Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Circular Seating Positions
At a circular table each person shares power making collaboration easier.
When no leader is
When a known leader is seated at a circular table, power trickles down as the relative distance
increases. In this case #1 has the most power followed by #2, #3, #4 and finally the person who sits
opposite. The person opposite finds himself in a unique situation of having to face the leader head-on!
present, round tables can be used to create informal settings unlike rectangular tables that are used to
conduct work or to reprimand employees. In offices, round tables are usually a place to relax and
converse or to drink coffee. Smart offices will use these areas to build alliances with potential clients,
especially timid ones, break down barriers, and create rapport. Round tables can reduce pressure and
build trust. Round tables also offers neat divisions or ‘pie shapes’ where each person receives the same
amount of space or “territory” that collect into a common center. Square tables on the other hand, have
territories that lack clear boundaries which can present their own power struggle.
King Arthur attempted to equalize authority and status amongst his knights with the “round table.” He
felt that without creating a head of table, his peers would see themselves as more equal preventing
quarrels. Previous to the round table, a medieval king usually sat at one end of the table, with the court
jester facing him at the other end. The knights were seated at the two sides with the most important
among them seated closer to the king. What King Arthur failed to realize with his round table, however,
was the trickle down effect where those sitting to his immediate left and right held the next level of
power due to their proximity to him. As one was more removed from the King, their level of status
diminished likewise until finally reaching the furthest party. Unfortunate for this person, he faced the
King directly putting him in a competitive arrangement! Ironically, and counter to his initial
assumption, the round table can still present difficulties in creating positive outcomes especially where
a definitive leader is present.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Positions In Circular Tables
At a circular table each person shares power making collaboration easier.
The same types of relationships arise with round tables as they did with rectangular tables. When
people wish to cooperate, they sit side-by-side, when they wish to be independent they keep one space
open between each party, and when they wish to compete, they site at opposite sides. When it is
desirable to maintain flow between three people equally, it is best to use a triangular sitting position at a
round table which encourages discussion amongst all members equally. This allows eye contact
between all members and discourages creation of rank and power.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Other Complex Seating Arrangements
See text for explanation.
It is possible to create a highly influential seating arrangement when we wish to influence a particularly
important, but as yet undecided individual. The first person or the main presenter (Pr) should sit head-
on with the “object” in the face-to-face competitive position (Ob). This competitive position aligns the
“object” with the person he most expects to object with. Next, we add an affiliate (Af) to the objects
left or right, that is, at the casual corner position to act as a friend, or to their side in the cooperative
position (Co). The subconscious effect can be powerful if the positions are matched with the outlooks
they should hold. That is, the cooperative position should play the advocate against the competitive
position in cooperation with the object, except (of course) showing a bias towards agreement with the
competitive position.
The affiliate can also “bait” the competitive position and control the conversation by giving up relevant
points without sounding pushy. This person can demonstrate ‘the other side of the coin’ and work
through the dialogue saving the object from having to voice negative positions himself. This saves him
from going through counterproductive mental reasoning that can prove a damaging exercise. Powerful
negotiators can use the affiliate to blow the argument out of proportion thereby forcing the object to
side with the competitor and bridge the original argument. Obviously this isn’t a simple strategy and
requires some advanced preparation, but when it is an important matter it is justified, not to mention
fun!
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
How To Set Up Your Office
The desk is the most important piece of furniture and it’s found in all offices. The area behind the desk
always forms the private area where only the desk owner is permitted. This is his sanctuary which he
protects. Those with desks facing in toward an open space with their backs to a wall have the most
amount of status. Having your back against the wall protects you from a theoretical sneak attack or
from having others watch you as you work. Low ranking workers will usually work in areas that afford
them little privacy and hence be found in wide open areas [click images to enlarge - not all data is
visible].
The area behind the desk is considered private. Facing the door with the back to the wall is the most
powerful position as it permits seeing people enter.
Low ranking employees are forced to face the wall so the boss can watch them work without being
noticed himself.
A low rank desk arrangement because it leaves the employees back exposed to whomever is entering
through the door.
An extremely low status desk arrangement because it would be impossible to guard against someone
entering through the door.
