Author Archive for Chris Site Author

Touch Reduction

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Liars will usually avoid physical contact.

Liars will usually avoid physical contact.

Liars rarely touch others when they lie to them. This is a natural part of the fight or flight response and the subconscious mind won’t permit them to reach out because of it. This can prove helpful in intimate relationships, with family members or children since touching is a normal part of everyday life. Any form of touch reduction can signal that a person is at odds with another and that they might be hiding something. If touch isn’t normal, however, then measuring touch reduction won’t be possible. In this case, look for distancing behaviours instead like arm withdrawal or leaning away, especially in the torso as these are forms of distancing of which touch forms a subset. Touch is an aspect of closeness that is simply not tolerated well between those who have different ideas. Couples have even been shown to draw away from each other when they are generally unhappy with their relationship, and tend to touch themselves far more frequently than they touch other people.

Touch reduction is usually accompanied with stressful questions or when information is presented that creates anxiety. Closeness can also be useful when assessing someone because it will invoke distancing desires. When talking with a spouse or child, sit as close as that which you are accustomed to before taking up serious matters. If someone is hiding something, they will usually push away or even stand up looking for ways to exit or change the subject. Holding the hand of a child can be particularly useful when discussing matters of dishonesty. If they wish to exit the discussion, they will try to tug their hand away.

Remaining Uncommitted

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

When people tell the truth they will usually show extra enthusiasm and commit to their story. Liars often start off the same way, but quickly trail off.

When people tell the truth they will usually show extra enthusiasm and commit to their story. Liars often start off the same way, but quickly trail off.

Liars have been noted to be uncommitted to lies. That is, because they have nothing vested in the lie, they remain less than exuberant in their convictions. In other words, the subconscious mind of liars doesn’t allow them to carry forward with enthusiasm. Instead of smashing a fist against a table and raising a voice saying “I didn’t do it!”, liars will instead make much duller motions and use less commitment to them. It is not as if they want to lie, it is the limbic mind that won’t allow them to.

Liars will motion without emphasis, or describe events by trailing off or use weak statements. They might limit arm and hand movement by clasping them together or locking them down on an armrest with such force they turn their knuckles white. The hands might be put out of sight in pockets or under a table where they can’t be read. Reduced movement can be seen throughout the body, not just in the hands. The entire body including the head, arms, feet, and torso can seem to lock in place. People that are telling the truth spend a lot of time and energy in efforts to make the facts known which comes across in their body language and gesturing. Truth tellers are happy to spend as much time as necessary to get everything right. They will often add more detail than required and go over it again and again if necessary. Not emphasizing is linked to the freeze response where the mind clams the body shut and reduces movement so as to draw less attention to it. What is important in lie detection is to compare cues from a baseline. That is, if someone suddenly drops emphasis then you know they’ve lost interest in the topic or are lying. In either case, it will have provided useful information to the body language reader.

In writing this passage, I had just reviewed a video (see bottom posted on the web of a baseball game in which a player leaped head-over-feet clear over the catcher as he came to homeplate to score a run. The catcher, stuck in a fear response, failed to tag the runner. Baseball has an interesting tradition where it is customary for the runner to body-check the catcher at homeplate as he tries to tag for an out. While the catcher braced and ducked with his elbow up to make the tag, the runner jumped over the catcher landing on home plate. The catcher stuck with his elbow up in defense could only convince his mind to bring his arm just close enough to miss the tag! Because his mind feared the body check, he wasn’t able to follow through with what he intended. While this is an interesting fear based response what follows is even more interesting since it helps us read liars. The catcher, realizing he failed to get the out, quickly turns to pursue the runner. One must ask why he would track the runner down if he made the tag? Obviously he hadn’t! But more important that this, is that we know that he knows that he didn’t make the tag! This means that any nonverbal language following the lack of tag, should he dispute it, is read as lying language. To state his case, the catcher chats with the umpire by raising his arms showing how he made the tag. What is revealing, however, is that the catcher only slightly raises his arms instead of doing it with emphasis. Instead of showing the gesture over and over again, the catcher just raises his arms once as if to make a casual rainbow motion with his arms. When his coach shows up with arms flaying and talking with enthusiasm, the catcher quietly exits! The catcher knows that he can’t make a case and so doesn’t put any effort into trying. The difference between the coach and the catcher, is that the catcher knows he’s lying, while the coach isn’t sure. Once more, the coach isn’t actually lying anyway, since he wasn’t there to feel the contact or lack thereof of the catchers mitt and the runner, he’s just acting out an inherent bias – he’s playing the role he was hired to do. Lack of commitment is an important cue to watch for when detecting lies so be careful to watch for it.

