
How to tell when someone is lying? - vbv
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/mariakonnikova/2014/04/how-to-tell-when-someone-is-lying.html
======
mrcdima
After reading all of Paul Ekman's books, watching all episodes of Lie to Me,
and reading various other pop-science books, articles, posts, and so on, all
on body language and lie detection, the only honest conclusion I could reach
was that if you really want to know if someone's lying you better know the
truth beforehand.

Though there is some science to the method, it ultimately relies on very
complex combinations of all sorts of hints, clues, behaviors, all very
ambiguous and hard to put to together. Applying this method to regular social
interactions is even harder because you rarely get any feedback. You might
determine that one person is lying but you might never get the chance to truly
confirm your assessment. It's really hard to figure out what works and what
doesn't.

You might have a chance at improving if you're a detective (maybe lawyer?) and
get to often interview people, ask questions and immediately (or at least at
some point) get feedback on whether your truthfulness assessment was right or
not but if you're just some regular person who has ordinary social
interactions it's much harder to become a human lie detector.

~~~
conanbatt
I read once that experienced detectives are worse at telling lies than
rookies. The article theorized that old-timey detectives get very confident on
their intuition and experience, so they assume they are right on a hunch
sooner than rookies. The latter, unexperienced as they are,look harder at the
facts and are more humble about guessing right or wrong.

There is something dangerous in believing you have the key to knowing when
someone is lying or not: if you are confident someone is lying you are more
likely to disregard facts or evidence, to justify your hunch.

Criminal profilers might qualify as experts in court, saying someone "fits the
profile", helping the state make a case, while their profiling could be
totally wrong, as it was in the famous sniper case, where they went with the
classic "middle aged caucasian" and the killer was black and with his son(?)
as an accomplice.

Even worse when you go through TSA, where the justifiable hunches are almost
certainly ethnically biased.

I respect law enforcements developed intuition to know "something might be
happening", but would never take that as more than a football player thinking
he will score the next goal.

~~~
justinreeves
>Criminal profilers might qualify as experts in court, saying someone "fits
the profile", helping the state make a case, while their profiling could be
totally wrong, as it was in the famous sniper case, where they went with the
classic "middle aged caucasian" and the killer was black and with his son(?)
as an accomplice.

What case is this? Also, is "middle ages caucasian" some kind of trope in
police investigations? I wasn't aware it was…

~~~
whtrbt
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks)

"It was widely speculated that a single sniper, initially identified as a
white man with assumed military experience, was using the Interstate 495
Capital Beltway for travel, possibly in a white van or truck. It was later
learned that the rampage was perpetrated by John Allen Muhammad, and a minor,
Lee Boyd Malvo, then aged 17 and originally from Jamaica, driving a blue 1990
Chevrolet Caprice sedan."

------
ZenPro
As a former MI interrogator, this was part of my skillset.

For the average layman looking to spot lies within a complex story there is an
exceptionally simply method known as _reverse chronological testing_

It works best for people you know are purposefully lying and you need a hook
or a fallacy for proof.

1\. Ask the person to recount their version of events.

>> _Oh so you went out with the girls at 7pm, then what happened...?_

2\. A liar will naturally add more detail to try and manufacture credibility.
Do not interrupt. Let them ramble. Silence from you will solicit more
imaginings from them.

3\. At the end of the tale, immediately ask them to recount the events in
reverse.

>> Why this works : It is almost impossible for untrained personnel to
factually recall imaginative events that have not actually occurred.

The brain has no factual reservoir from which to draw upon - the source
material is fiction and does not lend itself to recall.

In essence; the liar is trapped in a world they are trying to simultaneously
create and remember.

It's a hugely combative tactic though - if you use it, expect the situation to
escalate hugely.

~~~
NoMoreNicksLeft
I suspect that if you interrogated me about last night and I wasn't attempting
to lie to you that I would still fail this test.

I'm addle-brained, I don't get enough sleep, and I honestly don't remember if
I got my daughter chocolate milk before or after diddling around on the
computer.

I might very well remember events when asked to repeat them in reverse order
that I did not remember the first time through, leave details out, or get the
order reversed.

And while I can't manage to catch myself in the act while it is occurring,
I've noticed myself having malleable memory of the likes that researchers tend
to call "false memory". And this is just boring crap, nothing traumatic,
stressful, or important.

