Tag Archive for Inconsistencies

Lying In Children

Unfortunately, you probably thought that I would be describing how easy it is to spot lies told by children, but the common theme in this chapter is held consistent. Being able to ‘look through our children’ is a common sentiment. We do think that children are bad liars overall, but studies show that children are nearly as, if not just as efficient at lying as adults. A 2007 study by Leif Strömwall, Pär Granhag and Sara Landström of Göteborg University in Sweden found that overall detection of lies in children was only around fifty-two percent, or not much better than chance. Adult raters were only slightly more effective at detecting children’s lies when the children were not allowed time to prepare their fibs. In this case they were only fifty-six percent accurate. The children relied on their own real life experiences and those of others they knew to fabricate believable stories, whereas their nonverbal strategy was to ‘stay calm’. Other research tells us that children as young as four are able to construct and build lies, but that older children are more skilled than younger children and are therefore caught even less. Another study showed that by age twelve, children have reached adult success levels. Further to this, there is no ‘expert advantage’ mean that when college students were compared to teachers and social workers, no difference was found, they all performed poorly as lie detectors.

Now let’s all breath deeply here! Children have a natural knack for telling lies, but so too does the rest of the world it seems. To catch our children’s lies it’s best to watch for their verbal inconsistencies rather than their nonverbal language. In fact, that is exactly what we do. Paying particular attention to the consistencies in the verbal dialogue is reported by several studies as successful where adults are trying to catch children in lies. To illustrate this point I draw on a 2002 study by Victoria Talwar and Kang Lee of Queen’s University in Kingston Ontario, Canada. In the study they had children hold a stuffed Barney toy behind their backs. As the experimenter left the room, they asked for them not to peek. Almost no one could resist the temptation. Raters who had no chance to interview or listen to children speak, but had to rely on body language alone, showed similar difficulty as other studies when trying to pick which of the children where lying. However, when outright asked if they peeked seventy-five percent lied and only twenty-five percent admitted to peeking, but when asked to guess what toy they held, almost half of the six and seven-year-olds said “Barney” admitting they had looked, whereas ninety percent of the three, four and five-year olds admitted the same. The study demonstrates that young liars are easily read by verbal leakage. Only some of the students where able to come up with alternative answers, or report that they didn’t know.

Another factor we look for in liars, is “richness of detail”’, meaning the level of information in a story. It is this richness that we assume means that someone has actually experienced the event, rather than constructed it. Children have limited life experience and it is difficult for them to create details outside of their personal lives. Then again, young children often give short responses to questions anyway and offer up little detail, even when prompted. Children have also been found to appear more nervous and seem to think harder when lying, the problem of course is that they hold these traits while telling the truth as well. Telling the truth is hard for both adults and children. Reality is as difficult to recall as is creating lies.

Adults, parents in particular who spend a great deal of time with their children, can usually pick out lies easier, because they’ve been with them to measure their experiences more so than the cues they give up through their body language. However this falls much shorter than lie detection, it’s merely an examination of the facts or at its most generous, a probability assessment. Parents most often rely on baseline comparisons in their children and while this is helpful, detecting lies in strangers or in other people’s children would be more useful. Teachers whom are faced with stories about summer vacations or their extravagance might hold doubts, but until they can confirm these doubts with facts, photographs or even parent’s confirmation, they simply remain doubts. Information presented outside the realm of the children’s possible experiences can be used to reasonably detect lies, but with widespread media and internet, story creation by children is made much easier. However, as the research shows repeatedly, we should not expect to be able to detect lies through body language alone, even in children.

Dominance By Setting And Breaking Social Rules

Rules are always created by, and then in turn, broken by dominant individuals! Dominant individuals are the rule makers, not the rule followers. It’s sad but true, that police officers enjoy greater luxuries than regular citizens. Just ask any policemen what they do if the get pulled over for speeding. Do you really think they get a ticket? I won’t get into absolutes here, but I do personally know two officers who have explained to me that a flash of the badge gets them off every time. I would expect this to be the norm, not the exception, but there is no empirical way to be certain.

This sort of logic all starts at home, as parents make and break their own rules routinely. Is it any surprise that whinny children have whinny parents? Even small children can readily pick-out these injustices, but since they are still highly dependent on their parents to feed, house and cloth them, they, put up only a small amount of resistance. As children reach their teenage years, these inconsistencies are tolerated less and less by them as they tend to set their own course. They are separating themselves from their parents and taking on their own dominance characteristics, naturally, controlling inconsistent parents see this as disrespect.

This isn’t unlike what happens when dominant people meet as adults. Dominant people will often interrupt others or speak over them, casually swear in the wrong company and generally act inappropriately without fear of consequence. Dominance can also take the form of belittling and criticizing others, and holding thoughts such as “I’m more important then you”. It can also include ridiculing others and their possessions, such as their cars or occupations.

Touching also has rules which can be broken in order to set others in their place. A pat on the back can be disingenuous when used in certain context, whereas a light punch on the shoulder can be uplifting to a buddy. Punching can be annoying if done repeatedly to exercise control. There is a pretty clear line between being dominant in a good way versus being belligerent.

Body Language Of Children

BodyLanguageProjectCom - NeotenyBabies are almost entirely dependant on nonverbal communication in their first few months, that is, if we discount crying! As children age, they still rely, as adults do, on nonverbal language such as pointing at a toy rather then asking for it, pushing other children aside when it suites them, or even hugs to show affection and exaggerated pouting to garner sympathy. Babies as young as nine month’s old, who lack verbal language, can even begin using sign language to convey desires showing just how rooted non-verbal communication is all of us.

When young children lie they often have troubles making eye contact or they might hang their head, appear tense or they might even quickly pull both hands up and cover their mouths as if to shove the lie back in from where it came from. Even some adults will perform these gestures if they let slip a secret or particularly juicy piece of gossip in the wrong circle. However, at other times, both children and adults are not as obvious. A 2002 study by Victor Talwar and Kang Lee out of the University of Queens, Canada, however, showed that children as young as three are naturally adept at controlling their nonverbal language as it applies to deception. In the study, children were able to fool most of the evaluators of their deception as a videotape showing the lie was replayed. Children are not particularly skilled at lying through verbal channels though, and they slip up easily revealing inconsistencies in their stories, so this is where you can really catch them. We will cover deceptive body language at lengths later on.

Other emotional body language emitted by children is much more prevalent. For example, children use slouching and pouting to show that they are upset and disappointed but as we age, we drop our nonverbal cues in favour of verbal expression. We naturally become more adept at repressing what our bodies do and tend to use more conscious thought and spoken words since it is more direct and less easily misinterpreted. What starts off as a quick mouth slap movement to the mouth when lying (or swearing) in children, slowly becomes a touch to the corner of the mouth. Later, restraint forces the finger to the side even further and then instead of touching the mouth it touches the side of the nose instead. As people age, they become much more difficult to read. By logical progression, the hardest to read of all are sixty-year-old politicians!

As an interesting aside, dedicated parents even claim to be able to sense when a baby is about to relieve themselves and so avoid messy diapers. This technique is referred to as elimination communication. By reading gestures such as frowning, squirming, fussing or tensing, mother’s (or fathers!) in combination with baby’s particular rhythms, can detect when potty time is immanent. Once the baby’s cues have been deciphered the mother can anticipate potty time by holding baby over the toilet and cuing with “hiss-hiss” or “wiss-wiss” sounds. To associate the hissing sounds with urination, this process must be repeated ten to twenty times each day!