WHO CAN CATCH A LIAR?’, Ekman and O’Sullivan, 1991.
What is the definition of lying or indeed deception? Well deception
can be defined in many ways, but it was termed by Vrij (Vrij, 2000,
p.6) as a successful or unsuccessful deliberate attempt, without
forewarning, to create in another a belief, which the communicator
considers to be untrue.
Telling lies is a daily life event, which varies in quite complex ways
depending on the situation the person is in and the person being lied
to. People lie for all kinds of reasons. However half the lies are
either self–orientated, and are therefore intended to make the liar
appear better or to gain personal advantage (DePaulo et al., 1996).
Self– orientated lies consist of people lying in order to avoid
punishment, to make a positive impression on others or to protect
themselves. Some lies are other–orientated, to make another person
feel better or for another’s benefit.
How can you tell if someone is lying to you? People generally believe
that nonverbal cues to deception exist and they know what these cues
are; but how accurate are people at detecting lies?
In laboratory studies concerning detection of deception, observers are
given videotaped or audiotaped statements of various people who are
either lying or telling the truth. After each statement the
participant is asked to judge whether the statement are true or false.
In most studies reported, people have not been very good at judging
when people are lying. Average accuracy in detecting deceit has rarely
been above 60% with 50% being chance and most people have performed
below 50%.
Studies revealed that in three separate experiments conducted by Kraut
and Poe (1980) DePaulo and Pfeifer (1986) and Ko...
... middle of paper ...
...ussed in the appropriate section of the study, therefore this
could be an area that could be further explored in the future.
On the whole in conclusion, the study has established the extent to
which people are able to detect lies by observing physiological
responses. Mistakes in lie detection are inevitable, but perhaps with
the correct training, experience and motivation we may become
specialists in detecting lies. But is this possible?.
In my opinion in both theoretical and practical terms; this is a sound
work on a vital subject. Although room for further research is needed.
REFERENCES
----------
Aldert Vrij, (2002) ‘Telling and Detecting Lies’ chapter 4, in Nicola
Brace and Helen Westcott (ed) ‘Applying Psychology’ The Open
University
Journal article – Paul Ekman and Maureen O’Sullivan (1991) ‘Who Can
Catch A Liar’ Vol.46, no 9, pp.913-930
As John Ruskin once said, “The essence of lying is in deception, not in words.” This essence is debated in “The Ways We Lie”, written by Stephanie Ericsson, and “Doubts about Doublespeak”, written by William Lutz. In “The Ways We Lie”, Ericsson talks about the different ways people lie on a day to day basis. By comparison, in “Doubts about Doublespeak”, Lutz discusses the different forms of doublespeak that many individuals frequently use. Lutz considers doublespeak as a language that distorts the meaning of words in order to deceive another person, and only “pretends to communicate” (83). Although both authors agree that lying is about the use of deceptive language, Ericsson describes this use of language as occasionally being necessary,
In The Liars ' Club, Mary Karr recounts her dysfunctional childhood and the various struggles she and her family endured. Although both of Mary’s parents were suffered from severe alcoholism, Mary’s mother was also incredibly abusive as a result of mental illness. Growing up, Mary frequently witnessed violent episodes, fits and delusions that eventually landed her mother in a mental institution. Inevitably intensified by the alcoholism, her parents fought all the time, resulting in physical violence and constant threats of divorce. In just a few of her mother’s episodes, she tried to drive their car off of a bridge, starts fires and almost stabs her children with
The story of Ryan Ferguson is a bizarre case that many find difficult to comprehend. In 2001, a murder was committed and although DNA evidence was left behind, no suspects were found. The case became cold, until two years later when an anonymous call came saying that the murderer was Charles Erickson. Apparently, Chuck Erickson blacked out the night of Halloween and thought that he may have committed the crime because he was in the vicinity of the scene. When interrogated his story was loose and full of doubts. The police tell him about the murder weapon and various details of the crime, including motive.