This arrangement is meant to maximize the amount of private space claimed by the owner. Any area
from the edge of the door across the front of the desk to the bookcase and behind are claimed as
reserved for the owner’s needs.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Some Ways To Set Up An Office
Low ranking employees are forced to face the wall so the boss can watch them work without being
noticed himself.
Another method to protect and reserve space is to pull a desk away from a wall as it cuts other people
off from using that space. Outward facing desks leave plenty of space in a room where someone might
sneak up from behind or from the side. Higher status workers will turn their desks so they facing
doorways or entryways to avoid surprise intrusions. This simplest ways to perform a status check is to
verify the way in which people face. If they face a wall there is a good chance they are lower status, but
if they face the door and can easily see people enter their office, then they are likely higher status. The
orientation of the window and door also has an effect on how things are set up and depending on the
uneasiness of a particular person will depend on which orientation they prefer. Usually there is a
balance between looking out the window to enjoy the view it provides and monitoring the door. The
highest ranking workers will have private offices with controlled entry, or in other words a secretary.
A busy office provides multiple meeting and collaborative areas.
It is important to put some thought into how desks are used since they can dictate how a meeting might
unfold. A desk between two forward facing people forms a barrier which then leads into a formal
meeting even when it’s not intended. If the goal is to create less confrontation and foster team building,
than meetings should take place without a desk, or with circular or even square tables. Space
permitting, circular tables should be included in the office environment to permit informal meetings if
desired. Having room for more than one meeting area sends a powerful nonverbal message to those
visiting since it shows that your occupation warrants it, even if they are only rarely used.
Placing chairs kitty-corner at a rectangular desk or positioning two chairs at forty-five degrees to the
table on the same side can be effective if the goal is to hold cooperative meetings. Every office should
be set-up in a manner that suits its main purpose, however, contingencies should be made for rare
occasions when alternative strategies need to be implemented. If the idea is to quickly build friendships
rather than demonstrate authority, it would be wise to have a more informal setting, perhaps even a
comfortable sofa and coffee table with casual furnishings. It is no accident when a high powered lawyer
organizes rows upon rows of legal books to his back. His message is clear; I have the knowledge to
back me. What non verbal message does your office convey?
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Office Artifacts – The Other Nonverbal
Messages
We often take for granted our office layout which is understandable, but another nonverbal channel also
exists, and that is the artifacts it contains. While we might not personally pay particular attention to
these objects, visitors will use the information to make decisions about your personality and traits.
Diplomas, certificates and awards on walls all provide clues to the office owner. Excessive accolades
spells out to others an outward looking individual seeking to dominant and dazzle others by their
achievements (usually attributed to them by the opinions of others). Pay particular attention to awards
that might be less than prestigious as this might mean they are poorly accomplished, but trying to play
it up. Usually someone that is more subtle will only hold their highest award rather than all awards
leading up to it. For example, I know of one particular aesthetician who has ten neatly framed awards
on her salon walls for miniscule achievements during her one year study. In this sense, small accolades
detract from a persons perceived status and shows insecurity instead.
Tidiness is another factor. A cluttered office shows busyness and importance, but only up to a certain
limit. When hygiene becomes a factor, it’s time to clean up! An overly tidy office can show obsessive
tendencies negating any positive feelings. Thus, a mixture of clutter and tidiness is likely best as it
conveys busyness and importance but avoids the negative feelings of an overly sanitized office. Also
consider richness of furnishings such as desks and chairs, the view (or having windows at all), the size
and location, the type and level of lighting, degree of privacy, having plants and so forth. What research
that does exist on lighting shows that brightness has a more positive affect on friendliness than does
more subdued lighting. Also consider the ability or lack of ability to personalize a particular space.
Lower ranking workers are often not permitted this luxury.
Personal items, like family or pet photographs shows a strong family orientation whereas artwork can
provide clues to interests. For example, fishing or nature photographs for people interested in the
outdoors and adventure, city backdrops to someone with a metropolitan interest, or beaches for those
interested in leisure. Paying particular attention to these variations can provide clues to someone’s
interests, and when building rapport quickly is required, it can spell the difference between success and
failure.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
The Power Of Chairs
When my brother comes over to visit he likes to play chair games with me since he’s aware, through
my research, of the power plays afforded by such a seemingly innocuous objects. He often chooses the
head of the table or the most desirable position on the sofa, and if possible, will secure the tallest chair.
