Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

With Motivation And Training, Some Professionals Can Catch A Liar

Date:
May 28, 1999
Source:
University Of California, San Francisco
Summary:
Sherlock Holmes and Secret Service agents are not the only people who can catch a liar, according to researchers at the University of California San Francisco.

Sherlock Holmes and Secret Service agents are not the onlypeople who can catch a liar, according to researchers at theUniversity of California San Francisco.

UCSF psychologists have found that individuals with aspecial interest in deception are able to detect a liarbased on split second facial expressions, gestural slips,and subtle signs in speech. Their findings will bepublished in this month's issue of Psychological Science.

"The ability to accurately detect deceit is real," says PaulEkman, PhD, UCSF professor of psychiatry and principalinvestigator of the study. "The information is there andwe've shown that a few groups of people can utilize it,although most law enforcement officials and mostpsychologists miss it."

The 627 people who participated in the study includedsheriffs, judges, police, intelligence officials, andpsychologists. They were categorized into 7 groups based ontheir profession - either psychologists or law-enforcementagents -- and interest and experience level in deception.

The researchers measured how well each group could detectdeceit based upon demeanor. Participants watched videotapesof ten males, ages 18 to 28, who either lied or told thetruth about their deeply-held opinions on controversialsocial issues. The participants then had ten seconds todecide if the subjects had given true or false opinions.

A group of 23 federal law enforcement officers, whichincluded CIA agents, was the most accurate and decidedcorrectly 73 percent of the time, on average. This wassignificantly better than a group of 84 federal judges (62percent accuracy, on average) and a group of 36 municipal,state, and federal law enforcement personnel with no specialinterest in deception (51 percent accuracy, on average).

Clinical psychologists performed better than academicpsychologists, most likely because of their greaterexperience conducting interviews, said Ekman. A group of107 clinical psychologists highly interested in deceptionand a group of 209 clinical psychologists moderatelyinterested in deception had average accuracy rates of 68 and62 percent, respectively. A group of academic psychologistshad an average accuracy rate of 58 percent.

Previous studies by the UCSF researchers showed that U.S.Secret Service agents could determine when people were lyingabout their emotions. The current findings show for thefirst time that accurate judgments are not confined toselected law enforcement groups, such as the Secret Service,and that it is possible for motivated observers to detectthe kind of lies law enforcement and intelligence agentsroutinely encounter.

Although some of the groups tested better than others, asubstantial number of people in every category performed ator below chance. This suggests that even judgments made byprofessionals with training in deception will not always beaccurate, said Ekman.

"Judging deception from facial expressions and body languagewill probably never be sufficiently accurate to beadmissible in the courtroom," says Ekman. "Without theproper training and motivation, most people, even thoseentrusted by society to assess a person's trustworthiness,do quite poorly."

Perhaps the most surprising result uncovered by theresearchers was that the most accurate groups were better atdetecting lies than detecting truths. The federal officersgroup accurately detected lies 80 percent of the time butdetected truths only 66 percent of the time. The samepattern held true for both groups of clinical psychologists,and a group of 43 Los Angles County sheriffs.

In addition to Ekman, co-authors of the study includeMaureen O'Sullivan, PhD, professor of psychology at theUniversity of San Francisco, and Mark Frank, assistantprofessor of communication at Rutgers University.


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by University Of California, San Francisco. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.


Cite This Page:

University Of California, San Francisco. "With Motivation And Training, Some Professionals Can Catch A Liar." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 28 May 1999. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/05/990528003127.htm>.
University Of California, San Francisco. (1999, May 28). With Motivation And Training, Some Professionals Can Catch A Liar. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 30, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/05/990528003127.htm
University Of California, San Francisco. "With Motivation And Training, Some Professionals Can Catch A Liar." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/05/990528003127.htm (accessed July 30, 2014).

Share This




More Mind & Brain News

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations


Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

It's Not Just Facebook: OKCupid Experiments With Users Too

It's Not Just Facebook: OKCupid Experiments With Users Too

Newsy (July 29, 2014) If you've been looking for love online, there's a chance somebody has been looking at how you're looking. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
How Your Face Can Leave A Good Or Bad First Impression

How Your Face Can Leave A Good Or Bad First Impression

Newsy (July 29, 2014) Researchers have found certain facial features can make us seem more attractive or trustworthy. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
Losing Sleep Leaves You Vulnerable To 'False Memories'

Losing Sleep Leaves You Vulnerable To 'False Memories'

Newsy (July 27, 2014) A new study shows sleep deprivation can make it harder for people to remember specific details of an event. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
University Quiz Implies Atheists Are Smarter Than Christians

University Quiz Implies Atheists Are Smarter Than Christians

Newsy (July 25, 2014) An online quiz from a required course at Ohio State is making waves for suggesting atheists are inherently smarter than Christians. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.

Save/Print:
Share:

Breaking News:
from the past week

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

Environment News

Technology News



Save/Print:
Share:

Free Subscriptions


Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Get Social & Mobile


Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

Have Feedback?


Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Mobile: iPhone Android Web
Follow: Facebook Twitter Google+
Subscribe: RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins