Spotting a liar is complicated, as author Kevin Goodman outlines in his latest Huffington Post Blog “5 Guidelines to Catch a Liar”.

In his post, Goodman asserts that traditional signs of lying such as averting the eyes, fidgeting and playing with one’s hair are not necessarily proof of deception.  Why, you ask?

In their effort to be convincing, liars, actually tend to make good eye contact. Carol Goman substantiates this claim asserting that liars tend to overcompensate their eye contact in that they stare for too long.

As for fidgeting, that could easily be a sign of an innocent but overly anxious person. Dr. Paul Ekman stated in a 1999 NY Times article that “an innocent suspect fearful about being believed, for example, may leak evidence of anxiety or apprehension. The lie catcher must evaluate the meaning of the signals in each individual case”

So if lie detection experts aren’t always relying on these false indicators of deception, what other tactics are they using?

SUE

Goodman discusses a new interview approach favored by many police psychologists and deception researchers called SUE (strategic use of evidence). The approach involves the interrogator allowing the suspect to comfortably tell their account of what happened and then at a later point, the interrogator introduces evidence. The purpose of this method is to disclose inconsistencies. Lying involves mental effort; with this in mind, this approach forces the suspected liar to account for what happened against the evidence and thus, increases the potential for the liar’s contradiction. Keep in mind, this approach is only beneficial with actual evidence.

Non-Confrontational Approach

Lying requires constant mental effort as the liar is battling their story against the truth; therefore the propensity of vagueness and the risk of contradiction ensues. Goodman suggests that the interviewer can gain the upper hand in this situation by maintaining a non-confrontational approach, meaning make the liar feel comfortable with sharing their account of what happened as well as follow-up with details. This way if inconsistencies in the liar’s story verses the truth arises, the details can therefore be verified.

Observing Baseline Behavior

As mentioned earlier, lie catchers note that fidgeting can be a sign of an overly anxious but innocent person, and likewise, overly constrained behavior can stem from naturally reserved people. To tackle this situation, experts observe a person’s baseline behavior – the process of developing a basic understanding of a person’s normal body language.

Microexpressions

Microexpressions are said to help reveal the disparity between how one presents oneself and how one authentically feels. Although microexpressions are involuntary expressions lasting a fraction of a second, Dr. David Matsumoto of San Francisco State University, asserts that people can be trained to spot them when they occur. Goodman suggests that one good way to delve into a more in depth conversation with a witness or suspect is to ask the same types of questions in varying ways (referring to the event in question) and closely watch their microexpressions.

Share Your Insights for Spotting Deception !!

Courtesy DreamsTime

Evaluating Truthfulness is nothing new, but new technology and training programs based on validated scientific studies have sparked new interest in this field of study.  Pursuit Magazine goes in depth about about behavioral science’s perceptive on how to conduct successful interviews.

Deception detection is not as simple as many people, who are often times untrained, believe or want to believe. Experts agree that it is a complex assessment and requires years of training to be not only good at detecting deception but also accurate.

Individuals such as Joe Navarro and Mark Frank often revisit training techniques or strategies (either via research for a book or in teaching proven techniques to others) to stay on the top of their skill of evaluating truthfulness.

Pursuit Magazine points out that ‘despite what popular books on nonverbal behavior may say, there’s no scientific evidence that crossed arms or legs indicate a non-receptive person, or that deceivers touch their noses, avert their eyes, or cover their mouths.  Unfortunately, deception detection isn’t so simple, say behavioral scientists who actually study communication and deceit using scientific methods. Spotting a lie, it seems, is an inexact science.’

Pursuit interviewed Humintell’s Director Dr. David Matsumoto for this article and he commented, “a problem with academic research on the topic: Many experiments are based on low-stakes lies. In the real world, lies that concern investigators or potential employers are usually high stakes—in other words, liars in the interrogation room have a lot more to lose than study participants.“

According to Caroline Keating, good liars are ultimately good actors. Her advice on how to lie convincingly is to “rehearse” in order to reduce anxiety.  “Good lying, like good acting, is an art that requires a plausible story, well-practiced.“

The article also pointed out that Matsumoto has been at the forefront of academic scholarship on nonverbal behavior and cross-cultural psychology.  When asked what actions investigators can take to improve their sensitivity to deception, Matsumoto said:

“Get trained on the VALIDATED indicators of veracity and deception, both verbal and nonverbal.”
“Learn to strategize their interviewing techniques to maximize the potential for them to receive CLEAR verbal and nonverbal signals to interpret.”

To learn more about proven, effective techniques used to catch liars in high-stakes situations as well as some history and experts in the field of nonverbal behavior read the entire article.