Liars Freeze Up But Master Poker Players Become Dynamic?

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Lying is so pervasive in life that it is no doubt that poker, a game that celebrates and rewards lying, is so popular. Over the course of a poker game each player will gain access to the same good and bad hands on average, but it is what is done with these hands that bring in more or less money. Even weak hands can win by bluffing, or lying about the strength of the hand, by fooling a competing player into fold. Poker is a game that rewards those that actively lie about strong hands by betting when weak and also holding back or “slow playing” strong hands to milk as much money from opponents. As poker players develop, they work through steps or stages on their way to becoming masters. One of the first skills learned is feigned disinterest which is useful when dealt a great hand. If a player can not convince others that they hold a weaker hand and instead show confident body language and consistently raise, the remaining players will simply fold. This invariably reduces their contribution to your pot and reduces your earnings. It will have been said that you haven’t played the hand to its full potential so even if you have won, you will have still lost.

Once feigned disinterest is mastered, a poker player begins what is called “acting.” That is, they will act weak when they have a strong hand, and act strong when dealt a weak hand. In poker, this becomes very tiresome (but simple) because a player must constantly show signs of strength when they aren’t and show signs of weakness when they are strong. Doing the opposite to what comes naturally consumes mental resources and distracts from other tasks such as reading other people’s body language and calculating the strength of their hands. The next level in a poker player’s development is to do what most poker players conclude their learning with, especially casual home players, and this is to clam up and show no signs at all ever. This is what we call the “poker face” and is the primary topic at hand in this discussion. While not important in general life, it might behoove you to know the final stage to becoming a master poker player which is the ability to move from just the poker face (expressionless, or nearly so!) to all levels perpetually, so you can never quite be figured out with any degree of certainty. Of course, different styles exist between players, where some are constantly chatting, while others are constantly frozen, but the gist of it that they don’t have to be stuck in a frozen pipeline. As with good liars, good poker players possess the skills to act natural and honest, even when they aren’t.

Liars have been shown to freeze up in this “poker face” too. Acting naturally is difficult when under stress, or if we are particularly motivated to get away with a lie. Motivation can be due to receiving a reward, keeping our job, or avoiding severe punishment. The greater is the motivation, the greater the likelihood of freezing up. Someone that hits a monster hand in poker can suddenly stop all movement altogether, but as we see with all lying body language, a liar can also show opposite behaviour and begin to shake or vibrate uncontrollably usually with their feet, but sometimes even their hands. I’ve seen it happen and it tells me it’s time to fold! When playing poker it is usually impossible to see the feet so instead watch the person’s shirt and shoulders, as they will seem to bounce along with their legs. Surprisingly, even while the feet are practically running off, the faces of poker players often remain stoic as if frozen. Bouncing feet are called “happy feet” and is a high confidence ‘tell’, indicating that a person is about to gain something important. It is very reliable and happens as a direct result of having heard or seen something significant that is positive to the person displaying the signal. While high affect happy feet make the entire body bounce, happy feet can be display in a more subdued way by just wiggling the feet. Watching for these cues in poker can be a very important tell and save a pile of money, so be careful to watch for it.