He’s already a bit taller than me and he knows that while seated he looses his advantage making it even
more important to claim the higher chair lest he lose his height advantage. My computer chair allows
one to raise and lower it, so as fast as it can be adjusted it’s at its peek, allowing him to look down on
me. These games are all in good fun of course, as we both understand the implications. However, while
we play these games in fun, others might not, they may use them to intimidate or gain power over you
and if you are interested, you over them.
To level the playing field it is important to limit the presence of chairs that can be raised or lowered just
in case you don’t arrive early enough to gain access to them. Chairs that swivel also hold more power
because they can face in infinite directions. The most punishing chairs, which are used by interrogators
are those that are fixed to the floor, usually placed in the center of a room away from any shelter. When
the idea is to gain quick authority, job interviewers can also employ this tactic. Because you can’t
swivel, you must adjust your entire body position to orient yourself toward anything of interest. Should
someone enter the room, you’ll either be forced to keep your back to them or will have to lean to one
side to look. Regardless, you are at a disadvantage. Chairs that also give more power are those with
higher backs. Kings and queens sit in tall chairs because they understood the powers it gave them. The
peasants were lucky to get a chair at all, and a stool is was plenty for the layman. Think about what
types of chairs are present at fast food places and their effect on us. Usually they will be rock hard and
prevent us getting comfortable by leaning back with their metal backs designed specifically to reduce
our stay. What effect would this type of seating have on a competitor in business or an in-law we
wished to enjoy only a brief visit?
To disarm or punish people, use soft seating such as a sofa that when pressure is added practically
envelopes your opponent. This reduces their ability to use gestures in communication and to move
about the room because getting up from a sunken position is more difficult than an upright on. Also
make sure this chair is lower than normal helping you establish dominance, and if it has arms, even
better, as this too will limit their movement.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
How To Be Forgotten – The “Center-Stage
Effect”
In a study conducted by the University of California Berkeley in 2006 that examined seating position, it
was found that when seated in the middle of lecture halls, those in the middle tended to be overlooked.
This would seem counterintuitive, but was replicated several times and in several different ways.
This “center-stage” effect was shown through observation of the game show “The Weakest Link” since
they tended to be ignored more often than outlier players. If you aren’t familiar with the game, it
involved a series of questions across several competitors but with only one winner. Each contestant is
to answer a question in sequence associated with an ever increasing sum of money until the money is
“banked” or kept, at which point the value amount is reset, but the round continues. At the end of each
round the contestants vote on whom they’d like to eliminate. In the observations by the researchers,
they found that despite the contestants being randomly assigned more winners came from the center of
the stage rather than outliers. The center was often ignored as a pool from which people were “voted
off.” This seems counterintuitive to most, as our common sense would tell us that the outliers should be
less subject to attention.
When the experiment brought the game to the lab, the researchers found that observers often
overlooked errors that players in the center of the stage made to a greater extent than errors in extreme
positions. This gave center position holders more favourable assessments. It therefore follows that if
you are not particularly adept at a task you might want to take center stage so as to reap the inherent
leadership traits and avoid taking on negative stigma especially if being called upon is strong, and there
is a good likelihood of providing the wrong answer. If you want to stand out and be remembered for it,
take an outlier position where you will be called upon and stand a better chance of being remembered
for it.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Who In The Audience Is The Most Keen?
Research by Robert Sommer in the late 1960’s showed how attention and participation was neatly tied
to seating positions. This was especially true for very large audiences where it’s possible to have an
uneven distribution of connectivity with the speaker. His research examined classroom ecology and
revealed that students sitting in the front rows participated much more than those in the back rows and
those in the middle, the most.
Front and center had the highest rate of participation whereas the rear left and rear right the least. One
can picture a reverse arrangement with the largest percentage of participators at the “mouth” of the
funnel nearest the speaker and the “end” of the funnel at the back with the fewest participators. As one
travels back in the seats, those at the sides progressively get left out. Those at the back edges can more
easily ‘escape’ and find refuge from the speaker.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Deciphering Cause And Effect From Seating
Position
So which is it cause or effect? What happens when you assign seating versus allow people to choose
their seating? A study by Douglas Levine of the University of California in 1980 sought out to measure
this exact question. The study examined two phases, one where students were allowed to choose their
own seating and the second where seating was randomly assigned. They found that students sitting at
the front did much better than those sitting at the rear but only if the seats were chosen by the students.
