Social Engineering Blogs

An Aggregator for Blogs About Social Engineering and Related Fields

Complex Deceptive Behaviors

A great deal of popular discussion of how to detect deception rests on specific, isolated factors like eye contract, but the reality is a bit more complex.

This is the case that Humintell’s Drs. David Matsumoto and Hyisung Hwang made in a 2017 study published in the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. In this experimental analysis, they had participants engage in a simulated investigative interview which, after being recorded, was analyzed to see which deceptive nonverbal behaviors were exhibited and, most importantly, in what combinations.

Importantly, while many previous studies have found that certain nonverbal behaviors are reliable indicators of deception, these findings have often been difficult to replicate. These studies have focused on vocal fluctuations, body language, and gestures, all of which do demonstrate underlying emotions.

However, Drs. Matsumoto and Hwang emphasize that, because of the complex emotions involved in deception, analyzing just one behavior at a time seems problematic. This is why, in the current study, they sought to see whether looking at clusters of behaviors may help solve this puzzle.

In order to do this, they recruited a series of participants who were all asked to engage in a mock crime simulation. These participants were given the opportunity to “steal” a $100 check, with some told to do so and some to refrain. Both groups were then assigned to mock interviews where they were either told to lie or confess.

With this premise set up, the exciting analysis work began. Each interview was recorded and then analyzed, frame by frame, with machine-learning informed algorithms which sought to categorize individual frames based on certain emotions, including many basic emotions like anger, disgust, fear, happiness, etc.

This allowed the researchers to calculate exactly which emotions tended to be the most common during the interview.  Then, they hand coded a series of nonverbal behaviors, including head shakes, nods, and shoulder shrugs.  This analysis was then combined with sophisticated assessments of vocal pitch and volume, helping create a comprehensive account of the subtle behaviors involved in the interview process.

When comparing these behaviors to whether or not the interviewee was lying, Drs. Matsumoto and Hwang found that it was clusters of non-verbal behaviors that most reliably predicted deception. Liars tended to have fewer head nods and greater changes in vocal pitch, though with a lower average.

Importantly, the types of questions, be they open-ended or more closed had significant impacts.  Liars tended to have even lower pitches during open-ended questions, for example.

These findings have significant ramifications for anybody attempting to detect deception. While many of us are told to focus on individual behaviors, like eye contact or closed postures, these alone cannot fully explain the situation.

Instead, deception seems based on these clusters of behaviors which can be even more difficult to determine. This is definitely on reason why Humintell offers advanced deception detection classes which can be helpful for anyone, but especially any of you who make it your business of conducting lie detection interviews.

The Nonverbal Power of Posture

Reading nonverbal cues is not just about understanding psychology or threat detection. It can also help us get a job!

In an exciting 2010 study, Drs. Dana Carney, Amy Cuddy, and Andy Yap discuss the concept of “power posing.” Essentially, this involves using certain postures to appear more powerful. This can lead an interviewer or other interlocutor to see you as more worthy of a job, promotion or other benefit, according this insightful blog. However, Humintell’s Dr. David Matsumoto has a few words of caution.

Fundamentally, this notion of power posturing is related to evolutionary cues, where individual animals and humans seek to demonstrate their power in order to gain a greater share of available resources. Our posture greatly determines both our levels of testosterone but also our stress, both of which help convey, in very subtle ways, an impression of power.

So what is this power posture? According to Dr. Carney’s team, it involves expansive and open postures, such as spreading one’s limbs and otherwise appearing to be larger than one is. This is contrasted sharply with a slumped posture, where the body is constrained in a form of self-defense.

The details of these postures may be intuitively familiar, as many readers will probably notice. When we stand straight with arms wide, or if we lean forward, we feel and evince a sense of power. On the other hand, if we fold arms in the lap to hug our own torsos, there is a sense of meekness and submission.

Dr. Matsumoto cautions us that this does not necessarily work if we are feeling conflicted emotions: “Engaging in such postures or gestures or facial expressions would not necessarily trigger the experience in individuals who already are experiencing an emotion, especially a strong one.”

However, this does not mean that posture cannot amplify or affect our postures. As the aforementioned study explains, our posture can result in different chemical configurations being manifest in our brain. But can this actually help us seem competent and get a job? The answer, according to Dr. Matsumoto, is a little mixed.

On the one hand, there is certainly a lot conveyed through a sense of powerful posture. Not only can it make other people, such as an interviewer for a job, conclude that we are self-confidant, but it can even make us feel more self-assured and competent. This is not to be downplayed.

That said, it does not actually make us competent. Dr. Matsumoto cautions the aspiring power posturer against overreliance on these tactics:

“My advice would be to first gain actual competence in your field. The last thing anyone should want is to look confident and not really be competent. Once one has a certain degree for a lot of competence, adopting certain body postures may help to feel even more confident and powerful … but they’ve got to believe it and be able to back it up with real competence.”

Still, it is good to be aware of the power of postures. As we have noted in previous blogs, certain postures, such as that of triumph, are universal and deeply rooted in our evolutionary roots. When we are trying to read other people, moreover, it is very helpful to be able to read their posture: do they seem anxious? Confident? Powerful?

Group Emotions of Violence

Last week we discussed the role of contempt, disgust, and anger in violence, but what is the role of group identity and differentiation?

In fact, recent scientific research has focused increasingly on the role of group-level emotions, as opposed to just those of each individual. This can have significant effects in shaping when group members or entire groups engage in violence.

The apprehension of an out-group, for instance, is a major factor in predicting violence. Group members naturally distinguish between in and out-groups, but the precise nature of how they ought to feel for the out group is more challenging. This confusion is fed into by their attempts to reconcile past experiences with that group and often ambiguous expectations within their own group for how the out group should be seen.

One major theory is known as the Infrahumanization Theory. This argues that distinctions between groups lead to a tendency to see one’s in group as more human and one’s out-group as somehow alien. This can generate contempt and disgust for the out-group while still fostering compassion and trust for the in group.

Often, this involves the feeling that other groups are animals, entailing a sense that they are lesser and bestial. Genocidal contexts often see the prevalent use of vermin or pest-themed language as justification, for instance.

So, how do group-level emotions arise? Some argue that the violent predictors of anger, disgust, and contempt stem from group-level feelings that demonized groups have violated group values, such as community or divinity.

Often these emotions can be fostered effectively by stories and narratives that distinguish the groups.  These have the pragmatic advantage of being easy to understand and to share, giving group leaders the ability to marshal emotions against an out-group.

Such narratives often focus on the out-group as a sort of oppressor, outside threat, or subversive. In each case, the in-group is portrayed as threatened by domination, conquest, or degradation. Naturally, these narratives may rely on a sense of binary opposition, where the in-group is naturally everything that their enemy is not. If the enemy is evil or insane, the in-group is good and stable.

While this discussion of group-level emotions may seem less than relevant for the context of predicting violence, especially in a domestic violence situation, the context surrounding a potentially violent situation is often important.

For instance, a law enforcement agent in interrogation with a suspected terrorist has to grapple with the terrorist’s potential disgust and contempt, as well as the narratives that are shaping this hostility.

The recognition of group differentials and emotional context can aid us greatly not only in detecting threat but also in reconciling seemingly intractable cultural differences in contentious situations.