To avoid detection, under the ‘freeze-up’ premise, we expect people to decrease their overall nonverbal behaviour. Scientists have dubbed this the “motivational impairment effect.” Someone who is “acting”, might also appear more deliberate in their performance and this relates back to fluidity of movement. Truth tellers take the trust of others for granted, whereas liars must work for it. This can become evident through their “act” as they struggle to piece their story and body language together and make it appear congruent.

If when questioning, we notice that someone immediately freezes up, becomes rigid or less fluid these can be indicators of lying or at minimum stress. Freezing can happen in terms of facial expressions, foot and leg movements, head movements or even changes in posture. The overall movement of a person can become less fluid and their speech may become less spontaneous or they may stop speaking altogether. It will still be up to you to figure out why a person has become stressed and frozen. Not only this, but you must develop a baseline to compare freezing up versus normal behaviour. Perhaps this person always freezes up when people pry into their lives. Wouldn’t you, especially if you were innocent? Some people naturally use fewer gestures while speaking, and had freezing been a rule rather than a guide would lead us to assume something that is in fact incorrect. Along similar lines, using fewer illustrators in speech has been tied to lying through the research, so is also something to watch for. Just like a novice poker player who holds rigid postures all the time, or a poker face, we’ll never truly know what kind of hand they have through any outward indicators like body language. This is what makes freezing a good default skill to liars.

Nervousness And Guilt In Lying

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

"Talking out of the side of the mouth" came about because we feel that liars don't speak to us straight; in plain terms.

“Talking out of the side of the mouth” came about because we feel that liars don’t speak to us straight; in plain terms.

One of the most reported cues of deception includes fear and nervousness. These include higher pitch, faster and louder speech, speech errors or stuttering and indirect speech or talking out of ‘the side of the mouth’ or in worse cases, the liar might even sound unpleasant. We might also see blushing of the face, neck or ears, an increase in blink rate, fidgeting, dilation of the pupils or sweating. In theory, the greater the apprehension of getting caught or the greater the stakes, the more evident these fear cues should be. As an increase in the possibility of punishment or with an increase in the severity of punishment we should also find an increase in nervous body language. The studies tell us that people who lie about something they’ve done wrong, termed a ‘transgression’, the more likely they were to show more deceptive cues presumably because they felt guilt more strongly.

We should also be cognoscente about the motivation of the liar. If they aren’t particularly vested in the lie, they might not show nervousness at all. Someone presenting a ‘white lie’ about who they were with the night previous, or their preference for chocolate versus vanilla ice cream, should be expected to show minimal nervousness. More experienced liars show very little nervousness, because, not only are they practiced at lying, they rarely get caught, so have little to worry about effectively destroying the hypothesis that nervousness specifically increases because of lying. Conversely, poor, but frequent liars, get caught so often that the consequences of their lies fail to bother them, so they also lack nervousness. We should also predict that lies told to close friends or family whom the liar cares for, should make them more susceptible to nervous body language. Here we might in fact see lower pitch, softer and slower speech and a downward gaze as they battle their consciousness. The stick in the spokes of this theory though is that sometimes telling the truth can causes guilt just the same as telling a lie, especially when it is known that the truth might hurt someone. Other times, telling the truth causes even more distress because of the shame of revealing possible shortcomings or mistakes to others. Thus, it’s a pretty safe statement to say that liars don’t always feel guilty about their lies and truth tellers don’t always feel good about their honesty. In fact, many liars justify their lies to prevent distress in other people!

Being unable or unwilling to embrace their lies is what makes lie tellers appear less truthful and convincing. So by this theory we should expect a liar to face more negative emotions when lying which truth tellers don’t face which in turn leads to at least faint feelings of discomfort which then leaks out through the body. However, again we find data to the contrary. It has been noted by researchers that liar can have less vested in their claims primarily because they haven’t actually occurred. This is counter what was presented thus far because instead of appearing more emotional, they may in fact appear less emotional. Lest we forget too that liars can present fearful emotions when they lie due to the chances of getting caught! If you haven’t gotten the point by now, you are starting to. The point is that emotions are intertwined with the fear of getting caught, anguish of lying and telling the truth and a myriad of other factors directly and indirectly related to lying.

