000. Perspective differences in the construal of lies: is deception in the eye of the beholder? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26 (1): 46-55.

Gurung, R. A. R. and C. J. Chrouser. 2007. Predicting objectification: do provocative clothing and observer characteristics matter? Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 57 (1-2): 91-99.

Greenberg, J. 1976. The role of seating position in group interaction: a review, with applications for group trainers. Group & Organization Management 1 (3): 310-327.

Gregory H. and M. Karinch. 2007. I can read you like a book: how to spot the messages and emotions people are really sending with their body language. Franklin Lakes, Career Press.

Grammer, K., & Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. 1990. The ritualisation of laughter. In W. Koch (Ed.), Naturalichkeit der Sprache un der Kultur: Acta colloquii 192–214.

Grimshaw, Gina M.; Bulman-Fleming, M. Barbara; Ngo, Cam 2004. A signal-detection analysis of sex differences in the perception of emotional faces. Brain and Cognition. Vol 54(3): 248-250.

Gilliam, Harold V. B.; Van Den Berg, Sjef. 1980. Different Levels of Eye Contact: Effects on Black and White College Students. Urban Education. 15 (1): 83-92.

Grinder, J., DeLozier, J. and Bandler, R., 1977 Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. Vol. II

Goldman. 1980. Effect of Eye Contact and Distance on the Verbal Reinforcement of Attitude. The Journal of social psychology 111(1): 73 -78.

Greene 1979. Title: Need-Fulfillment and Consistency Theory: Relationships Between Self-Esteem and Eye Contact. Source: Western journal of speech communication. 43(2): 123 -133.

Galin, D. and Ornstein, R., 1974. Individual Differences in Cognitive Style – Reflective Eye Movements; Neuropsychologia, 12: 376-397.

Guéguen, N. and C. Jacob, 2005. The Effect of touch on tipping: an evaluation in a French’s bar, International Journal of Hospitality Management 24: 295–299.

Guéguen, N and C. Jacob 2006, Touch and consumer behavior: A new experimental evidence in a field setting, International Journal of Management 23: 24–33.

Graziano, Michael S.A. Cooke, Daylan, F. 2006. Pariieto-frontal Interactions, Personal Space, and Defensive Behavior. Neuropsychologia. 44: 845-59.

Glenn E. Weisfeld and Jody M. Beresford. 1982. Erectness of posture as an indicator of dominance or success in humans. Motivation and Emotion. 6(2):113 -131.

-H-

Hall. J.A. 1978. Gender effects in decoding nonverbal cues. Psychological Bulletin, 85: 845-857.

Hall. J.A. 1984. Nonverbal sex differences: Communication accuracy and expressive style. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hall, J. A. 2006.Nonverbal Behavior, Status, and Gender: How Do We Understand Their Relations. Psychology of Women Quarterly; 30(4): 384-391.

Hall, Edward, T. 1959. The silent language. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, Edward,T.. The Silent Language, Greenwich, CT: Fawcett, 1959.

Hall, Edward, T. The Hidden Dimension, Garden City, NJ: Doubleday, 1966.

Hamel, R. F (1974). Female subjective and pupillary reactions to nude male and female figures. Journal of Psychology. 87: 171-175.

Halpern, D. F.; Camilla P. Benbow, David C. Geary, Ruben C. Gur, Janet Shibley Hyde, Morton Ann Gernsbacher. 2007. The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological science in the public interest. 8(1): 1-51.

Hatch, M.J. 1997 Irony and the social construction of contradiction in the humor of a management team. Organization Science. 8: 275–88.

Havlicek, J., S. C. Roberts, and J. Flegr. 2005. Women’s preference for dominant male odour: effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status. Biology Letters 1(3): 256-259.

Haselton, M. G., M. Mortezaie, E. G. Pillsworth, A. Bleske-rechek, and D. A. Frederick. 2007. Ovulatory shifts in human female ornamentation: near ovulation, women dress to impress. Hormones and Behavior. 51(1): 40-45.

Harper, Robert G., Arthur N. Wiens and Joseph D. Matarazzo. Nonverbal communication: The State of the Art. Wiley Series on Personality Processes. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1978.

Harrison, Neil A.; Wilson, C. Ellie; Critchley, Hugo D. 2007. Processing of observed pupil size modulates perception of sadness and predicts empathy. Emotion. 7(4): 724-729.

Henley, N., 1977. “Body Politics: power, sex and nonverbal communication, prentice hall, new jersey.

Hecht, M.A. and LaFrance, M. 1988. License or obligation to smile: The effect of power and gender on amount and type of smiling. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24: 1326-1336.

Hasegawa, T. and K. Sakaguchi. 2006. Person perception through gait information and target choice for sexual advances: comparison of likely targets in experiments and real life. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 30(2): 63-85.

Hess, E. H., & Polt, J. M. (1960). Pupil size as related to the interest value of visual stimuli. Science, 132: 349-350.

Hess, E. H. 1965. Attitude and pupil size. Scientific American, 212 (4): 46–54.

Hess, E. H. 1975. The role of pupil size in communication. Scientific American. 233(5): 110–119.

Hertenstein, Matthew J; Keltner, Dacher; App, Betsy; Bulleit, Brittany A; Jaskolka, Ariane R 2006. Touch Communicates Distinct Emotions. Emotion. 6(3): 528-533

Hediger, Heini 1955. Studies of the psychology and behaviour of captive animals in zoos and circuses. Butterworths Scientific Publications

Holdaway, S. Blue jokes: Humour in police work. In C. Powell & G.E.C. Paton (Eds),
Humour in society: Resistance and control. Houndsmills: Macmillan, 1988, 106–22.

Hermans, E. J., P. Putman, and J. van Honk. 2006. Testosterone administration reduces empathetic behavior: a facial mimicry study. Psychoneuroendocrinology 31(7): 859-866.

Hensley, W. E. 1982. Professor Proxemics: personality and job demands as factors of faculty office arrangement. Environment and Behavior 14(5): 581-591.

Hocking. 1985. Eye contact contrast effects in the employment interview. Communication research reports 2(1): 5-10.

Hornik, J 1992. Tactile stimulation and consumer response, Journal of Consumer Research 19: 449–458.

Hornik, J.1992. Effects of physical contact on customers’ shopping time and behavior, Marketing Letters. 49–55.

Howells, L. T. and S. W. Becker. 1962. Seating arrangement and leadership emergence.
The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 64(2): 148-150.

-I-

Irwin Silverman, Jean Choi, and Michael Peters. 2007. The hunter-gatherer theory of sex differences in spatial abilities: Data from 40 countries. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 36 (2): 261-268.

-J-

James A. Coan; Hillary S, Schaefer; and Richard J. Davidson. 2006. Lending a Hand. Social Regulation of the Neural Response to Threat. Association for Psychological Science

Jardin, R., and Martin, N. G. 1983. Spatial ability and throwing accuracy. Behavior Genetics. 13: 331–340.