When the seating was assigned there was no discernible different in test scores. They did find that
student involvement was affected by seating however, as in both cases participation was greater for
those sitting in the front seats. Thus, it becomes evident that students who want to learn more choose
seats in the front rows because it allows them a better view of the teacher and also allows them to
participate more. Those that want to blend in and avoid participation sit at the rear and sides. Other
studies show that keener students often choose seats in the front and also those that relate better to the
instructor will orient themselves in relation to them.
In another study conducted in 2004 arranged seating was found to affect test scores contrary to the
study presented above. Here economics professors Mary Benedict and John Hoag at Bowling Green
State University found that students who were forced forward produced a net gain in test scores. For
example, a student who preferred a back seat but was forced to a center row, reduced the probability of
receiving a D or F from twenty-three to twelve percent for an overall gain of eleven percent. The study
also suggests a lower probability of receiving an A and a higher probability for receiving a D or F for
those students forced from the middle aisle seats to the side aisle seats.
Therefore, when presenting information organized seating can have a subtle effect, but can be
somewhat limited in scope. If you wish to wow someone in particular, position them in the front as
you’ll be better able to connect with them. Those parties you wish to mute can be placed at the back-
sides to reduce their ability to speak out. The data from research seems to suggest that audiences
naturally arrange themselves according to how interested they are to learn especially in theater style
auditoriums. Thus, this information can be used passively to choose the most qualified or interested
parties for important projects.
Other strategies come from the walk and talk method taken from lab style learning. Here, the instructor
is permitted to travel through rows and isle and connect with more than just the front row of listeners
eliminating the side effects of rows and columns. Orienting seating into a horseshoe also eliminates the
effects that rows and columns hold and so too does smaller group sizes. It’s much more difficult to be
forgotten in a small group and functionally impossible when speaking one on one!
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Summary – Chapter 15
Seating arrangements is one of the things we infrequently draw to conscious attention but at some level
always understand its importance. In this chapter we looked at what seems on the outset to be a
complicated matter, but in reality is fairly straight forward and like all body language, once it is know,
common sense. We found that seating positions can indicate our reason for meeting, be it ‘affiliation’ –
to build group cohesion, ‘achievement’ – to get things done, or ‘power’ – to emphasis control. We
found that the meeting organizer typically dictates how meetings will transpire.
We learned that Sommer first began researching seating ecology and that patterns emerged based on the
shape of the table and the proximity speakers had to one-another. We found that a casual corner
position where speakers meet across the corners of a rectangular or square table preserve closeness
between people, but still offers the security of a partial barrier. We found that when seated side-by-side
cooperation is fostered, when facing across from one-another but not head-on, independent though is
fostered, and when facing directly, competition. We found that leadership studies show us what we
intuitively already know, that leaders take up the head position, that those at his or her flank receive
trickle down leadership and that when seating is pre-determined, leadership is assigned to the head of
the table. We found that square tables includes both competitive and cooperative seating positions, that
circular tables had similar affects despite what King Arthur thought, and that strategically we can sway
our “object” by taking up competitive and affiliative positions.
Next we looking at how to set up an office and found that desk placement and office artifacts are
crucial and that chairs can make people uncomfortable or powerful depending on their height and
location. We then looked at seating arrangements in larger auditoriums and saw that the center of
lecture halls tended to be overlooked, and also how to use this to our advantage, and finally we
concluded the chapter by pointing out that seating location affects participation; those in front
participating most, but that it did not related to test scores.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Introduction – Chapter 16
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?
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Why We Lie
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
The Nine Reasons We Lie (outlined by Paul
Ekman)
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Deception Causes Arousal, Generally
by Chris Site Author • 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.
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Duping Delight, Eye Contact And Smiling
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Lying Is Hard Work?
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Nervousness And Guilt In Lying
“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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Liars Freeze Up But Master Poker Players
Become Dynamic?
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Remaining Uncommitted
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.
