Has anyone been watching the new TV show, "Lie To Me"? It's about a scientist who watches for facial micro-expressions and body language to help the government, the justice system, and other entities determine if someone is being deceptive. I've been reading up on the science behind the show. Involuntary body language like squelched shoulder shrugs, alternative head shakes that differ from what one has said (e.g., stating yes but shaking one's head no), etc. reveal a lot.
I tested things out with Condoleezza Rice's interview yesterday on "The View". My armchair scientific analysis sees that the moderate-conservative Republican has many behavioral cues throughout her interview which indicate deception. At times, she also tries to conceal her true emotions. The average person tells three lies within a 10-minute period but Ms. Condi almost quadruples that lying average, in the first five minutes alone:
Iraq War
Condi does deceptive slippage here, with her non-verbal gestures indicating the opposite of what she is verbally communicating. When Barbara Walters asks her whether she regrets that the Bush administration did not find weapons of mass destruction, Condi verbally says, "I certainly regret it"....but her head is shaking no (1:34 mark). Our girl is lying. She continues shaking her head (1:35 mark) while stating, "We thought there were weapons of mass destruction". She's lying. Her emblematic slips here show that she has actually has no regrets, because the Bush administration did not believe from the jump that there were WMDs. Dang, girl!
She also does shoulder shrugging, another indicator of deception. It is a non-verbal cue indicating, "I don't believe what I'm saying." She shrugs her left shoulder (1:42 mark), while claiming that she will take some time to determine what is her greatest policy regret. Condi has in fact, already self-determined what is her greatest policy regret...and it is not the Iraq war. At the 2:15 mark, while reiterating that the Bush administration didn't know there were no WMDs, she again does a left shoulder shrug. She also does a negative head shake.
Her left shoulder slightly shrugs (1:56 mark) as she states that she believes that history will determine what are good and bad policy calls. She does not believe so. When Joy Behar asks if the Bush administration gave diplomacy enough of a chance, Condi states yes but her head is shaking no (2:16 mark). In reality, she believes that there should've been more diplomacy.
Her non-verbal behavioral cues are congruent when she states that she believes that we liberated Iraq and doesn't regret that USA did so. Thus, that is her true belief.
Her Parents
More emblematic slips here. Condi states, "I had great parents" (3:20 mark), but her head is simultaneous shaking no. Notice both a negative head shake and a left shoulder shrug (3:40 mark) when she claims that her parents gave her every opportunity that they possibly could. In reality, she believes that they denied her some opportunity.
However, she demonstrates body congruence when discussing that her parents taught her to excel and were dedicated parents (4:22 mark). I.e., Condi truly believes her statement. Yet at the 4:28 mark, she shakes her head no while claiming that her parents thought that "I could do anything that I wanted to." She's lying. Another head shake and she shrugs both shoulders as she reiterates, “I thank God for my parents.” (4:32 mark), which happens earlier when she first stated this point. Shrugging both shoulders means, "I don't know."
Imani and Tyrone, there’s a back story here because Condi's relationship with her deceased parents is more complicated than she is verbally letting on here. Perhaps she is writing the book about them because she feels obligated to do so, but she has some ambivalence toward and unresolved issues with her parents.
Hurricane Katrina
Ambivalence rings during this part of the interview. She does genuinely believe that the Bush administration didn't see Hurricane Katrina coming. She believes it exposed poverty in America. Although not under realm of responsibility she did feel some responsibility as the highest-ranking black official. She was appalled by people claiming that President Bush didn't care about Hurricane Katrina. At the 6:22 mark though, note the negative head shake when she says, "I think we'll do better, the United States government will do better the next time around..." She also does a left shoulder shrug (6:31 mark) but is nodding her head yes when she says that Hurricane Katrina was one of the worst policy disasters for the administration. In actually, she is at least ambivalent on that point. However, she displays oblique eyebrows - a behavioral cue that's very difficult to fake, and which indicates sadness - on at least three occasions (6:14, 6:25, and 6:30 mark and while discussing Hurricane Katrina. While ambivalent about the Bush administration's role, she is genuinely saddened over the Hurricane Katrina events.
Romance
Left shoulder shrug (1:48 mark), when asked if she wants to make time for romance and she says, “I hope so.” Oblique eyebrows too, which indicates sadness. Condi is saddened that she hasn't found a life partner. She shrugs her right shoulder (2:03 mark) as she claims, “The truth of the matter is, I haven’t found anyone who I wanted to marry.” She's lying, and the accompanying oblique eyebrows return. I.e., she is saddened over that point. Alright, who broke Ms. Condi's po' heart?
Condi Rice: Liar
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Look, if you've got a shiny pony, you're going to take it for a ride.
Doesn't mean that the shiny pony should be entered into the Kentucky Derby.