If your test could fail for me recounting an evening at home for which I know
I wouldn't be lying about, how could it possibly succeed for someone who's
trying to prove to you that they aren't a killer, especially when they might
have something else to hide (hey, I don't want this guy finding out I bought
$1000 worth of pot to sell to my trashy neighbors in the trailer park!) ?

~~~
trhway
>I would still fail this test.

that is the point. If MI (or any other government force agency) got their paws
on you, then you're guilty, and it is just a matter of routine effort to come
up with what you're guilty of. The only choice you have is whether it happens
a hard or an easy way... As they say in my old country - "for a given man, he
always can be found guilty of something" (original - "byl by chelovek, a vina
naydetsya" :)

~~~
ZenPro
>> _Got their paws on you?_

The inherent bias and paranoia in your statement is staggering. Although, it's
understandable if you come from a country with a particularly brutal and
pervasive secret police.

In my country, the intelligence agencies have no powers of arrest and must
defer to police enforcement.

------
atacrawl
Any time this topic comes up, I think immediately of the Louise Woodward case
(aka the British Nanny Case):
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Woodward_case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Woodward_case)

During the trial, much was made of Louise Woodward's odd demeanor on the
stand; particularly, her propensity to awkwardly twist her mouth to stifle
laughter during testimony. Many interpreted that as a sign of guilt, but my
grandmother would laugh in a similar fashion whenever she was nervous or
uncomfortable. Woodward struck me as genuine.

On the other hand, at the end of the trial, the baby's mother read a statement
to the court. Her delivery was cold, emotionless and oddly stable given the
circumstances. It was unnerving, and I've never forgotten it.

~~~
arbitrage
Which is why it's a good thing that people are supposed to be judged based on
facts, and not their popularity.

~~~
mynameishere
The one time I was on a jury the judge specifically instructed the jurors to
use our judgement in determining the credibility of anyone testifying. I don't
think there's any way around it--everyone knows that perjury is a given on one
side or the other.

------
vonnik
The article's OK, but it doesn't actually deliver on the headline by
illustrating the "tells" of a lie. This book is much more practical.

[http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Lie-Former-Officers-
Deception/dp/1...](http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Lie-Former-Officers-
Deception/dp/1250029627)

One of the most interesting ideas is that no single tells indicates a lie, but
clusters of them together are strong signals. A few would be: 1) pausing
before you answer (lies take longer to compose than truths); 2) touching your
face with your hand (blood rushes from your face when the fight-or-flight
response kicks in, prompting an itching sensation); 3) fidgeting at the place
where your body rests on something more solid (floor, chair, armrest); 4)
vacillating between an appeasing and angry tone; 5) leaning away and closing
your body language.

~~~
pdeuchler
This might be somewhat of an unfortunate list, as I tend to do 1, 2, 3, and 5
when I'm answering a nuanced question that requires a careful answer (i.e.
non-technical family member asking if it's really possible for the NSA to spy
on all of us)

~~~
vonnik
Yeah, I totally get it. I'm not saying they are absolute tells. But let's say
you talk with somebody about an easy subject, during which they behave one
way, and then you turn the discussion to a more sensitive topic that you
suspect they may lie about. If they change their behavior from the established
benchmark, then that can be one indicator in your diagnosis.

~~~
nitrogen
Couldn't it also just indicate that you've switched from an easy to a
difficult subject? All you're really reading is emotion, which may or may not
indicate deception.

~~~
vonnik
Sure. But if you're asking someone where they were at the time of a crime --
e.g. Were you at Nicole Brown Simpson's house yesterday at 7pm? -- and that
turns out to be a really difficult question for a person to answer, then maybe
that's a signal that something more is going on.

------
Destitute
Here is the video that Brinke saw and identified her as lying, can you?

[http://vimeo.com/55997359](http://vimeo.com/55997359)

~~~
zvrba
Because she holds her hand on her chin, and the hand is very active, she
appears as if she were thinking really hard about what to say. A truly
concerned parent wouldn't need to think hard.

------
Brajeshwar
Here is an interesting TED Video, "How to spot a liar."

[http://www.ted.com/talks/pamela_meyer_how_to_spot_a_liar](http://www.ted.com/talks/pamela_meyer_how_to_spot_a_liar)

------
laxatives
How to delude yourself in to thinking you know more than you do?

~~~
flint
It's called a PhD

------
mapleoin
_Hardly anyone refrains from lying altogether, and some people report lying up
to twelve times within that time span. I might open a conversation, for
instance, by saying how nice it is to meet someone—when I’m really not at all
happy about it. I might go on to say that I grew up in Boston—a lie,
technically, since I really grew up in a small town about forty minutes
outside the city. I could say that the person’s work sounds fascinating, when
it’s no such thing, or compliment him on his (drab) tie or his (awful) shirt.
And if the person mentions loving a certain downtown restaurant where I’ve had
a terrible experience? I’m likely to just smile and nod and say, Yes, great
place. Trust me: we often lie without giving it so much as a second thought._

Is this an American trait? I think it's the opposite in Eastern Europe. People
would stop you to tell you they've had a bad experience at the restaurant,
usually don't compliment and interrupt you immediately to tell you what they
think about your line of work.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
That's not lying. There's no intent to deceive - nobody is fooled. We know
conventionally that he lives 'somewhere around Boston'; that he's offering an
opening conversational gambit and not conveying emotional information; that
we're confirming his right to enjoy something and not communicating a
restaurant review.