Janisse, Michel Pierre. 1973. Pupil Size and Affect: A Critical Review of the Literature Since 1960. Canadian Psychologist Psychologie Canadienne. 14(4): 311-329.

James A. Russell, Naoto Suzuki and Noriko Ishida. 1993. Canadian, Greek, and Japanese freely produced emotion labels for facial expressions. Motivation and Emotion. 17(4): 337 -351

Jeffrey D. Fisher; Marvin Rytting; Richard Heslin. 1976. Hands Touching Hands: Affective and Evaluative Effects of an Interpersonal Touch. Sociometry, 39(4): 416-421.

Julius F. 1977. The body language of sex, power, and aggression. New York, M. Evans and Company Inc.

Joe Navarro. 2008. What Every BODY is Saying: An Ex-FBI Agent’s Guide to Speed-Reading People. William Morrow Paperbacks.

John F. Dpvidio, Karen Heltman, Clifford E. Brown, Steve L. Ellyson, Caroline F. Keating. 1988. Power Displays Between Women and Men in Discussions of Gender-

Joseph, R. 2000. The evolution of sex differences in language, sexuality, and visual-spatial skills. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 29(1): 35-66.

-K-

Kansaku, K., & Kitazawa, S. 2001. Imaging studies on sex divergences in the lateralization of language. Neuroscience Research. 41: 333–337.

Kaufman, D. and J. Mahoney. 1999 The effect of waitresses’ touch on alcohol consumption in dyads, The Journal of Social Psychology 139: 261–267.

Kawakami, Kiyobumi; Takai-Kawakami, Kiyoko; Tomonaga, Masaki; Suzuki, Juri; Kusaka, Tomiyo; Okai, Takashi. 2006. Origins of smile and laughter: a preliminary study. Early Human Development. 82 (1): 61.

Keltner, Dacher; Bonanno, George A. 1997. A study of laughter and dissociation: Distinct correlates of laughter and smiling during bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 73(4): 687-702.

Kellerman. 1989. Looking and loving: The effects of mutual gaze on feelings of romantic love. Journal of Research in Personality. 23(2): 145-161.

Keltner, D., Ekman, P., 2003. Expression of emotion. In: Davidson, R., Scherer, K., Goldsmith, H. (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford University Press, New York, 411–414.

Kelly, Janice R.; Murphy, Julie D.; Craig, Traci Y.; Driscoll, Denise M. 2005. The Effect of Nonverbal Behaviors Associated with Sexual Harassment Proclivity on Women’s Performance Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 53(9-10): 689-701.

Kendon, A. Some Functions of Gaze Direction in Social Interaction. Acta Psychologica. 1967. 32: 1-25.

Kendon, A. 1994. Do gestures communicate? A review. Research on Language and Social Intraction. 27(3): 175-200.

Klineberg, O. 1938. Emotional expression in Chinese literature. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 33: 517-520.

Klineberg, O. 1940. Social psychology. New York: Holt.

Kolakowski, D., & Malina, R. M. 1974. Spatial ability, throwing accuracy and man’s hunting heritage. Nature. 251: 410–412.

Krumhuber, E., & Kappas, A. (2005). Moving smiles: The role of dynamic components for the perception of the genuineness of smiles. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 29: 3-24.

Kinsbourne, M., 1972. Eye and Head Turning Indicates Cerebral Lateralization; Science, 179: 539-541.

Kocel, K., et al.,1972. Lateral Eye Movement and Cognitive Mode; Psychon Sci. 27: 223-224.

Knackstedt, G., & Kleinke, C. L. (1991). Eye contact, gender, and personality judgments. Journal of Social Psychology, 131: 303-304.

Konopacki 1987. Eye Movement Betrays a Prospect’s Inner Feelings Source: Marketing news 21(10): 4.

Krumhuber, E ; Manstead, A.S.R; Kappas, A. 2007. Temporal Aspects of Facial Displays in Person and Expression Perception: The Effects of Smile Dynamics, Head-tilt, and Gender. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 31: 39-56.

Krannich, C. R. and R. L. Krannich. 2000. Savvy interviewing. Manassas Par, Impact Publications.

Kneidinger, L. M.; Maple, T. L.; Tross, S. A. 2001. Touching behavior in sport: functional components, analysis of sex differences, and ethological considerations. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25(1): 43-62.

Knapp, Mark. Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction, New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1992.

Kleinke, C. L. 1980. Interaction between gaze and legitimacy of request on compliance in a field setting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 5(1): 3-12.

-L-

LaFrance, Marianne, Hecht, M.A., & Levy Paluck, E 2003. The contingent smile: A meta-analysis of sex differences in smiling. Psychological Bulletin, 129: 305-334.

LaFrance, Marianne. 1995. Why smiles generate leniency.; Hecht, Marvin A
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21: 207-14.

LaFrance, Marianne 1996. Why do women smile more than men? International Journal of Psychology. 31(3-4): 5042-5042.

LaFrance, Marianne. 2003. The Contingent Smile: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Smiling Source: Psychological bulletin. 129(2):305-334.

LaFrance, Marianne. 1979. Nonverbal synchrony and rapport: analysis by the cross-lag panel technique. Social Psychology Quarterly 42: 66-70.

LaFrance, Marianne. 1982. Posture mirroring and rapport. In M. Davis (Ed.) Interaction rhythms: periodicity in communicative behavior (279-298). New York, Human Sciences Press, Inc.

LaFrance, Marianne. and W. Ickes. 1981. Posture mirroring and interactional involvement: sex and sex typing effects. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 5: 139-154.

LaFrance, Marianne 2002. Smile Boycotts and Other Body Politics, Feminism & Psychology. 12 (3):319-323.

Lafrance, Marianne. Smile Boycotts and Other Body Politics. Feminism & Psychology. 2002. 12(3): 319-323.

Lakin, J. L., and T. L. Chartrand. 2003. Using non-conscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science 14 (4): 334-339.

Lakin, J. L. 2003. The chameleon effect as social glue: evidence for the evolutionary significance of non-conscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 27 (3): 145-162.

Lawson, Willow 2005. Humor’s Sexual Side. Psychology Today. New York. 38(5): 17-18.

Leeb. 2004. Here’s Looking at You, Kid! A Longitudinal Study of Perceived Gender Differences in Mutual Gaze Behavior in Young Infants Source: Sex Roles. 50(1-2): 1-14.

Leventhal, G. 1978, Sex and setting effects on seating arrangement. Journal of Psychology. 100: 21-26.

Levine, D. W., E. C. O’neal, S. G. Garwood, and P. J. Mcdonald. 1980. Classroom ecology: the effects of seating position on grades and participation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6 (3): 409-412.

Lewis, David. 1999. The Secret Language Of Success. BBS Publishing Corporation.

Lurie, Alison. The Language of Clothes. (New York, 1981), 3-26.

Lott, D. F. and R. Sommer. 1967. Seating arrangements and status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 7 (1): 90-95.