There's a reason this kind of stuff isn't entered into evidence at trial.
ok... you are looking too much into this... shrugging isnt always a sign of a lie... it could be a sign of uncertainty...
and when she is shaking her head it could very well be because she was thinking about the disappointment of not finding the weapons...
im sure i could have read more and pointed out more perfectly innocent behavior perceived as a sign of a lie but i really don't feel like it... though id be happy to oblige if you try to refute me
Interesting, but once again you are taking micro-expression and the whole "non-verbal communication" thing much to literally, you can't just apply motions to cues and call it deception. I'd suggest reading "Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities" by Vrij Aldert (a 500 page book written largely for police/government and security) as he discusses everything you should know about nonverbal cues, but also why you can't just throw them as hard evidence to every single motion you see. Not to mention he makes a strong point against the factual validity of the research of Paul Ekman, the man whose research is the main facts behind the show.
Not to say it isn't a great new show and very entertaining, but remember, TV and movies rarely mimic real life!
Glad to see you too have a strong interest in the topic and I hope you continue to research and develop more knowledge about this topic.
Although this was probably good practice - as would the scrutinization of any interview - I agree with other commenters that you are being a little too much like the TV show. At 2:03 in the romance clip, for example, if there is a shrug there, it is incredibly slight...although purely as coincidence it is interesting that she says she "didn't" meet someone, rather than "haven't" met someone, like she did the first time. It implies a singular event, but could also just be a poorly formed sentence.
Anyway, the first rule of non-verbal communication is to find "clusters" or groups of signs that all show the same idea. It's more dramatic to see one and say Eureka, though.
Her head movements are interesting, because compared to her baseline when they ask about American Idol, her anxiety is much higher and head movements in general are much more horizontal, and her voice is much higher in pitch. Whether that indicates lying is arguable, but the supression of something, seems likely...but are you suprised? She has probably been well-trained to be still during interviews.
If Condoleeza seems to be lying 4 times as much as average, perhaps it is a flaw in the assessment, rather than one in Condoleeza. Or maybe it's because she is being bombarded with tough questions on national television.
I'm intriuged by body language and micro expressions and was interested to see this analysis. I agree with most of what you said, Shay, but not about the shoulder shrugging. Her head shakes and micro-expressions are more relevant. The shoulder shrugging, I found, was a confusion between a micro-expression and her laughing.
She doesn't seem to be happy with the people around her. Her only sense of accomplishment is with her own achievements, it seems. Overall, Ms. Rice shows vulnerability and fear - many, many sad micro-expressions. In the romance section she betrays a lot.
What is going on here is, we all know she is lying and she knows she is lying. Bush's wholereign was based on lies and everyone was complicent. We are all relieved all of these liars are gone. Only problem is, Obama is putting the liars in the shadows in the forefront. You don't need a phd to know all these people are liars.
To the comment above, it doesn't matter what people you have in government, EVERYONE LIES. Government is based on lies, dont play that "Bush is an evil liar" bullshit, take a look at any politician..
"I do regret that we did not know about the weapons of mass destruction"
Starting 2:11
She is nodding when she says she does regret about...
Then she starts shaking her head when she says weapons of mass destruction.
Could this mean that is the bit she is lieing about? perhaps they expected something else.
I think you are making a mistake Ion your anlaysis, and I think I was making the same mistake at first. When she's shaking her head no, I don't believe she is ALWAYS contradicting what she is saying. It is merely that her subconcious is answering the question no. That means, if she is verbally saying no "I have no regrests about not finding WMD. . ." the actual shaking of the head no, is her subconcious CONFIRMING what her lips are telling us.
However, if she is answering "yes" to a question while shaking her head no, that is when I believe there is a contradiction and that is when I believe you know someone is not being truely honest with themselves or their answers. Such as the Hilary clinton interviews when she is saying "yes, I am looking forward to working with Obama" but her head is shaking no, there is clearly a difference in her body language answer "no" and her lips answer "yes."
But with Condi, her answer to the WMD question, she is consistent with her body language answer "no" and her lips answer "no."
I think you are interpreting that whenever someone shakes their head no, they are saying "hey, I'm lying, whatever my lips are saying, believe teh opposite." And I don't believe that is the case. I believe the shaking of the head no is the body's answer to the question and then we have to guage as to whether the lips are supporting that answer.
I could be wrong, but it just seems logical to me. Think of it this way, if she really does mean "no" by your logic, for her body language to support her verbal communication, she would need to be nodding her head in agreement while actually saying no. Essentially meaning that while her heading is nodding up and down she is saying subconciously "this means taht what my lips are sayng is what I truly mean." Try saying no about something and nod up and down over and over. If you can do that, I'm impressed.
It's good that you have an interest and are moving through some methodological analysis, but more study and research is neccessary. One of the things that surrounds the approach to reading facial expressions is to develop a deep understanding of the context regarding the interaction. This includes the backgrund of the individual under analysis, the environment surrounding the setting, the background of the interviewer or other oeple involved in the conversation and many other factors. Analysis of exuctives and elites is distinct from analysis of the ,man on the street', requiring specific preparation and analysis. As an elite of society, and with the executive knowledge and background, any analysis of Ms. Rice would have to be proceeded by extensive study of past patterns and behaviours and other preparation. One of the things thats must be understood up front is that executive experience within the highest policy making and action levels of the US government embue the individual with a background that few others completely understand without similar experience. In fact, if Ms. Rice was showing any deception, it is likely for good casue, rather personal a reflecting of personal deception or 'lieing'. THis is one of the most difficult aspects, and forms one of the critics of this method; if a behaviour can be assumed to be deceptive, exactly what is the stimulus eliciting the decption? THis is why the structure of the questions and the background of the individual is so critical to the assumed results. I saw nothing in the first video that indicates 'lieing' on the part of Ms. Rice, outside of the context of her extensive executive knowledge, background and experience. In this line of research the starting question that the parctitioner always starts with is, When is a wink just a wink? I recommend reading Paul Ekman, and go from there. THere is knowledge to be gained in these techniques but it must be aproached very carefully.
