Tag Archive for Lie Detection

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.

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?

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.

fMRI In Lie Detection

by  • March 6, 2013 • 1 Comment

Machines That Detect Lies – When All Else Fails Bring In The Machines

fMRI is the abbreviation for functional magnetic resonance imaging which enables researchers to create maps of the brain’s networks as it processes thoughts, sensations, memories, and motor commands. As our brains work, it requires blood to operate and the greater the work done, the more blood is required. What gives lies away is that certain areas of the brain “light” up through increased blood flow when lying take place. The job of the fMRI machine is to read this flow and decipher patterns. Regions of the brain that are used in lying include the anterior (front) cingulated which functions in process goals and intensions, the right orbital interior frontal which processes reward, and the right middle frontal that helps govern tasks that require more than just ordinary thought. It is these three brain centers working in concert that produce and also mask lies.

The fMRI measures blood flow and hence measures which areas of the brain are using up oxygen faster and are working harder. Proponents of fMRI machines in lie detection claim that if you can get hits in all three zones of the brain at the same time you can catch liars. In some studies lying has been detected in upwards of ninety-three percent success rate with the help of fMRI machines. However, the current methodologies of the study present some very big hurdlers before the machines can use the technology in lie detection. For example, small movements in the head or speaking aloud can disrupt the scan and produce unreadable information. The test also requires baseline procedures that compare deceptive thought patterns and honest thought patterns, both of which can be made troublesome by an uncooperative participant. The units are also expensive, bulky and require immersion into the unit which proves to be impractical under most circumstances.

A second more portable device is in creation that uses processes similar to fMRI except that it uses near-infrared light that pass through the forehead and skull but penetrates only the first few centimeters of cortical tissue. This also uses blood flow similar to the fMRI. Once it passes through it is captured by optical sensors and filtered. The unit is formed with a headband studded with LEDs and silicon diode sensors. Researchers were able to detect lying in a card game ninety-five percent of the time using these machines.

While blood flow to certain parts of the brain can be excellent predictors of lying, it does no help for us as human lie detectors since there are no direct body language cues as yet discovered that are tied directly to brain activity.

Nervous Body Language – The ‘Other’ Cues

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

As we know nervousness plays a big part in lie detection so we habitually connect the two sentiments. Therefore, by this nature, we assume that any of the following could be associated with dishonesty. Here is a nearly comprehensive list of all cues that could be tied to lying or else associated with lying from the general public. While they don’t necessarily uncover a liar they will be tied to dishonesty and persons that perform these cues will be mistrusted. They include increased eye blink rate, stuttering, dilated pupils, fidgeting, appearing unfriendly or tense, facial fidgeting, shaking, postural shifts or unrelaxed/reserved postures, twitches, shrugs, head movements, playing with objects, sneering, scowling, frowning, smiling, biting the lower lip, pressing the lips together, wrinkling of the nose, increase in perspiration, blushing or turning pale and increased swallowing.

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.

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.

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.