Lorenz, K. On aggression. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1966.

Lorenz, K. 1965. Evolution and modification of behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lieberman, Joel D.; Sales, Bruce D. 2007. In-Court Observations of Nonverbal Behavior. Scientific jury selection. (pp. 125-142). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. ix, 261 pp.

Littlepage, Glenn E.; Whiteside, Harold D. 1983. The “Peripheral Cue Shift” Phenomenon: Influence of Facial Expression and Level of Commission on Attribution of Responsibility Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(2): 261-265.

Lynn et al., 1998 M. Lynn, J.M. Le and D. Sherwyn. 1998. Reach out and touch your customers, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quaterly 39: 60-65.

-M-

MacDonald, C., 2004. A Chuckle a Day Keeps the Doctor Away: Therapeutic Humor & Laughter. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services 42(3):18-25.

Mann, S., A. Vrij, and R. Bull. 2002. Suspects, lies, and videotape: an analysis of authentic high-stake liars. Law and Human Behavior 26 (3): 365-376.

Mann, S., A. Vrij, and R. Bull. 2004. Detecting true lies: police officers’ ability to detect suspects’ lies. Journal of Applied Psychology 89(1): 137-149.

Maddux, W. W., E. Mullen, and A. D. Galinsky. 2008. Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44(2): 461-468.

Manstead, A. and A. Kappas. 2007. Temporal aspects of facial displays in person and expression perception: the effects of smile dynamics, head-tilt, and gender. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 31(1): 39-56.

Matsumoto. 1987. Cultural similarities and differences in the semantic dimensions of body postures. Source: Journal of nonverbal behavior. 11(3):166-179.

Martin, Rod A. 2001. Humor, laughter, and physical health: Methodological issues and research findings Psychological Bulletin. 127(4): 504-519.

Martin, S.E. 1978. Sexual politics in the workplace: The interactional world of policewomen. Symbolic Interaction. 1 (2): 44-60.

Martin, David John. 1997. Slaughtering a sacred cow: The eyebrow flash is not a universal social greeting. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 58(5-B): 2751.

McElroy, J. C., P. C. Morrow, and R. J. Ackerman. 1983. Personality and interior office design: exploring the accuracy of visitor attributions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 68 (3): 541-544.

McCaskey, M. B. 1979. The hidden messages managers send. Harvard Business Review, Boston. 57 (6): 135.

McAndrew. 1986. Arousal seeking and the maintenance of mutual gaze in same and mixed sex dyads Source: Journal of nonverbal behavior. 10(3):168-172.

McGhee, Paul E. 1984 Current American Psychological Research on Humor. Jahrbuche fur Internationale Germanistik 16(2): 37-57.

McClure, Erin B 2000. A meta-analytic review of sex differences in facial expression processing and their development in infants, children, and adolescents
Psychological Bulletin. 126(3): 424-453.

McClure, E.B. 2000. A meta- analytic review of sex differences in facial expression processing and their development in infants, children, and adolescents. Psychological Bulletin. 126: 424-453.

Mcguire, Michael T. 1982. Social Dominance Relationships in Male Vervet Monkeys: A Possible Model for the Study of Dominance Relationships in Human Political Systems.
International Political Science Review. 3(1): 11-32.

Mead, M. 1975. Review of “Darwin and facial expression.” Journal of Communication, 25: 209-213.

Mehrabian, A., Friar, J., 1969. Encoding of attitude by a seated communicator via posture and position cues. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 33: 330–336.

Mesquita, B., 2003. Emotions as dynamic cultural phenomena. In: Davidson, R., Scherer, K., Goldsmith, H. (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford University Press, New York, 871–890.

Miles, L. and V. Peace. 2006. Implicit behavioral mimicry: investigating the impact of group membership. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 30(3): 97-113.

Morrison, K., M. Ferrara, H. S. Park, T. R. Levine, and S. A. McCornack. 2002. How people really detect lies. Communication Monographs 69(2): 144.

Montello, D. R. 1988. Classroom seating location and its effect on course achievement, participation, and attitudes. Journal of Environmental Psychology 8(2): 149-157.

Morrow, P. C. and J. C. McElroy. 1981. Interior office design and visitor response: a constructive replication. Journal of Applied Psychology 66(5): 646-650.

Moore, M. M. and D. L. Butler. 1989. Predictive aspects of nonverbal courtship behavior in women. Semiotica 76(3/4): 205-215.

Moore, M. M. 2001. Flirting. In C. G. Waugh (Ed.) Let’s talk: A cognitive skills approach to interpersonal communication. Newark, Kendall-Hunt.

Moore, M. M. 1985. Nonverbal courtship patterns in women: context and consequences. Ethology and Sociobiology 64: 237-247.

Morris, T. L., J. Gorham, S. H. Cohen, and D. Huffman. 1996. Fashion in the classroom: effects of attire on student perceptions of instructors in college classes. Communication Education 45(2): 135.

Morris, Desmond. Peoplewatching. London: Vintage, 2002.

Moody, E. J., D. N. McIntosh, L. J. Mann, and K. R. Weisser. 2007. More than mere mimicry? The influence of emotion on rapid facial reactions to faces. Emotion. 7(2): 447-457.

Middlemist, R. D., E. S. Knowles, and C. F. Matter. 1976. Personal space invasions in the lavatory: suggestive evidence for arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 33(5): 541-546.

Mobbs, N.A. 1968. Eye-contact in Relation to Social Introversion-Extraversion. British Journal of Social Clinical Psychology 7: 305-306.

Mulac, A., Studley, L., Wiemann, J., & Bradac, J. 1987. Male/female gaze in same-sex
and mixed-sex dyads. Human Communication Research. 13: 323-343.

Miller, Patrick W. 2005. Body language in the classroom: communication is more than words, and it is important for teachers and administrators to understand the nonverbal messages they are sending and receiving in the classroom. Techniques. 80(8): 28.

Michelini, RL, Passalacqua, R., & Cusimano, J. 1976. Effects of seating arrangement on group participation. Journal of Social Psychology. 99: 179-186.

-N-

Norum, G. A., N. J. Russo, and R. Sommer. 1967. Seating patterns and group tasks. Psychology in the Schools 4(3): 276-280.

Natale, M., E. Entin, and J. Jaffe. 1979. Vocal interruptions in dyadic communication as a function of speech and social anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37: 865-878.

Natale, Michael. 1976. A Markovian model of adult gaze behavior. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 5(1): 53-63.

Briton, Nancy J.; Hall, Judith A. 1995. Beliefs about female and male nonverbal communication. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 32(1): 79-90.

Nierenberg, G.I. 1983. Negotiating Strategies and Counterstrategies: How to Develop Win/Win Techniques. Management Review, 72: 48-49.

Norum, G.A., Russo, N.J., and Sommer, R. 1967. Seating patterns and group tasks. Source: Psychology in the schools. 4(3): 276-280.

