Tag Archive for Interrogation

Closed Body Postures

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Closed body postures, like hands hiding in pockets, indicate insecurity which we subconsciously associate with lying.

Closed body postures, like hands hiding in pockets, indicate insecurity which we subconsciously associate with lying.

Closed body positions, as we know, give off bad signals in general. When in a high pressure situation, closing the body off in any way may lead people to think that you have something to hide. Tucking the chin in, pulling the arms closer to the body, crossing the legs, turning the body away, and taking on a less threatening profile are all attributed to lying. Another less obvious clue to being closed-off, is to subconsciously place an object between the liar and interrogator, such as a book, brief case, or any other “security-blanket.”

As we all know of course, closed body positions like the majority of the signals associated with liars is in fact due to the stress, fear and hence nervousness of the interrogation. When “under attack” we close up our bodies to make it appear smaller and less significant to draw less attention to it, which is a way to protect our bodies in case the interrogation escalates into a physical attack. While most cultures prohibit physical force during everyday encounters, we still have the mental hardwiring that programs us to foresee physical violence, never mind the fact that a verbal threat is just as embarrassing and visceral as any physical confrontation. Threatening language puts our minds at risk to long term emotional damage, no different than being threatened by physical conflict. In our daily lives accusatory situations, verbal threats, and scolding, ranks near the top as far as the sorts of harm we endure throughout our lives. This is why we see our bodies react through body language to emotional threats, as well as to the possibility of being uncovered as cheats and liars.

Police As Lie Detectors

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

In a 2004 study out of the University of Portsmouth by Samantha Mann, Aldert Vrij and Ray Bull it was found that police officers were sixty-five percent accurate in detecting lies when they watched the proceedings of an interrogation. This success rate is significantly higher than that which could arise by chance alone and also shows that familiarity with the subjects can have a role in increasing accuracy. Most research thus far has used college students, but this shows that police who frequently deal with suspects might have an advantage reading them over reading others. By a similarly notion, this advantage would theoretically be non-existent for police officers in a business meeting or with regard to a salesperson on a car lot, unless they had particular experience with such matters. This study does tell us that familiarity with the subject and the context can help us in detecting lies.

Police manuals give the impression that officers who interview suspects often, are good lie detectors, despite of course the vast research that says otherwise. When the researchers qualified their observations however, they found some surprising findings. Officers who named visual cues such as those mentioned in Inbau’s research, mentioned previously, which forms part of the manual on lie detection for police, such as gaze aversion, unnatural changes in posture, self touching, mouth and eye covering were less likely to be accurate in reading others. In fact, these cues proved counterproductive. Specifically, female participants who claimed to use Inbau’s cues most often where poorer at detecting truths, than the males who did not. In particular, gaze aversion was unhelpful and in fact distracting when analyzing for truth. So despite the moderate success of officers at detecting lies, there still remains severe shortcomings because it was not necessarily due to observations of body language or other anything else that could be described, catalogued, and hence put to use. If an inherent skill amounts to a sixty-five percent success, but one can’t describe that skill in a way that makes it useful to other people, then it simply appears like a hunch. Hunches are not reliable, nor do they meet the scientific principle of reproducibility or have predictive (useful) qualities.