Sorry guys but I win :-) I found the Holy Grail.
Remember that time where Condi answered a question by saying, "Well, as I was telling my husba-... as I was telling President Bush..."
Yah, do ya? If not, look it up, it was at some sort of New York Times dinner and it was witnessed by lots of credible witnesses who wrote about that Freudian slip.
Second piece of intro: Has it ever happened to you or have you observed in others that sometimes you pick up some verbal or body language from someone you like or admire like a teacher, a parent, a role-model, etc. It's really quite common. You can easily tell things about how someone views someone else by noticing how they cock their head while thinking, how they laugh or any of a host of other cues.
Now go to the second video and watch for THREE WHOLE SECONDS from 2:01-2:04 and tell em who Condi likes.
Sad, by true.
As someone once said, it's not enough to know that someone is lying... you have to know WHY they're lying.
I only agree on certain items. However, I don't agree on the shoulder shrugs which were almost non-existant. I think the shoulder shrug in most cases is pretty obvious as it's done when they are uncertain about what they're saying. The whole lietome and microexpressions are a cool idea. However, i think it isnt something you're gonna pick up after watching the show. Plus you wouldn't get enough experience during your day to day invovlment with people. I try spotting people lying but not only do you have to remember all the cues, but you have to take the context of the situation. e.g. if the guy goes.. man I don't know what to do *shoulder shrug* -- doesn't mean he's lying, since a shoulder shrug is a sign of uncertainty.. hes raising his shoulder because he really doesn't know what to do. So, though I actually really like this stuff, as i am a huge psychology buff, unless you spend many many many years studying this stuff and learning all the subtle differences, i wouldn't quit my day job.
She's constantly shaking her head, I doubt she lies that often, probably just how she normally acts.
People, FYI in Bulgaria nodding your head up and down means no, and sideways means yes. Emotions are universal, but the ways we portray them aren't.
I find it funny that you all take this to heart. I was watching a "Judge Judy" kind of show a couple days ago with a twist, The twist was... A Lie detector. Well during one of the sessions The man was asked a question, "Did you throw a rock into her window" his response was "No I would *** His hand now goes to his neck and he began to itch it for under 2 seconds then puts his hand down*** never do something like that". Now during the trial the judge reveals that during that session and that question that it was 'False', he was lying. Now you may not be able to tell every cue but come on... Who here actualy belives that Bush actualy belived there was 'Wepons of MASS destrucion' in Iraq. I mean truly, so to understand it more maybe she does not belive there was wepons there her self, Or maybe like all of us out there Belive that Bush was a complete moron. ( no offense Bush ) But its true. Now this converstaion can go on forever but I know I will in proving that you can not prove it and proving that she could be lying, hopefully that confused you.
Enjoy your day and don't get caught up in so much of what is said on the internet. If you want something to complain about, GO COMPLAIN about BET and the music video for Lady Gaga and the Disco Stick. this is little compared to that.
While I find what all of you say very interesting. I would like to pose a thought. Most of the time in the show, as in the practice of lie detection, don't they study multiple images, recordings, etc on their subject. They usually try to at least assemble a point of reference. Right?
I do see the signs each of you have pointed out but I must pose this thought. Some one else said this too. It is not as easy as 123.
This kind of science, I guess I should say, all science has a great many variables. To see that there are signs of deception doesn't necessarily mean that the person is telling a lie. These deceptions could be about something entirely different. Life is never black and white. As we see in the show. The web of lies and truth is always far more complex than initially thought. Thats why its called a science.
It takes more than a few minutes and some shruggs to begin to understand what someone is lying about, if indeed they are and cognitively doing so. Don't get me wrong. The science is fascinating. But it takes a lifetime to master and even then you'll find there's more to learn yet. So take it at face value and use your instincts as well as the science. But I think that we should be careful. With great power comes great responsibility. Or at least that's what that one guy said from that show about that story about that place.....
I must say though that you are all brilliant in your observations and analasys. It is quite amazing when we are all able to share thoughts on a matter like this. So many opinions. So many points of view. After all, you can't see the world from one spot. And how dull life would be without different windows in which to view an event. Quite an honor to see so many thoughts. Thanks for reading my humble opinion. Good day! ~anne
<span>"People, FYI in Bulgaria nodding your head up and down means no, and sideways means yes. Emotions are universal, but the ways we portray them aren't"</span>
Answering with 'yes' nodding/'no' nodding -> emblem (mean cultural signs), not emotion.
Post a Comment