-O-

Owren, Michael J.; Bachorowski, Jo-Anne 2003. Reconsidering the evolution of nonlinguistic communication: the case of laughter Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 27(3): 183-200.

-P-

Patrington. 1997. NLP for Business Success: How to Master Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Management Research News. 20(8): 43.

Patterson, Miles L.; Montepare, Joann M. 2007. Nonverbal behavior in a global context dialogue questions and responses. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 31(3): 167-168.

Panksepp, J. 1998. Affective Neuroscience: The Foundation of Human and Animal Emotions. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.

Panksepp, J., Burgdorf, J., “Laughing” rats and the evolutionary antecedents of human joy? Physiology & Behavior (2003) 79: 533-547.

Park, H. S., T. R. Levine, S. A. McCornack, K. Morrison, and M. Ferrara. 2002. How people really detect lies. Communication Monographs. 69: 144-157.

Parrill, F. and I. Kimbara. 2006. Seeing and hearing double: the influence of mimicry in speech and gesture on observers. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 30(4): 157-166.

Pease, Barbara and Allan Pease. 2006. The Definitive Book of Body Language Hardcover. Bantam.

Peluchette, J. V., K. Karl, and K. Rust. 2006. Dressing to impress: beliefs and attitudes regarding workplace attire. Journal of Business and Psychology 21(1): 45-63.

Peterson, Robin T. 2005. An Examination of the Relative Effectiveness of Training in Nonverbal Communication: Personal Selling Implications. Journal of Marketing Education. 27(2): 143-150.

Penton-Voak, I. S., D. I. Perrett, D. Castles, M. Burt, T. Kobayashi, and L. K. Murray. 1999. Female preference for male faces changes cyclically. Nature 399: 741-742.

Pillsworth, E. G., M. G. Haselton and D. M. Buss. 2004. Ovulatory shifts in female sexual desire. Journal of Sex Research. 41: 55-65.

Provine, Robert R. 2005. Yawning: The yawn is primal, unstoppable and contagious, revealing the evolutionary and neural basis of empathy and unconscious behavior. Source: American Scientist. 93(6): 532-540.

Provine, Robert R. 2005. Yawning. American Scientist. 2005. 93(6): 532-539

Provine, Robert R.. 2000. The laughing species. Natural History. 109(10): 72-76.

Provine, Robert R. 2000. Laugh and the world laughs with you. Scientific American. 283(6): 108-110.

Provine, Robert R. 2000. The science of laughter. Psychology Today. 33(6):

Provine, R. R. 1986. Yawning as a stereotyped action pattern and releasing stimulus. Ethology 72:109-122.

Provine, R. R. 1992. Contagious laughter: Laughter is a sufficient stimulus for laughs and smiles. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 30: 1- 4.

Provine, R. R. 1993. Laughter punctuates speech: Linguistic, social and gender contexts of laughter. Ethology 95: 291-298.

Provine, R. R., and K. R. Fischer. 1989. Laughing, smiling, and talking: Relation to sleeping and social context in humans. Ethology 83: 295-305.

Provine, R. R., and Y. L. Yong. 1991. Laughter: A stereotyped human vocalization. Ethology 89: 115-124.

Provine, R.R. Contagious yawning and laughing: Everyday imitation and mirror-like behavior. Behavioral and Brain Science. 28: 142.

Priest, RF; Thein, MT. 2003. Humor appreciation in marriage: Spousal similarity, assortative mating, and disaffection. Humor-international journal of humor research, 16(1): 63-78.

Phelps, F., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Warnock Educational Psychology., 27, 91-107. (2006). Functional benefits of children’s gaze aversion during questioning. British Journal Developmental Psychology. 24: 577-588.

Puts, D.A. 2007. Men’s voices as dominance signals: Vocal fundamental and formant frequencies influence dominance attributions among men. Source: Evolution and human behavior 28(5): 340-344.

Puts, D.A. 2005. Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preference for male voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior 26: 388-397.

-Q-

Quilliam, Susan. 2004. Body Language: Learn to read and use the body’s secrete signals. Firefly books Inc.

-R-

Raghubir, P. and A. Valenzuela. 2006. Center-of-inattention: position biases in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 99 (1): 66-80.

Rogers, W. T. and S. E. Jones. 1975. Effects of dominance tendencies on floor holding and interruption behavior in dyadic interaction. Human Communication Research I: 113-122.

Roger, D. B. and W. Nesshoever. 1987. Individual differences in dyadic conversational strategies: a further study. British Journal of Social Psychology 26: 247-754

Roger, D. B. and A. Schumacher. 1983. Effects of individual differences on dyadic conversational strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 45(3): 700-705.

Remland, M. S. and T. S. Jones 1995. Interpersonal Distance, Body Orientation, and Touch: Effects of Culture, Gender, and Age. Journal of Social Psychology 135(3): 281-297.

Rosenfeld, H., Breck, B., Smith, S., & Kehoe, S. 1984. Intimacy-mediators of the proximity-gaze compensation effect: Movement, conversational role, acquaintance, and gender. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 8: 235-249.

Rosengrant, T., & McCroskey, J. 1975. The effects of sex and race on proxemic
behavior in an interview setting. The Southern Speech Communication Journal,
40: 408-420.

Russell, James A. 1995. Facial Expressions of Emotion: What Lies Beyond Minimal Universality? Psychological bulletin. 118(3): 379-391.

Russell, James A. 1994. Is There Universal Recognition of Emotion From Facial Expression? A Review of the Cross-Cultural Studies. Psychological Bulletin. 115(1): 102-141.

Rutter, D.C; D. C. Pennington, M. E. Dewey and J. Swain. 1984. Eye-contact as a chance product of individual looking: Implications for the intimacy model of Argyle and Dean. Source: Journal of nonverbal behavior. 8(4): 250-258.

Riess, M. and P. Rosenfeld. 1980. Seating preferences as nonverbal communication: a self-presentational analysis. Journal of Applied Communications Research 8(1): 22.

Richard Tessler and Lisa Sushelsky. 1978. Effects of eye contact and social status on the perception of a job applicant in an employment interviewing situation. Journal of Vocational Behavior 13(3): 338-347.

R. Stephen and R. Zweigenhaft. 1986. The effect on tipping of a waitress touching male and female customers. The Journal of Social Psychology 126 pp. 141–142.

-S-

Schleidt, 1980. Personal odor and nonverbal communication. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1(3): 225-231.

Scherer, K.R., Wallbott, H.G., Matsumoto, D., Kudoh, T., 1988. Emotional experience in cultural context: a comparison between Europe, Japan, and the United states. In: Scherer, K.R. (Ed.), Faces of Emotions. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Scherer,K.R., Johnstone,T., Klasmeyer,G., 2003. Vocal expression of emotion. In: Davidson,R., Scherer, K., Goldsmith, H. (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 433–456.

Sommer, R. 1965. Further studies of small group ecology. Sociometry 28: 337-348.