Chapter 15 – Seating Arrangements
Touch Reduction
by Chris Site Author • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
The Truth Bias
A review of the literature on lying and truth telling shows us that an average sixty-seven percent
accuracy is found when detecting the truth, whereas forty-four percent is found while detecting
deception. In other words, people’s accuracy at detecting truths is usually higher than their accuracy at
detecting lies! This is what is called the truth bias. Some possible explanations for the truth bias stem
from the fact that in everyday encounters we usually deal with honest people. While lying is pervasive,
it doesn’t happen nearly as often as does lying. Thus, we expect people to be telling the truth and are
therefore better at detecting it.
Another possible reason for our inherent truth bias is because it would be detrimental to act
suspiciously while speaking with others just in case they were telling the truth. If our default was to
label other people as deceptive, we’d be constantly interrupting others to clarify statements, or our
suspicion would have our minds busy fact checking at a later time. Our conversations would be littered
with statements such as ‘That can’t be true’ or ‘Really, I can’t see that’ or ‘I’ll believe that when I see it’
which sometimes it is, but usually not. This would be time consuming and counterproductive given the
nature of real to life situations, that is that people normally tell the truth. Our social rules also do not
permit us to act suspiciously and if we did so would alienate others and prevent us from formulating
alliances or friendships. In fact, ignoring the faults of others is the primary reason we allow ourselves
to associate with anyone at all. Those with a memory for detail find it hard to ‘let things go’ or ‘ignore
subtle unimportant flaws’ which can be detrimental for relationships. The truth bias tells us that letting
little ‘white lies’ go, is an integral part of human nature, perhaps even necessary.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Are Truth Tellers Less Cooperative?
The most influential manual regarding suspect interviewing was written by Fred Inbau, Reid and
Buckley in 2001 “Criminal interrogation and confession” and is the handbook used by police officers
in training. The “Reid nine steps” claims that after being accused of having committed a crime, those
under investigation who are innocent will tend to be more cooperative than deceptive when compared
to guilty suspects. The theory says that honest suspects will cooperate and work harder to show their
innocence, whereas the guilty will appear less cooperative, and so appear less convincing.
Inbau provides a few examples. He says that suspects who are guilty will want to exit the interview as
quickly as possible. They will say things like “Well, I figured you wouldn’t believe me. It’s been nice
talking to you but I have an attorney to see.” On the other hand, suspects who are innocent will not
want to exit the interview room after being falsely accused so they will insist on remaining as long as
possible to present the truth to the investigator. In fact, the manual states that innocent suspects, will
remain until they have had the opportunity to present enough information to eliminate themselves as a
suspect.
The argument of cooperation does seem plausible and some studies do support the argument, however
others do not. One such study by Aldert Vrij of the University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom in
2005 showed that there was no relationship between cooperation and guilt. He found that suspects who
were shy tended to cooperate less despite their guilt or innocence. Therefore by Inbau’s logic would be
falsely labeled as guilty. At issue here are many factors and ones that need to be considered before
anyone can be labeled as a liar or otherwise. Deceivers are just as likely to be concerned with the
impressions they make as non-deceivers so this is non-issue. However, the context does come across as
a big factor.
For example, a criminal at a boarder crossing who is moving drugs with a suitcase would obviously be
unwilling to cooperate by opening his bag so as to delay being caught, but so too might someone
holding particularly private or personal items. Lest we not forget about a human rights activist who’s
occupation involves protecting the freedoms of people. The activists will be just as unlikely to
cooperate with law enforcement since his goals are best served by drawing attention to the injustices
around him. What better way to make a point about global big brother than to become a victim
yourself. Liars on the other hand might try harder to appear more honest by cooperating, or show that
they have nothing to fear, and even appeal to discrimination and unjustness of the process. In the case
of the honest suspect, they aren’t concerned about the impression they make on others, so can also
appear less cooperative, even combative. Thus, cooperation, in and of itself, does not lead necessarily
indicate deception, but on the surface, has some merit.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
The Facial Action Coding System Or FACT
Another Way To Detect Lies
Scientists have uncovered tics and flutters that can tell us when people aren’t telling us the truth. FACT
or the Facial Action Coding System is a system that deals with forty-six facial movements classified
into more than 10,000 microexpressions. The manual details how the face behaves based on the
muscles that control it. The guide is a combination of still images, digital video and written descriptions
and is of interest not only to lie detectors, but also to animators, computer scientists who create facial
recognition software and other personnel who need to know how the face moves and why such as
psychotherapists and interviewers.