If we must call it lying, then we need a new word for when someone tells an
intentional untruth with the intent to deceive.

~~~
ph0rque
_We know conventionally that he lives 'somewhere around Boston'_

When Americans ask me where I was born, I don't say the actual country that no
longer exists (USSR) nor the country that it is called now (Kazakhstan). I
simply say Russia. The reason is that it's simpler for Americans to understand
Russia.

~~~
sejje
What makes you think we understand Russia better than we understand
Kazakhstan?

Maybe you wish to have imparted your culture or something, however I don't
expect most people have any reasonable idea what the culture is like in
neither Russia nor Kazakhstan.

Are you just hoping they know where it is on the map?

~~~
ph0rque
I should have expounded: I am ethnically Russian, as both of my parents'
families moved from Russia to Kazakhstan when it was all USSR. So if I were to
say I was born in Kazakhstan, most Americans would have no idea where it is.
Those that know something about Kazakhstan would ask why I don't look Kazakh.
Thus I just answer with Russia.

------
Crito
It seems to me that under some circumstances, developing a skill for detecting
liars could be dangerous. If you are good at catching liars, then your
confidence in people who you do not belief to be lying could go up, which
could in turn increase the damage done by false-negatives.

Knowing that in all likelihood _some_ of the people I interact with are
sociopaths/psychopaths (somewhere in the neighborhood of 1% of the population
are, and most blend in with the general population), I distrust my own ability
to determine when somebody is or is not lying to me. Being self-critical in
this way limits the damage done by the few that will inevitably slip through.

~~~
meowface
Are you suggesting that it is impossible to detect that a sociopath or
psychopath is lying? They're probably better at it, partially because they do
it so much and can practice, but I doubt any of them are infallible.

That being said, it is indeed very risky to assume you can always detect
lying, or even be certain that a particular person is lying. It's good to be
wary but bad to be certain.

~~~
ZenPro
Lying, as a social interaction, actually has a net benefit to society allowing
interaction between humans - it can avoid conflict, ill feeling,
embarrassment, shame and a whole host of other negative scenarios.

You are absolutely correct that it is risky to assume you can detect lying.
Most of the time it is simply not in your best interest to even point out a
lie let alone be wrong about it.

------
thesimpsons1022
Why would she kill the daughter when she had an ex-husband to take care of it?
what the hell?

------
sirdogealot
Maybe it's just that the article was written by a woman. (As I could easily
see my significant other behaving in this manner when she was "out with her
girlfriends".) But, does anybody on HN actually relate to this paragraph
below?

>I might open a conversation, for instance, by saying how nice it is to meet
someone—when I’m really not at all happy about it. I might go on to say that I
grew up in Boston—a lie, technically, since I really grew up in a small town
about forty minutes outside the city. I could say that the person’s work
sounds fascinating, when it’s no such thing, or compliment him on his (drab)
tie or his (awful) shirt. And if the person mentions loving a certain downtown
restaurant where I’ve had a terrible experience? I’m likely to just smile and
nod and say, Yes, great place.

I am proud to say that I relate to none of those examples.

I would usually say "it was nice to meet you" when somebody I just met was
parting ways just as a pleasantry that has to be said, not that I meant it.
And not that the other person would assume that I actually genuinely meant
that either. Ending a meeting with "It was nice to meet you" seems just as
natural and called for as starting out with "Hello, my name is sirdogealot".
Who goes home thrilled or even remembering the fact that somebody they met
that day said "Nice to meet you"?

I always am truthful about where I am from. If the person has never heard of
my small home town, I would explain it's location to them.

I wouldn't lie and say somebody's work sounds fascinating if it wasn't. If you
haul boxes or flip burgers, I don't really care to hear about your job or your
problems at work. In fact I find I don't congregate with people who hold
boring jobs. It just gets too tedious hearing that you are unhappy and yet not
bright enough to realize it and quit.

I would never compliment somebody on their clothing if they actually looked
like shit unless they I was trying to cheer them up, hit on them or get a job
or something.

If somebody suggests a terrible restaurant, I'll let them know why it's a bad
choice. Like the restaurant that served me ants in my stir fry, or the place
that gave me food poisoning on Christmas eve one year? No, I'm not eating at
those places again. I don't care if I'm trying to win over my girlfriend's
parents. If a place is shit I'll call it shit.

Does the author think that her checkout clerk is lying to her when they
systematically grunt out "have a nice day" as they pass her her grocery bags?

Do you think the kid at the McDonald's counter is mocking you when he smiles
at you?

Do you think I'm lying to you when you ask "How are you doing?" and I only
ever respond with "Oh, pretty good! How are you doing?" I might say that if I
just woke up in the morning or if I had just been in a car crash but I'm not
lying. I know that most people don't care to hear about your problems. So I
don't bother them with them.

Society is weird. There are a lot of odd things we do in society but I
wouldn't misconstrue them all as lying.