Sommer, R. 1967. Small group ecology. Psychological Bulletin 67(2): 145-152.

Sommer, R. 1967. Socifugal space. American Journal of Sociology 72(6): 654-659.

Sommer, R. 1959. Studies in personal space. Sociometry 22: 247-260.

Sommer, R. and R. Hugo. 1958. Social interaction on a geriatrics ward. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 4(2): 128-133.

Sommer, R. 1967. Classroom ecology. The Journal Of Applied Behavioral Science 3(4): 489-503.

Sporer, S. L. and B. Schwandt. 2007. Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 13: 1-34.

Stromwell, L. A., P. A. Granhag, and S. Landstrom. 2007. Children’s prepared and unprepared lies: can adults see through their strategies? Applied Cognitive Psychology 21 (4): 457-471.

Sitton, Sarah C; Griffin, Susan T. 1981. Detection of deception from clients’ eye contact patterns. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 28(3): 269-271.

Stephen, Jolly. 2000. Understanding body language: Birdwhistell’s theory of kinesics Corporate communications. 5(3): 133-139.

Simons, D.J., and Chabris, C.F. 1999. Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28: 1059-1074.

Simonet, Versteeg, & Storie 2005 Dog Laughter: Recorded playback reduces stress related behavior in shelter dogs. 7th International Conference on Environmental Enrichment (2005)

Stephenson, G. M. and B. K. Kniveton. 1978. Interpersonal and interparty exchange: an experimental study of the effect of seating position on the outcome of negotiations between teams representing parties in dispute. Human Relations 31(6): 555-566.

Sato, W. and S. Yoshikawa. 2007. Spontaneous facial mimicry in response to dynamic facial expressions. Cognition 104(1): 1-18

Simone, Pika; Nicoladis, Elena; Marentette, Paula, F. A cross-cultural study on the use of gestures: Evidence for cross-linguistic transfer? Bilingualism Language and Cognition. 9(3): 319 -327

Sandoval. 2001. Subtle skills for building rapport: using neuro-linguistic programming in the interview room. FBI law enforcement bulletin. 70(8): 1-635.

Skinner. 2003. Speaking the same language: the relevance of neuro-linguistic programming to effective marketing communications Source: Journal of Marketing Communications. 9(3): 177-192.

Silverman, I., & Eals, M. 1992. Sex differences in spatial abilities: Evolutionary theory and data. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 531–549). New York: Oxford Press.

Smith, D. E., Gier, J. A., & Willis, F. N. 1982. Interpersonal touch and compliance with a marketing request. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 3: 35-38.

Strodtbeck Fred L. and L. Harmon Hook 1961. The social dimensions of a twelve-man jury table. Sociometry. 24(4): 397-415.

Stephen Reysen. 2006. A New Predictor of Likeability: Laughter. North American journal of psychology. 8(2): 373-382.

Scharlemann, Jorn P. W., Eckel, Catherine C., Kacelnik, Alex, Wilson, Rick K.
2001. The value of a smile: Game theory with a human face. Journal of Economic Psychology. 22(5): 617-640.

-T-

Terrion, Jenepher Lennox; Ashforth, Blake E. 2002. From ‘I’ to ‘We’: The Role of Putdown Humor and Identity in the Development of a Temporary Group
Human Relations. 55(1): 55-88.

Tracy, Jessica L; Robins, Richard W 2008. The nonverbal expression of pride: Evidence
for cross-cultural recognition Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 94(3): 516-530.

Tombs, Selina; Silverman, Irwin 2004. Pupillometry: A sexual selection approach.
Evolution and Human Behavior. 25(4): 221-228.

Tosey, Paul; Mathison, Jane; Michelli, Dena. 2005. Mapping Transformative Learning: The Potential of Neuro-Linguistic. Journal Of Transformative Education. 3(2): 140-167.

Talwar, Victoria; Lee, Kang . 2002. Development of lying to conceal a transgression: Children’s control of expressive behaviour during verbal deception International Journal Of Behavioral Development. 26(5): 436-444.

Trice, H.M. and Beyer, J.M. 1993. The cultures of work organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Thornhill, R. and S. W. Gangestad. 1999. The scent of symmetry: a human pheromone that signals fitness? Evolution and Human Behavior 20: 175-201.

Thornhill, R., S. W. Gangestad, R. Miller, G. Scheyd, J. McCollough, and M. Franklin. 2003. MHC, symmetry and body scent attractiveness in men and women (Homo sapiens). Behavioral Ecology 14: 668-678.

Thornhill, R. and S. W. Gangestad. 2003. Evolutionary theory led to evidence for a male sex pheromone that signals symmetry. Psychological Inquiry 14 (3-4): 318-325.

Turner, L. H., K. Dindia, and J. C. Pearson. 1995. An investigation of female/male verbal behaviors in same-sex and mixed-sex conversations. Communication Reports 8: 86-96.

-U-

Urbaniak, Anthony. Nonverbal communication in selling. SuperVision[Burlington]. 2005. 66(6): 13-15.

Navarro, J. 2003. A four-domain model of detecting deception. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin June: 19-24.

-V-

Vargas, M. F. 1986. Louder Than Words: An Introduction to Non-Verbal Communication. Ames, Iowa State University Press.

van Baaren, R. B., R. W. Holland, K. Kawakami, and A. van Knippenberg. 2003. Mimicry and pro-social behavior. Psychological Science 15: 71-74.

Van Swol, L. M. 2003. The effects of nonverbal mirroring on perceived persuasiveness, agreement with an imitator, and reciprocity in a group discussion. Communication Research 30 (4): 461-480.

Van Swol, L. M. 2003. The effects of nonverbal mirroring on perceived persuasiveness, agreement with an imitator, and reciprocity in a group discussion. Communication Research 30 (4): 461.

Vrij, A. and G. R. Semin. 1996. Lie experts’ beliefs about nonverbal indicators of
deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 20: 65-80.

Vrij, A. 1997. Individual differences in hand movements during deception. Source: Journal of nonverbal behavior. 21: 87-102.

Vrij, A.. 2004. Why professionals fail to catch liars and how they can improve Source: Legal and Criminological Psychology. 9:159-181.

Vrij, A., S. Mann, and S. Kristen. 2007. Cues to deception and ability to detect lies as a function of police interview styles. Law and Human Behavior 31 (5): 499-518.

-W-

Watson, N. V., & Kimura, D. 1991. Nontrivial sex differences in throwing and intercepting: Relation to psychometrically-defined spatial functions. Personality and Individual Differences. 12: 375–385.

Watson KK, Matthews BJ, Allman JM 2007. Brain activation during sight gags and language-dependent humor. Cereb Cortex 17(2): 314–24.

West, C. and D. H. Zimmerman. 1987. Doing gender. Gender and Society I: 125-151.

Wood, John Andy 2006. NLP revisited: nonverbal communications and signals of trustworthiness. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management. 26(2): 197.

Walker. 1983 The expressive function of the eye flash. Journal of nonverbal behavior. 8(1): 3 -13.

Williams. 1993. Effects of Mutual Gaze and Touch on Attraction, Mood, and Cardiovascular Reactivity Source: Journal of Research in Personality. 27(2): 170-183.

Willis, F. N., & Hamm, H. K. 1980. The use of interpersonal touch in securing compliance. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 5: 49-55.

Willis, F. 1966. Initial speaking distance as a function of the speaker’s relationship.
Psychonomic Science. 5: 221-222.

Wilson P, R. 1968. Perceptual distortion of height as a function of ascribed academic status. The Journal of social psychology. 74: 97-97.

-X-

NONE

-Y-

Yeagley, Erin; Morling, Beth; Nelson, Maria 2007. Nonverbal zero-acquaintance accuracy of self-esteem, social dominance orientation, and satisfaction with life. Journal of Research in Personality. 41(5): 1099-1106.

Yee, N., Bailenson, J.N., Urbanek, M., Chang, F., Merget, D. 2007. The Unbearable Likeness of Being Digital: The Persistence of Nonverbal Social Norms in Online Virtual Environments. The Journal of CyberPsychology and Behavior. 10: 115-121.

-Z-

Zajonc, R. B., P. K. Adelmann, S. T. Murphy, and P. M. Niedenthal. 1987. Convergence in the physical appearance of spouses. Motivation and Emotion 11 (4): 335-346.

Zald, D. H. The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev. 2003. 41: 88–123.

Zimmerman, D. H. and C. West. 1975. Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. In B. Thorne and N. Henley (Eds) Language and sex: difference and dominance: 105-129. Rowley, Newbury House.

Zweigenhaft, R. L. 1976. Personal space in the faculty office: Desk placement and the student-faculty interaction. Journal of Applied Psychology 61 (4): 529-532.

Final Thoughts

by  • March 6, 2013 • 2 Comments

Final?  There’s no end to the constant flow of research on Body Language and how amazing our Brains are…  Stay tuned for more, and visit our Articles section of the site for the newest research.

This is the public content.

You are missing the rest of the article! There is more content to read: Click to Register and Get Free Access To Read ALL Of This Content


This is public info after the private info.
 

Cheers,

Chris

Summary – Chapter 16

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

We began this chapter knowing full well that lie detection through nonverbal means was difficult at best. However, we did cover a huge amount of clues that can help us by raising suspicion and provide us with leads to delve further. We began the chapter by looking at the reasons for lying which includes hiding feelings, preferences and attitudes. We found that lying is used to reduce disagreements and hurt feelings and is a useful skill in impression management. We listed the nine reasons people lie which are to avoid punishment, to gain access to a reward, to protect another person or one’s self from being punished, to win admiration of others, to avoid awkward social situations, to avoid embarrassment, to maintain privacy and to gain at the expense of others.

We found that by grilling someone for the truth it is often enough to cause someone to feel stress thereby creating the behaviour instead of uncovering it. Contrary to popular belief we discussed that eye contact can often increase during lying rather than decrease due to “duping delight” where a person receives a charge from pulling one over on someone else. We learned that lying is hard work so should expect that when someone is caught with difficult questions that they should exhibit more nonverbal leakage and might even ‘appear’ to be thinking harder. Nervousness and guilt was touched on which showed that at times liars can give themselves up through a higher pitch, faster and louder speech, speech errors or stuttering, blushing, an increase in blink rate, fidgeting, dilation of the pupils or sweating, but that these cues only reveal liars that actually feel guilt, and not all do. Liars can also tend to “freeze up” and reduce movement and we related it back to professional poker players. Next we looked at how liars remain uncommitted to their lies, and thereby use less exuberant gesturing, and can stop or reduce touching when they lie.

Next we looked at the “truth bias” which shows that an average of sixty-seven percent accuracy is found when detecting the truth, whereas forty-four percent is found while detecting deception because people expect to be told the truth so have adapted to detect it. We found in this chapter that truth tellers (and liars) are sometimes less cooperative, but not always, and looked at the FACT or the facial action coding system as another way to detect lies. “Microexpressions” were defined as facial expressions that flash across the face in 1/25 to 1/5 of a second and can betray liars because they are difficult to consciously control and appear more honest. We discussed that while lying requires fabrication, telling the truth can be just as difficult since details must be recalled from memory. Police officers, we found, are fairly good at detecting lies, but this is in spite of what they are taught rather than because of it. Lying language in children was discussed and then we classified the major gestures that are usually associated with lying, but that aren’t always actually indicative of it. Our aim in doing so was to avoid doing them so we can avoid being mislabeled as untruthful by others. These commonly associated gestures include touching the face and ears, scratching the neck, pulling at the collar, touching the eyes, mouth, or nose and closed body language. We also examined eye patterns in lying, verbal and paraverbal cues and nervous body language as they relate to lying. We discovered that machines such as the fMRI, thermal scanners, eye trackers, pupillometers and stress sniffers had a much greater success rate when compared to people, but were also expensive and impractical.

We finished up the chapter by examining true success which is achieved by the experts; the CIA who scores seventy-three percent, sheriffs sixty-seven percent, psychologist sixty-eight percent and the secret service who scored sixty-four percent as well as techniques for actually detecting lies by comparing the baseline of a person as they shift from comfort to discomfort based on questioning or other stimulus.

Setting Someone Up To Be Read

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

The following is a sequence by which lying can be more effectively read as outlined by Joe Navarro in his book What everybody is saying. Navarro follows a more interrogative style which will work in some circumstances, but it limited in others.

When trying to read someone for truth-telling, have an open view of their body to be able to see any signs of comfort and discomfort as they may arise.

When trying to read someone for truth-telling, have an open view of their body to be able to see any signs of comfort and discomfort as they may arise.