According to its proponents FACT can detect deception with a seventy-six percent accuracy. According
to researcher Paul Ekman, thousands of people have been trained to read these signals from
transportation security to administrative personnel. In fact, FACS has been recently implemented in
U.S. airports as terrorist-screening. In other words, you may want to look up FACS and avoid the
expressions least you get pulled aside for an uncomfortable cavity search! FACS however, is by no
means beginners reading material, however, the idea is to be able to codify the information into
software that can then be interpreted by a human operator.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Microexpressions
Microexpressions, such as this furrowed forehead (a negative thought indicator) are called “leaked”
because they happen quickly and last only fractions of a second before disappearing. Because they are
difficult to control, they tend to be reliable indicators of truly felt emotions.
Microexpressions are facial movements or expressions that flash across the face at such a fast rate that
they are barely perceivable. Slow motion replays of high speed videography easily shows what is
difficult to see in real time. The persistence of these cues range from 1/25 to 1/5 of a second. It is the
study of microexpressions that assumes that certain aspects of facial expressions reveal this duplicity to
betray the liar. The research was originally pioneer by Guillaume Duchenne in the 1800s as we saw in
an earlier chapter who discerned the difference between real and fake smiles from the use of the
zygomatic major muscles which pull the corners of the mouth upward and the orbicularis oculi, the
muscle around the eye that pulls the cheek up while lowering the brow. This was the true smile and in
the same way, other unconscious microgestures reveal negative emotions. Presumably it is more
difficult to prevent a felt emotion in addition to creating a false emotion than to simply neutralize the
face. The term “masked” refers to any facial emotion that is either replaced by a different falsified
expression, or is neutralized with no emotion present. This is when microexpressions should be most
evident.
Microexpressions, on the other hand, are tied to leakage in so much as they are an attempt to hide our
true feelings. When we tell a lie, and if we hold any remorse for that lie, repressed or otherwise, our
faces should reveal these cues through facial expressions. When a deceiver tries to repress an emotion
caused by lying, the result is a micro display that briefly comes across the face instead. Other times
these cues happen at a much slower rate and are perceivable by the naked eye. Those that can
intuitively detect lies often score high on the ability to recognize microexpressions.
Lies can be betrayed by signs of emotions as they relate to microexpressions or in other words, it is
difficult for a liar to create emotions that don’t exist. For example, it is difficult to consciously narrow
the red margins of the lips so this can be an indicator of feigned anger. Rarely do we detect these fake
emotions though, which is partly due to the fact that we simply don’t care to know the truth as it serves
no useful purpose to us; there is no reward or incentive.
A study conducted in 2008 by Stephen Porter and Leanne Brinke of Dalhouse University who
examined microexpressions through the examination of high speed video cameras found some, but
incomplete support, for their use in detecting feigned emotions. In fact the emotions they did uncover
occurred over a much longer time which could suggest that they might be easier to detect than
previously though. They also found that it was far easier to neutralize the face (show no expression)
than to create an artificial emotion. In the neutral face, they found a lower blink rate, possibly due to
the effects of claming up, but where a masked face appeared, they found increased blinking likely due
to the stress associated with faking a face. Other studies suggest that liars increase blink rate, as we
recall. They also found that all participants showed at least one inconsistent emotion during deception
showing that leakage might be ubiquitous, but the overall success rate was still only sixty percent.
Confusing the findings further, they found that microexpressions were found throughout positive
emotions.
To date very little study has gone into microexpressions which is surprising given the widespread
attention is had been given. It is currently being utilized as a massive foundation for the U.S.