~~~
thaumasiotes
>> I might go on to say that I grew up in Boston—a lie, technically, since I
really grew up in a small town about forty minutes outside the city.

> I am proud to say that I relate to none of those examples.

I can relate to the one I highlighted. People ask me where I'm from all the
time. Usually, I'll ask what they mean, but if they press the issue I have to
delve deeper:

"I'm from the United States."

"If I answered you, would that mean anything to you?"

"California."

"Near San Francisco. (well, actually a few hours away)"

"Santa Cruz."

"Actually, a suburb about 20 minutes away from Santa Cruz. According to the
post office, it's in Watsonville, but according to itself it's named La Selva
Beach."

Generally people have heard of San Francisco, but having heard of Santa Cruz
is rare and obviously no one has ever heard of La Selva Beach unless they
actually live there themselves.

It's always mystifying to me why people ask this question which is (a)
incredibly awkward to answer, and (b) completely meaningless to them no matter
how I choose to answer it. So virtually 100% of the time I'll answer "near San
Francisco" (not a lie, but not particularly informative) or "Santa Cruz" (much
more accurate, but also a lie).

If they ask me where my hometown is, I have to probe even further: The place
where I was born? The first place I can remember? The place where I went to
elementary school? The place where I went to middle school, high school, and
college? And when I try to find out what they mean by the question, far and
away the most common response is to be annoyed that I found their question
confusing (never mind that they don't have an answer when I ask what they
meant... apparently I should have just made something up).

So I can understand why people lie, even though I hate doing it. The social
pressure here is enormous, and over a completely meaningless question.

~~~
StavrosK
It's not a lie because nobody expects the question to be answered with
accuracy. It's just a topic that may start a conversation, so the more
interesting you can make the answer, the better.

Hell, starting with the last one, where you say exactly where it is, and even
going on to describe what it's like, what's nice about it, etc is the way the
question was INTENDED to be answered.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> It's not a lie because nobody expects the question to be answered with
> accuracy.

Well, if Michael Corleone takes the stand to affirm that he doesn't know what
anyone is talking about, he is not and has never been a mob boss, and in fact
no one in his family has ever been a mob boss, that won't surprise anyone
(they might be surprised that he agreed to testify in the first place, but no
one will be surprised by what he says). Can we conclude that he isn't lying?

~~~
sirdogealot
OP was referring to 'nobody' as being the general public. Not a mob-boss on
trial that the FBI has been following for decades.

~~~
thaumasiotes
...and that's exactly the way I interpret it in my response?

------
oska
_She confessed to murdering Karissa—she wanted to save her faltering
relationship with her boyfriend, she told the court, and he’d told her that
she would have to choose between him and the child—and described in quiet
detail her daughter’s final moments._

Is there any good research on the behaviour of women in these situations?
Obviously this is the extreme case - murdering your own child to save your
relationship with your partner - but I would be interested in broader research
in this area on how mothers deal with disinterest or hostility to their
offspring by a partner.

------
arkad
There is a scene in Polish crime movie "Psy" (great movie BTW,
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105185/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105185/)),
where a bad guy answers this question by saying: "Noone ever lied with a car
battery connected to his balls"

~~~
oska
[1] Effectiveness of torture for interrogation

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_torture_for_in...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_torture_for_interrogation)

[2] Torture Has a Long History ... of Not Working

[http://www.livescience.com/4651-torture-long-history-
working...](http://www.livescience.com/4651-torture-long-history-working.html)

------
Zigurd
Detecting lies would be a more-credible field if they purged their voodoo
shamans first. It is fascinating that detecting lies is a field so full of
frauds and liars.

~~~
mathattack
There's something very Godelesque in that comment. It's kind of like having so
many teachers who were weak students.

~~~
0xdeadbeefbabe
Or so many writers pretending to be hackers.

~~~
jaekwon
I don't believe that any of us believe what we are writing.

------
DiabloD3
"How to tell when someone is lying? They open their mouths." \-- Unknown

------
flint
ten Brinke

------
asgard1024
Well, there is a simple method:

1\. Get the statement from the person that might be lying.

2\. Find out what the truth was.

If the truth is different than the statement, the person was lying. Recently
uncovered famous liars, with this method, include James Clapper and Vladimir
Putin.

~~~
3rd3
This sentence is false.

~~~
flint
Liar!