1. Get a clear unobstructed view of the person you wish to read so you don’t miss any pacifying behaviours. If possible put people in an open space.
2. Expect some nervous and stressful body language especially pacifying behaviours. People are expected to calm themselves at all times even when no lying is being done.
3. Expect initial nervousness. When someone is questioned they will feel tension regardless of their level of guilt.
4. If possible have the person you wish to read to first relax. With time everyone relaxes, even guilty people so if you can put off asking important questions or build rapport, do so.
5. Look to establish a baseline. This is especially important if you don’t know the person you are questioning all that well. Look for cues they use normally especially mannerisms and pacifiers.
6. As you begin questioning, watch for an increased use of pacifiers. This will be especially telling when they seem to increase dramatically during specific questions or when certain topics arise. When they arise, it will provide clues as to which information requires further investigation.
7. Pause frequently after asking questions. It is important to avoid putting out too many questions all at once because it will only serve to create stress. Give the person you are trying to read enough time to think and answer questions so as to avoid false positives.
8. Stay on task and maintain focus. When people feel stress they often want to change the subject matter or avoid questions. If a person gets the opportunity to change the subject their will emit fewer nonverbal tells of deception because when people speak they get to choose and control the topic.
9. Chatter is not truth. Listening to one side of the story often produces a bias and on the surface, the more we listen to people, the more we tend to trust and believe what they tell us. Advertising campaigns work through a similar mechanism as the more we hear the message, the more we think it to be true. Eventually, if we hear messages enough time, they work into our subconsciousness to become “ours”, they re-write our reality. When people present a huge amount of information about a topic, they appear to be telling the truth, however this is not always the case as even creative liars can go at lengths to produce elaborate and believable lies. It is not the amount of information provided that matters, but rather the accuracy of the information which can only come through verification of the facts.
10. Stress in and stress out. There are two times when stressful nonverbals are emitted, once when the question is asked which can appear like distancing behaviours such as arms and foot withdrawl and then again when pacifying is needed to calm. These come out as neck touching, stroking the hair and so forth.
11. Isolate the cause of stress. Is stress due to being asked stressful questions, or because someone is being interrogated. Not all stressful nonverbal language is due to lying and often people that are honest, show nervous language.
12. Pacifiers tell us a lot. Pacifying body language tells us when someone is stressed which tells us which scenarios, questions or information has created it. It therefore follows that pacifying cues tell us which areas require more thorough investigation.

Comfort and Discomfort Body Language

by  • March 6, 2013 • 1 Comment

Comfort on the left side of the image, discomfort on the right.

Comfort on the left side of the image, discomfort on the right.

We have covered many signals of comfort and discomfort throughout the book and have even eluded to their use in lie detection. To simplify things, I wanted to take the time to cover the cues we can use to detect lying as it relates to comfort and discomfort. We have seen how open and closed language can signal a desire to allow access to the body. Ventral displays shows that a person is open and trusting of someone and this sort of response is difficult when we feel we are hiding emotions. Comfort is displayed through proximity and people do this by moving their torsos closer or leaning inward rather than away and will remove objects that impede their view so as to establish more intimacy.

Comfortable bodies open up and spread out.

Comfortable bodies open up and spread out.

Comfortable people will hold their bodies loose rather than rigid, and their body will move with fluidity. They will gesture with their speech instead of freezing instantly or awkwardly, called “flash frozen.” Sometimes people will slow to catch their thoughts, but this will be obvious to the body language reader and will come at appropriate times and in context when thought is actually required to produce accurate answers. Comfortable people mirror others around them instead of avoiding synchrony. Their breath rate will be similar and they will adopt like postures instead of showing differences.

Bodies show discomfort by increased heart rate, breath rate, sweating, a change in normal colour in the face or neck, trembling or shaking in the hands lips, or elsewhere, compressing the lips, fidgeting, drumming the fingers and other repetitive behaviours. Voices often crack when under stress, mouths might dry up producing noticeable swallowing, “hard swallows”, or frequent throat clearing. Liars might use objects as barriers. They might hold drinking glasses to hide parts of their face or use walls and chairs while standing to lean against to gain support. Liars might engage in eye blocking behaviours by covering their eyes with their hands or seem to talk through them or even squint so as to impede what is being said from entering their minds. The eyes might also begin to flutter or increase in overall blink rate showing an internal struggle.

Drumming fingers, fidgeting, kicking feet and so forth are burning off nervous energy - discomfort.

Drumming fingers, fidgeting, kicking feet and so forth are burning off nervous energy – discomfort.

We’ve hit on the fact that stress creates nonverbal language such as preening to show detachment from a conversation (picking lint), energy displacement gestures such as scratching the body or rubbing the neck or wiping the side of the nose. Palm up displays show that a person has some doubt, and indicates a desire for other to believe them while palm down displays show confidence and authority. Microexpressions can also be particularly revealing since they happen instantaneously and subconsciously. Watch for movements that happen first especially if they are negative in nature as these are more honest than positive body language. Positive language is used by people to appear more in control and polite instead of appearing vulnerable. Fake smiles are an excellent example of an expression that can sometimes be put on to appear to disguise stress. We know smiles are faked when they seem to last for much longer than what would be considered natural.

Lack of touching, or touch reduction also signals discomfort and a divergence of ideas. When people’s ideas differ they find it hard to come close to others as part of the natural fear response. Head movements that are inconsistent with speech such as slightly nodding affirmatively though making a denial or vice versa, or delaying head nodding until after speech is made such that speech and gestures lack synchrony can give liars away. When gestures are done out of sync they tell us that a person is adding the gesture on as support for their statement. The entire affair appears to be out of the normal order of flow in communication which liars can often do. When affirmative nodding happens during denial statements such as nodding “yes” while saying “I did not do it” usually happens very subtly, but is obvious to the conscious observer. Keep in mind while reading these cues that they do not indicate lying per se, but rather indicate discomfort and stress. The job of the body language reader is to decide why a person is stressed. Are they stressed because they are being put on the spot, because they fear being mislabeled, or because they are actually telling lies?

Comfort and Discomfort In Detecting Deception

by  • March 6, 2013 • 1 Comment

By keeping a "subject" relaxed, we can measure lying more accurately. Instead of creating lying-language through suspicion, we can uncover lying.

By keeping a “subject” relaxed, we can measure lying more accurately. Instead of creating lying-language through suspicion, we can find out which facts create discomfort – it is discomfort body language that helps uncover the truth.

Ex-FBI agent Joe Navarro explain in his book What everybody is saying that nonverbal cues put out by the limbic mind are paramount to detecting deception. He says that it is the displays of comfort versus discomfort that tells body language readers when someone is telling the truth or lying. When people lie they experience discomfort and “guilt knowledge” which leaks through the body through a person’s fear response, but when they tell the truth they “have no worries.” This approach says that a person uses more emphatic gestures with their hands and arms when they tell the truth, but when they lie they tend to freeze up and lock themselves down. If you see half-hazard attempts to describe events using lack of emphasis and gesturing, or in other words, remain uncommitted, than you can be pretty sure their story is fabricated. Truth tellers try their best to set facts straight and will go on at lengths to accomplish this.

The theory says that someone that is guilty carries negative thoughts with them because by nature, people are honest and think that they are good people. When they harbour bad thoughts though, they find it difficult to achieve comfort. The technique to reading lying as outlined states that a person must be read in low stress environments so that it is possible to measure changes from their baseline to catch stress related discomfort. Grilling someone for the truth has been show to produce “false positives”, meaning people who are actually innocent will actually plead guilty. Innocent suspects have been shown to confess to very serious crimes such as murder simply because they were put under very intense pressure. This is why it is important to establish comfort during all interactions, yet use appropriate questions to uncover the truth.

Overlooking someone suspiciously or presenting leading or accusatory questions will create discomfort, however it won’t show you which information presented leads to changes in nonverbal body language. It is by using relaxed and rapport building body language that allows someone to relax leaving only the information or question to be the variable by which all body language is measured. When scientists conduct research they do their best to keep all factors the same except for one. They call this the dependent variable, and it is by definition what is measured, or in other words what is affected during the experiment. The independent variable is what is manipulated in an experiment. When conducting a “lying experiment”, like all experiments, you want to keep all other variables constant so you can measure one variable against another variable.