transportation agency to help identify suspicious passengers. While the science is incomplete with
regards to microexpressions, it is important to realize their existence, real or not, because the next time
we wait to board a plane, the eye in the sky and the personnel on the floor are eagerly watching for our
nervous ticks for the opportunity to pull us aside for more questioning. The rational of course is that
while nervous ticks might not accurately betray a liar all the time, it does form a basis to increase the
level of investigation even if there are occasional misses. The (not too?) distant future might hold
recognition software that reads all levels of being, from gait to blood pressure, voice inconsistencies
and perhaps microexpressions. Most experts agree that this technology, due to its complex nature,
won’t be in production for some time though.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Examples of Microexpression
Keep in mind that microexpressions are useful when they appear out of congruency with other gestures
or language. It is when the facial expression is out of tune with what is being said. For example, telling
a positive story while smiling and momentarily flashing a microexpression can mean that the person is
lying. Here are some microexpressions with respect to emotions. [note that images show true
expressions which might be held for a time, whereas a microexpression will not persist, only flash
quickly before disappearing]
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Anger: Lowering the brow, flaring of the eyes and tightening of the mouth.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Fear: Raising the upper eyelids and showing the whites of the eyes, raising the
inner brow and folding the eyebrows inward (activation of the grief muscle), lowering the brow and or
tightening of the eyelid. A grimace usually comes across the face.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Surprise: Straight upward lift of the brows.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Disgust: Baring of the teeth, lower of the eyebrows, tightening the eyelid, and
wrinkling the nose.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Scorn: A combination of anger and disgust that happens by wrinkling of the
nose, raising and tightening of the upper lip. To visualize this expression think of a bad smell.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Reverse smile: While smiling the corners of the mouth curl downwards
momentarily displaying a caught/suppressed frown.
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
False smile: Where the eyes play no part (no wrinkles in the corners of the eyes
as in the Duchenne smile and the mouth is stretched across the face).
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Doubt or disbelief: While answering a question in the affirmative saying “yes” the head is seen shaking
from side-to-side in a ‘no-gesture.’
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
How Mentally Taxing Is Lie Telling?
It’s intuitive for most to
think that the creation of lies is more difficult than telling the truth. For example, some think that the
truth comes ready-made, we simply remove it from a box and present it, whereas lies have to be pieced
together and manufactured so appear more difficult to construct. However, only sometimes this is true,
other times recalling what really happened proves to be just as difficult. Sometimes the truth requires
interpretation and other times the truth is hard to describe such as our opinion and feelings or in other
cases is difficult to visualize such as when an event happens quickly. Our minds have built in selective
memories making it hard to recall information that has happened in our past, particularly with respect
to traumatic or discomforting events. Lies though always involved a deliberate and conscious aim to
deliver information that is contrary to the truth, but as we know the truth is only sometimes easy to
interpret. Lies can be constructed willy-nilly and can flow just as fast as the mind can imagine things,
which, as we know, can happen instantly. This is what makes it only sometimes true that making up lies
is more challenging than telling the truth.
Depending on how one puts information together, will depend on how others will interpret it as well.
We can’t conceivable relay all events, as necessarily our information is censored for brevity. For
example, one might describe a particularly uneventful day by saying that it was “fine” and then listing
all the main events. However, what constitutes a main event anyway? Someone else might find
something important in your day that you failed to mention, however, this doesn’t mean that the person
is lying per se. Our minds are complex and quick, when we come up with simple lies, we can create
them as fast as we can spite them out. Only when lies get very complicated do we see effects such as
stuttering, pauses, speech errors or corrections. Keep in mind that only sometimes are truths
prepackaged, but lies are always prepackaged. The length of time to construct them is just one factor.
Quick and dirty lies might be shorter and contain only the main details, but so too might the truth.
Thus, prompting for more information can sometimes lead to the method of the lie. It’s much easier to
catch broad lies too and ones that fall outside the expertise of the teller precisely because they won’t be
able to add relevant information from their experiences. Due to the skills we all naturally posses, we
should only expect the telling of lies to be slightly more challenging to tell than the truth.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Police As Lie Detectors
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
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.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
The Most Common Gestures Associated With
Liars
As we have seen liars are difficult to detect and sometimes body language is more of a distraction than
a help, however, as mentioned throughout, most people still rely on visual cues and identify (at least in
their mind) liars through their body language. While these cues are only sometimes useful in detecting
lies, they are always valuable as cues to avoid if the desire is to appear honest and trustworthy in the
eyes of others. In other words, here is a list of cues to avoid emitting yourself!
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Increased Face-Touching
Unnecessary face touching shows emotional discomfort. When in the right context, it can signal a lie.
Self touching is one thing we habitually associate with liars. They touch their chin, neck, nose, ears or
will pull their collar away from their neck. These traits are of course related to nervousness and the
mistake we sometimes make is directly associating nervousness with lying. As we have seen, not all
liars are nervous. Let’s break this category down a little more.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Ear Pull
Tugging at the ears helps distract the mind from emotional stress.