As we know, when truth tellers speak, they are backed with an accumulation of knowledge, experience and wisdom from an event, whereas a liar is only acting out of his own imagination. This can provide clues to his deception. Therefore, the liar might offer fewer details, present their story with less emotional investment, provide less evidence to stake their claims, act less compellingly, appear less forthcoming, less pleasant and more tense. It is also important to note the motivation or context of the lie as well, as this will provide us with clues to watch for, be it nervousness, fear of getting caught and the guilt or the shame of either lying or not lying as the case may be.

Lying Is Hard Work?

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Is she constructing a lie or trying to recall the facts?

Is she constructing a lie or trying to recall the facts?

Some researchers argue that deceptive messages requires more mental processing because one needs to create facts instead of simply recalling and describing them. In truth tellers emotion flows effortlessly, but those who are faking it, have to foster theirs and while liars are playing a role, truth tellers are just living. With an increase in pressure, such as one might experience during cross-examination in law proceedings, liars might be faced with an unexpected question catching them off guard. Pathological liars are constantly having to mentally catalog their lies and then entwine them with lies told previously which is confusing. This makes liars who are caught off guard more likely to delay responding and increase pauses as they attempt to create information while simultaneously comparing it to information otherwise presented. They must also compare information to possible information already known to the listener. It has been said that for every one lie originated, two to three other lies must be created to back it up. This can become mentally taxing and is a process not required of truth tellers. While pauses in speech are not definitive cues to deception by itself, since remembering the truth is sometimes difficult as well, pausing, when it is obvious that the answer should be known, can serve to betray a liar.

Thus, we can expect that when someone is caught with difficult questions that they should exhibit more nonverbal leakage and might even ‘appear’ to be thinking harder. Some researchers therefore have linked avoiding eye contact, or looking away to think as a signal of mental processing and lying. However, as we have seen, looking away sometimes helps us recall real to life events so this, in and of itself, is not an indication of lying. Using eye direction was outlined in an earlier section, but it’s important to note that baselining must first be accomplished for this to be anywhere near accurate. Right and left handed persons will look in different direction depending on whether they are creating information or recalling it.

A way liars use to reduce the work to carry out lies is to prepare the details in advance. In this condition we should expect more eye contact, gestures and overall movement because less stress is put on the mind, and so the body should appear more relaxed. When a liar is not afforded the time to prepare to tell a lie their movement should be less fluid and their behaviour should exhibit changes in frequencies especially nervousness. Liars that prepare their lies in advance will have fewer inconsistencies in their stories, but might appear overly rehearsed whereas liars that can’t prepare will seem to be over thinking. Thus when truth telling, there should be an inherent fluidity about the conversation. Other research tells us that liars are less forthcoming than truth tellers and tell less compelling tales. The stories they tell also have fewer ordinary imperfections and unusual contents.

Duping Delight, Eye Contact And Smiling

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Unlike this fella, good liars often appear very charismatic and this trait helps carry them through their lies.

Unlike this fella, good liars often appear very charismatic and this trait helps carry them through their lies.

Paul Ekman coined the term “duping delight” to explain possible reasons for an increase in certain cues while lying was taking place. For example, fear and guilt associated with lying should decrease nonverbal cues such as eye contact and smiles, but the research shows us that eye contact usually increases during lying. Ironically, it is the reverse that is commonly thought of by the general public to be true. That is, most people think that eye contact decreases during lying. Two possible explanations exist for an increase in eye contact and smiling. One is that smiling happens more often because the liar is experiencing pleasure with the act of lying which has been extensively proven through research on psychopaths, con-men and pathological liars, the second says that a smile is in fact due to stress and embarrassment which causes a stress smile. An increase in eye contact is also explained in terms of a desire to measure the efficacy of the lie. The liar holds eye contact to watch for signals of disbelief in his counterpart to allow him to calibrate his tactics accordingly. So by this reason, the liar holds eye contact more than truth tellers in order to gauge how well his lie is being pulled over on his victim and to revel in joy as his ploy washes over his victim.

Duping delight means that nearly any signal can be used during a lie to convey honesty, and the greater the pleasure felt by the liar, the more relaxed and honest they will appear. The converse can happen too, the duper can appear more excited and happy throwing a wrench in this signal as universal amongst liars. Signals of duping delight can include higher voice pitch, faster and louder speech, increases in nodding and smiles, and use of more illustrators. Also, the more a lie is being perceived as true, the stronger these signals will be since the excitement of the liar increases in tow. Thus, just because some signals are present, does not necessarily mean that at lie is either present or absent. Although the willful modification of our natural traits often make us appear more or less sincere. For example, a perpetual feigning of friendliness comes across as phony. Incidentally, things like voice pitch, which can be difficult to control amongst all other factors when lying, might go unusually high through anxiousness when the true intent was to appear enthusiastic. It is the difference between a normal interaction and one that is unusually energetic that gives the dupers away.

Deception Causes Arousal, Generally

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

While he COULD be lying, it's much more likely that he's actually anxious. We instinctively (and wrongfully) link anxiety with lying, when in fact good liars often feel no anxiety whatsoever when they lie, and honest people feel anxiety when they think they will be disbelieved.

While he COULD be lying, it’s much more likely that he’s actually anxious. We instinctively (and wrongfully) link anxiety with lying, when in fact good liars often feel no anxiety whatsoever when they lie, and honest people feel anxiety when they think they will be disbelieved.

It is a widely held belief that emotional arousal and stress, is strongly tied with lying. It is also at the heart of the polygraph or lie detector. Here, autonomic responses which happen in our bodies without our conscious control such as sweating or ‘skin conductivity’ is measured as well as increases in heart rate and breathing. It is assumed that when lies occur, stress related behaviours increase. Lie detector machines measure a baseline, that is, they take readings when lying is known to occur and compare it to readings when lying is thought to occur. By reading the differences, lying should become obvious.

We can use similar methods to read arousal without the help of the polygraph. Watching for an increase in adaptors, shifting, subtle movements, touching or scratching the face, neck or nose can show us that someone is uncomfortable. What it won’t show us is the reason for the discomfort. By grilling someone for the truth, this is often enough to cause someone to feel stress thereby creating the behaviour instead of uncovering it. Other clues to an increase in stress includes an increase in eye blinking, changes in posture, avoiding eye contact and foot and leg movement. It is important to always put fear of lying and arousal into context. Someone with little fear, little to gain or loose, or in other words, ‘when the stakes are low’ wont show any of these signals. Aside from this lack of tell, it is important to realize that body language cues, especially lying language is not a result directly of lying, but rather an indication of the stress, fear and anxiety that may or may not be present when lying.

The Nine Reasons We Lie (outlined by Paul Ekman)

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

The Nine Reasons We Lie (outlined by Paul Ekman)

1. To avoid punishment. This is the most frequently mentioned motive and is used to cover up a deliberate or accidental misdeed.
2. To gain access to a reward not otherwise readily obtainable.
3. To protect another person from being punished.
4. To protect oneself from the threat of physical harm. This is unlike lying to avoid punishment as the threat does not come from a misdeed. Ekman presents the example of a child who lies about his parents being home to avoid having an intruder prey on them.
5. To win the admiration of others.
6. To avoid awkward social situations i.e. lying to avoid a boring party, or saying you are busy so you don’t have to talk on the phone.
7. To avoid embarrassment i.e. telling others that you spilled water on your pants, when in reality it was the result of a bathroom ‘accident’.
8. To maintain privacy. Lying to avoid revealing personal matters.
9. To gain power over others, by controlling the information they have, or think is correct.

Why We Lie

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Research by Bella DePaulo of the University of Virgina and Deborah Kashy of Texas A & M University in 1998 found that on average people tell one or two lies daily. The research tells us that people lie most often about their feelings, preferences, attitudes and opinions and lie less frequently about their actions, plans and whereabouts presumably because it would be fairly easy to detect these lies. Lies are also told about achievements and failures. Material gain, personal convenience or escaping punishment are all fodder for lies but most often, lies are used to gain psychological currency such as to appear more sophisticated or virtuous. It seems that we take self-presentation, that is, the way we are perceived seriously. Lying permits us to convey certain roles and personal qualities to others as we see fit. It’s important to realize the main reasons for lying so that we can be skeptical at the right moments. It is difficult and perhaps even detrimental to constantly be suspicious of lying. In fact, letting lies pass detection is often the best thing to do since not all lies are of significance, in fact, most are not. This strategy doesn’t require you to believe someone’s lies, but it does requiring the ignoring of certain lies, especially the unimportant ones.

The upside to lying is to protect others from disapproval, to reduce disagreements or to prevent hurting the feelings of others. Lying is therefore a skill to manage our impressions in light of others. Politicians present an example we know all to well, as they posture from all sides of every issue to gain the most support. Another feature of lies is that they often occur from omission where we remove or withhold information so as to mislead. Incidentally these are the easiest to get away with. When asked about the effect of lies, most agreed that lying produced little regret and that the lies where of little consequence. Most reported that they felt bad immediately after telling a lie though, but did not take much time planning lies or thinking about the consequences. Lying has a dark side too, and these are to hide actions that would otherwise lead to punishment which can be from cheating to deep betrayals of intimacy and trust.

In closing off this general introduction, I would like to emphasis that by no means is lie detection easy or straightforward and any source that tells you it is, is misleading you. Lying is not universally stressful, guilt-inducing or even complicated. Some lies are simple and the motivation for lying varies greatly. It is my contention which is supported by the literature on deception, that lying is used routinely, and competently executed yields only faint clues through body language. Researchers who favour my view say that ordinary people are so practiced and proficient and unaffected by lies, that they could be regarded as professionals. Lying is so pervasive that over time (evolution), those who were best able to fool others tended to be most successful and produced more of this trait. Therefore, only weak ties exist between verbal and nonverbal tells with regards to lies, with the most blatant and obvious signals eliminated quickly through our development and our evolutionary history.

Introduction – Chapter 16

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

He does not answer questions, or gives evasive answers; he speaks nonsense, rubs the
great toe along the ground; and shivers; his face is discolored; he rubs the roots of his
hair with his fingers.
—Description of a liar, 900 B.C.

Touching the nose has long been use as a 'tell' when detecting lies. However, is lying just that easy to spot?

Touching the nose has long been use as a ‘tell’ when detecting lies. However, is lying just that easy to spot?

I’ve been putting off writing this chapter for some time and not for reasons of laziness. In fact, I have research the topic to death. The problem with lying related body language is that it’s not where it needs to be in order to be useful to the vast majority of people. What research on lie detection, and there is plenty, tells us, is that there is no definitive traits that give up all liars. Most of the cues are either anecdotal or happen some of the time, but not all of the time. Other studies tell us that so called experts, that is, police officers, interrogators, customs inspectors, federal law enforcement, federal polygraphers, robbery investigators, judges, parole officers and psychiatrists fair only at slightly above the fifty percent success rate. In fact, the average is somewhere around thirty-seven to seventy percent. It doesn’t take a mathematician to realize that someone flipping a coin is just as skilled at coming up with the correct answers as any one of the ‘experts’. Other research tells us that higher order interrogators aren’t able to pass on their intuitive abilities to others, telling us that they can’t quantify their observations. If they can’t pass it on to laypersons, than it’s of no practical purpose for me to pass it on either. Other times programs specifically designed and sold to improve detection of deception have failed miserably and have even lead to the detriment, rather than improvement of performance.