Therefore, when we want to uncover lies, we should keep our body language neutral and remain calm while working to present information, details, asking for clarification, and so forth to uncover discomfort. This is why torture techniques don’t work to uncover the truth, they just pull information that the suspect believes the interviewer desires so they will stop badgering them. Just by using suspicious body language or leading questions can put someone on edge and influence their nonverbal communication. Saying things like “I don’t believe you” or “I think you are lying” will create anxious body language which can be misconstrued to be the result of actually being dishonest, when in actual fact is likely due to stress from being mislabeled. To body language reader will gain no useful information from creating anxiety. The rule of thumb therefore is to create and maintain comfort at all times, remain neutral in expression and measure signals of discomfort to uncover information that creates stress.

How To Accurately Read Lies

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

By now we know that liars are practiced, we all do it, and we do it regularly. Sometimes we don’t even realize we do it and other times those around us don’t care to know. What we do know is that most liars feel only mild feelings of guilt and fear. Thus, we should only expect very subtle clues to deception and nothing more. It has been shown through the research that looking for full blown signals of lying is both misleading and even unhelpful. Liars as it were, are only slightly more apprehensive than truth tellers with both feeling nervous and anxious when faced with scrutiny.

My advice to read people is to watch for the little stuff, the microexpressions, the small gestures and the ones that happen instantly, and then hone in on it. Keep in mind too, that you won’t be able to detect lies much better than about seventy-five percent of the time anyway, which is on par with the CIA minus of course various lie detection machines which we discussed as being impractical and requiring cooperation that you are very unlikely to garner, even if provided with access.

The top lie detectors all seem to have one trait in common, and that is skepticism. They know or assume that someone is lying so they view them through that window being careful to watch and recall any cues that tip the scales toward deception. Looking at the world through rose-coloured glasses will lead to rose-coloured predictions about people and this is all just dandy, if you aren’t interesting in uncovering bad things around you. You also must be aware of a person, from their face to their toes and be willing to look them over and actively observe them. If you’re goal is to make friends, then by all means avoid filtering and analyzing the body language around you. In fact, I would advise body language readers to relax their skills when around family and friends, or at least keep it secret!

It is not safe to immediately peg someone a liar based on one or even a handful of cues just by the nature of the trade. Reading lying correctly is a long term comparison of the facts seeded with emotional, fearful and stressed body language from one moment to the next that can only happen over time. Success will come by looking at the full picture and comparing the parts to the whole and digging deeper when discrepancies happen between expressive behaviours and the words said. No doubt, lie detection is difficult, but the body language in this chapter coupled with how it is framed, that is the lie detection theory and it’s limitations, will help increase your odds significantly.

How We Really Detect Lies

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

It is traditionally assumed that deception detection occurs simultaneously to the telling of a lie. Meaning, as people speak, lie detectors were able to pick up on nonverbal and verbal cues to ‘read’ people. Most of the research to date suggests that we can’t use any body language cue, or collection of cues in a comprehensive manner to read liars, but this might just be a limitation or flaw in the design of the studies. In 2002 research by Hee Sun Park working out of the University of California in Santa Barbara it was found that success in real-world lie detection happens gradually, over time and not on one chance encounter. Her research found that the most often reported method of disseminating lies included third party information, confessions and physical evidence, none of which the studies thus far have provided. Therefore, with respect to how people really read lies, the scientific investigations to date, haven’t provided people with information necessary to accurately detect lies.

Reading lies in real life is an active comparison from information we know for certain, and information told to us. No doubt, nonverbal language can provide clues to us as a full package, but it doesn’t permit us to ascertain conclusive evidence. We should therefore use untrustworthy or nervous body language as motivation to spark further investigation.

So Which People Are Good At Detecting Lies?

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

At this point in the chapter it might seem out of place to admit that some individuals can actually detect lies better than chance, but this is true, and has been backed up empirically through research. Studies have shown that while the rest of the world is limited to fifty percent, or the same accuracy as that which would occur by chance, the CIA (central intelligence agency) scores seventy-three percent, sheriffs sixty-seven percent, psychologist sixty-eight percent whereas the secret service scores sixty-four percent.

So why do the experts have an advantage over the layman? Well, part of the explanation lies in experience. The group of psychologist was chosen due to their special interest in lying and lie detection, not to mention their willingness to participate in a two day seminar covering various topics related to lying and lie detection. Each group including the psychologists, the CIA, and the secret service all have an interest in lie detection coupled with the training to back it up. Experts are drawing on information from many facets about a person, including their paraverbal and nonverbal language as well as other cues as we have covered which is unlike regular lay-people who have little if any experience in analyzing people, let alone the ability to repeatedly test their skills. Because lie detection and reading people is a huge part of their occupations, they get a lot of practice and feedback.

Personality characteristics might also play into the ability to detect lies. For example, empathy, sensitivity to social cues, and conscientiousness can all help in reading people more accurate because it allows a person to put themselves in someone else’s shoes. Experts are also more aware of the truth bias, which we covered earlier, and so can properly adjust for this phenomenon. It is important to conclude on these matters that the accuracy, while impressive in relation to ordinary people, is still far from perfect. While the experts are far from perfect, they do give us some hope that lie detection is more than a chance operation. No doubt, by reading this chapter alone, you will be able to make huge strides in reading others, perhaps not pegging every liar dead on the spot, but the cues in this chapter will help you at least identified those who are worthy of a second look.

Above: Paul Ekman talks about microexpressions.

Some Other Lie Machines – Thermal Scanners, Eye Trackers, Pupillometers And Stress Sniffers

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Other machines that could potentially find their way into law enforcement and homeland security include thermal scanners, eye trackers and pupillometers. Scientists at Dodpi or the Department of defense polygraph institute have created a machine that measures the body’s emissions of heat, light, vibration and other minute changes that happen during lying. One of the tools measures the amount of heat that is released just inside each eye. The theory is that heat increase with lying and stress and this should increase during lying. From this chapter, we know that this machine has severe limitations since not all liars experience stress and fear, and not all honest people lack it. Another machine tracks people’s gaze patterns to determine if they’re looking at something they recognize or something novel. This would be useful in criminal investigations where the murder weapon was kept hidden from the public. If a suspect was read to recognize the item, he could be linked to the crime. Other machines measure pupils sizes to determine arousal which as we have been discussing can signal stress, fear, but also interest. A sniffer machine is also being tested which looks for an increase in stress hormones on the breath.

Such devices are new and their effectiveness unmeasured so are not in widespread use. Thankfully the time we hear “Your plane is boarding, please walk through the mental detector” isn’t yet upon us, and predictions of the popular book 1984 can sit idle, for the time being at least.