The ear rub or pull is as gesture done as a response to greater blood flow to the ears and as a result of
an increase in body temperature. Lying ear language can come in the form of a pull downward on the
lobe, or as a scratch, or swipe behind the ear. When we get hot, we flush, and the neck and ears are
particularly sensitive to flushing. Flushing is the body’s response to an overactive metabolism as it
prepares to either fight, or take flight. When this cue is as a result of hearing a lie from someone else, or
hearing something that is distasteful, it is done in an attempt to inhibit what a person is hearing by
blocking the hears. Only it is not a complete blocking, but rather an abbreviated blocking so instead of
covering them completely, the hand merely grazes the ears or pulls on them. Other times liars respond
to the stress associated with lying themselves, so the ears are being touched to “block” the hears from
hearing their own fib. When someone manages their body in this way, it tells us that they are having an
inner battle with their self-image. In other words, this gesture is likely to appear only in those people
that are traditionally honest. Pathological liars don’t hold a positive self image, at least not about their
honesty and integrity, so feel no remorse from telling a lie and therefore go free of the stress response
lying can sometimes produce.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Neck Scratch And Collar Pull
Does this gesture means something or is her neck itchy?
When someone utters words such as “I completely agree with you, that sentiment is bang-on” but then
punctuates the sentence with a neck scratch, it might mean that they in fact believe the opposite.
Scratching the neck when no itch is present is a way to displace some of the nervous energy created by
the lie and so distracts them from the pain of their dishonesty. Usually, the neck is scratched about five
times, usually exactly. It seldom happens more than this, and rarely less. The collar pull is another form
of self touching that is related to the neck. In this case, the idea is to reduce friction causes by an
increase in blood flow to the neck. When stress increases, our face and necks flush with blood and we
pull our collar away as an unconscious indication of this process. As blood flow increases to our neck,
it stimulates nerves which in turn cause irritation and discomfort. Other times, the collar pull is a way
to release heat created by our bodies while under pressure and discomfort from a neck that has become
moist due to sweating.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Hand To Eye Gestures
Hand-to-eye sometimes gives liars away as they wish to “see no evil” – in this case, the evil of their
own lies.
Reaching for the eyes, rubbing the eyes or touching the skin below the eyes are all abbreviated forms of
eye covering. It is a response to the embarrassment caused by the lie and is, in effect, an attempt to “see
no evil.” As a response to seeing traumatic events we instinctively cover our eyes so as to shelter
ourselves from negative sights. This is a childhood throwback when kids would hide from view scary
images. However, in order not to give ourselves away, and to keep our victims in sight, adults stop
short of covering their eyes completely, and instead only scratch just below the eyes. Men might
vigorously rub their eyes however, whereas women will lightly rub around the eye so as not to smear
their make-up.
Chapter 16 - Deception and Lie Detection
Hand To Mouth Gestures
When a child lies, she might bring her hand up quickly and slap her mouth closed, but when an adult
lies, she holds back and might only lightly touch the side of the mouth.
Mouth covering is another way to reduce the pain of telling a lie. In this case, it is so as to “speak no
evil.” Small children perform a full cover and even slap their mouths when they say something they
shouldn’t. Grown adults will sometimes cup their hands to their mouths like children in effort to “jam
the words back in their mouths” but usually use more subtle gestures such as talking through their hand
or placing a finger softly over their lips. Talking with ones hand covering the mouth “talking through
the hand” or resting the hand around the mouth by wrapping the fingers around the top, are significant
clues indicating insecurity.
Subconsciously, hand-to-mouth gestures leads people to distrust others, and see them as less honest
overall. The gesture can be done with a fist, a finger, or a ‘shushing’ motion with the index finger
vertically placed over the lips. Other times the subconscious mind is so powerful that the hand comes
up and slaps the mouth, but to cover this ‘tell’ up, a fake cough is added.
‘Talking through the mouth’ is seen as dishonest.
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
The Ultimate Body Language Book
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search
The Ultimate Body Language Book
- 1 - 50
- 51 - 100
- 101 - 150
- 151 - 200
- 201 - 250
- 251 - 300
- 301 - 350
- 351 - 400
- 401 - 450
- 451 - 500
- 501 - 550
- 551 - 600
- 601 - 638
Pages: