Tag Archive for Difficult Questions

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.

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.

Why Sometimes Eye Contact Is Bad

by  • March 5, 2013 • 0 Comments

A 2006 study by Stirling University psychologists found that children who were instructed to avoid eye contact while considering their response to a question had a seventy-two percent chance of answering correctly but only a fifty percent chance of answered correctly when they had not been told to look away. One of the theories advanced to explain this finding suggests that looking at human faces, which are complex and information rich, requires a lot of mental processing and that this might disrupt thinking. So next time you want a child (or anyone) to provide a correct answer, instead of forcing them to be polite and maintain eye contact, allow them the freedom to cast their gaze wherever it might fall so they can better process the information. The research shows that children were justified all along by avoiding eye contact when posed difficult questions.

Eye aversion during complex thought is just one example of why sometimes eye contact is bad. Another says that eye aversion controls hierarchy and many species of animals have evolved eye aversion as a function of appeasement gestures. Primates will use direct stares as part of their threat display which is a precursor to direct physical aggression. Averting the eyes altogether or looking down and away with brief glances in the direction of the aggressor can serve to eliminate an attack response. Eye aversion to reduce physical violence is to the benefit of both parties because it eliminates the chances of serious injury or even death. In most cases the aggressor, having received the signal that he is higher in the ranks, will stop in its tracks and turn away.

Eye aversion is a form of submission and submission is usually all that is desired from most attackers. Simply put, violence is often the byproduct of two individuals who refuse to heed each other’s dominance displays, and of which are naturally fairly evenly matched. When dominance displays include things like strutting, stretching, false charges, chest pounding and so forth can not definitively crown a winner, then the conflict is settled by physical contest. Obviously, the last description could apply to any one species of animals, but it could also apply to people. When neither person backs down, a fight ensues.

Children who avoid eye contact can also avoid being physically abused by other students, although it does nothing to eliminate the problem altogether. It has been said that the only true way to settle a bully down is to give them a bit of their own medicine. Bullies are always trying to pick easy fights to build up their dominance and so tend not to want to fight as much as one would be lead to think. Eye contact between humans and non-humans is also well documented. For example, young children who haven’t yet learned to avoid eye contact with dogs, tend to be attacked more often as the dog perceives the child as an aggressor. By most accounts it is recommended that people avoid direct eye contact when confronted by bears to avoid hostile encounters. Avoiding eye contact switches off the threat response and tells the bear that you do not wish to end the dispute with a physical contest.

In most animal species unwavering gaze is used to display dominance and aggression when it happens between members of the same species. When it happens across species it indicates that a prey has been centered out and the stalk has begun. Looking away and avoiding eye contact is a submissive cue and the least dominant is usually the first one to look away. Knowing this, you can easily test out your own dominance. Just pick a victim and stare directly into their eyes for an extended period of time. Whoever breaks first admits to lower rank. You will see that direct and piercing eye contact lasting any longer than five seconds will create an intense desire to look away. If you find it difficult to stare someone down like this then look at the area just above the eyes, as if the person had a third eye. While we know we aren’t making eye contact, the victim won’t realize the difference. Staring will evoke stress, they will feel prey-like and under attack. Keeping the eyes unblinking or even narrowing them is akin to a predator-prey interaction which will make the dominance display even more powerful. However you decide to experiment, do so at your own risk!