Several cues have been attributed to detecting lies. They generally fit into two broad classes. The first is nonverbal visual cues such as facial expressions, eye blinking, eye contact or gaze aversion, head movements, pupil dilation, nodding, smiling, hand movements or gestures, foot and leg movements and postural shifts. The second includes paraverbal cues including pitch, pauses, or speech errors. We will get into these cues in the following pages.

There are other ways that scientists use to detect lies and these involve machines. The most common is the polygraph or lie detector machine. The polygraph relies on changes in heart rate, blood pressure and increases in perspiration or respiration. However, these cues are of practically no use to us because they are difficult, although not impossible to see. For example, an increase in heart rate can be seen if one looks closely at the carotid artery that runs along the neck, and an increase in sweating does become apparent with an increase in scratching of the palms. Further to this, the polygraph has a poor track record and most experts agree that they have severe limitations and their accuracy is known to be inconsistent. As well will see, one facet of lie detection involves the reading of nervousness, but practiced pathological liars are skilled at eliminating nervousness, some even thrive on it thereby reducing the propensity of visible and invisible cues.

Notwithstanding the myriad of hard fast research on lie detection, it is still a widespread belief in the population that nonverbal behaviours betray a liar. Worldwide, cross-cultural comparison has shown a universally held belief that liars are spotted through their bodies. Police training packages will often include nonverbal and paraverbal behaviours as part of the ways in which deception can be detected. A study by Lucy Akehurst of the University of Portsmouth found that when asked which behaviours they thought would be consistent with lying, both police officers and regular lay people agreed. There was no difference between what the experts thought betrayed a liar and what regular people thought. They also agreed that these behavioural changes would occur more frequently in others as they lied, than in themselves. This finding is replicated in other studies as well. For example, police officers and students agreed on which behaviours were consistent with lying and they also thought that they themselves would display these cues less during lying. The research therefore is inconsistent with the nature of lying. It can not happen both ways, and it seems that our attitudes about lying and lie detection are skewed.

Judgments of deception are heavily correlated with long held stereotypes. Person’s that display behaviours associated with lying are often judged as deceptive even though they may be telling the truth. Study after study shows that roughly only fifty percent of the time liars give themselves away, the remaining time, liars are passed off as truth tellers and truth tellers as liars. Pegging liars based on body language alone or some other mystical cue is a dangerous assumption. It can lead to marital break-ups such as if a spouse falsely labels her husband as a cheater, can put innocent people in jail, can lead to the firing of employees on suspicion of theft and so forth. Yet with this huge propensity for error and consequence, we still, by in large, believe that we can read people on this trait. What shouldn’t surprise us are the rewards achievable through lying and cheating. Lying can avoid punishment, save us from hardships, but perhaps more importantly can help protect those around us and their feelings. The question “Does this dress make me look fat?” does not necessitate an honest answer, and in so doing, everyone is much happier!

Teachers, principles, lay persons and even intellectuals have been shown to all think similarly in terms of lie detection, and the body language associated (even if incorrect). Thus to avoid being detected, or mislabeled a liar (which is worse), we should still avoid displaying stereotypical lying body language that will serve to give us away. At this point, you should understand my reasoning for presenting this chapter even if only to slightly help us catch liars. While lying body language may be of some help in catching a liar, it will help avoid making us appear as though we are lying in the eyes of those around us. As the studies on beliefs about deception have indicated, there seems to be worldwide agreement on what constitute cues to deception in others. Therefore, it is these behaviours one should avoid so as not to appear dishonest. I will add too, that lie detection is not impossible, certain individuals do fair better than chance alone when detecting lies. However it is with caution that I present this chapter because as of yet, it is difficult to pin down exactly which cues are used and which cues happen across all people. Some cues mean deception some of the time, while other times they are simply related to emotional arousal and stress which can be due to being portrayed inaccurately as a liar, or in response to the punishment that might be forthcoming. Sometimes it is the worry about being “under the gun” that causes the stress and therefore the behaviour, and not because of any concern about the telling of a lie. While this chapter provides cues to emotionality related to lying, it will be up to the reader of the language to determine the source, be it actual lying or emotions related to being caught.