Welty's honest tone draws readers more closely to her emotions regarding literature through phrases like "the feeling that resides in the printed word, reaches me through the reader-voice" and "whether I'm right to trust so far I don't know". Welty uses words like "truth" and "trust" in order to express her abstract emotions in a way that the reader can understand, but that is also representative of her actual feelings. She writes, "the sound of what falls on the page begins the process of testing it for truth" and "I have always trusted this voice". When people write, the words tend to resound inside their own heads as they go. By "truth", Welty means how "right" or "correct" the words sound together. This not only refers to grammar, but also
One thing that we all (humans) have in common is that we lie and cheat. At some point of our lives, whether young or old we have been guilty of lying or cheating. The book The Honest Truth About Dishonesty by Dan Ariely delves into the question of why we cheat. He explores this question through numerous experiments, real life examples, and personal encounters. This book has honestly been one of the most interesting books I have ever read. It kept me going from the beginning to end, captivating my attention through every page. The book is balanced between delightful learning and humor. Dan Ariely doesn’t fail in keeping you laughing while learning something new.
Through out history people have been influenced by what they want to hear and the way a current trend is happening. The evolution of mankind has drifted towards a different society than what we where born to sustain. We are emotionally driven human beings that want to feel accepted by the rules of society. Sometimes an individual can confuse actions or emotions towards trying to fulfill the standards society has imposed. I have analyzed two articles that incorporate how a society reacts towards integrity as well as honesty and the belief that an individual in order to be a part of society one must comply with the standards that are set. As I began to interpret what Stephen L. Carter explained in “The Insufficiency of Honesty” I examined they
Sutliff, Usha. “‘Liars’ Brains Wired Differently.” USC News. USC University of Southern California. 19 Sept. 2005. Web. 11 December 2013.
The polygraph test, introduced nearly a century ago, has been widely used in the detection of deception and for some time, has been considered by law enforcement representatives, an exceptionally valid testing apparatus. The media and law enforcement representatives describe the various methods of detecting deception to be extremely valid and reliable in detecting deceptive cues, although the various research done through field studies and controlled experiments demonstrate significant error rates amongst the various testing procedures used. Physiological responses of an individual may vary from person to person. No matter how small the error rate may be, there is always a chance that environmental conditions as well as physiological conditions induced by the individual or the interpreter can have an effect on the interpretational conclusion of what were considered to be deceptive cues. These influential factors may illustrate a small positive or negative error rate, but when the conclusion is applied to a conviction, it can possibly establish or distinguish false results to be accurate or inconclusive.
Traced all the way back to six centuries before christ, the Liar Paradox is an argument that arrives at a contradiction when assuming the principle of bivalence. The principle of bivalence states that a declarative statement must have only one truth value; the declarative statement is either true or false, not both (Bernecker). The classical liar paradox is composed of paradoxical statements, like: “This sentence is false,” and “L1 : L1 is false” (Bernecker). If the statement “L1 is false” is true, then “L1” is false, because the first premise says, “L1 is false” (Bernecker). However, if the statement “L1 is false” is false, then “L1” is not false, it is true (Bernecker). Instinctively, “L1” seems to be neither false nor true, but because
Deception is sometimes used by researchers when they conduct psychological experiments. Deception occurs when the participant is misled about the purpose, design, of the experiment, or when the researcher uses deliberate misleading to persuade the subject into believing a certain view (McLeod). Many people believe deception is ethically wrong, and psychologists should not use it to obtain important information. I believe psychologists should be able to use deception if the participant is not psychologically harmed. It is believed that deception is the only way we can obtain true information (Connolly). The knowledge we are able to obtain about psychological tendencies outweighs the temporary effects of deception.
"Lie Detector."2 Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6Th Edition (2013): 1. Middle Search Plus. Web. 26 Nov. 2013.
Means of lie detection were used far before the modern polygraph was invented. For example, in the 18th century, a person’s hand was placed in a boiling pot of water and if their hand burned, then they were determined to be lying (The History and Basic Facts of Polygraph, 2009). Eventually the...
Feeling comes into play when lying. A good liar will know how their feelings should be brought in. when something is tough the occasional tear will appear. If they are not so good they will often be caught because of them trying to force feelings out.
“It is better to tell the truth now, than to lie and face the consequences later”. This aphorism originated in biblical times, more specifically in the Bible in the book of 1st Peter. For example, when Peter says in verse 3:10, “for, whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech”.
People of wealth and stature are more likely to lie and deceive to get what they want, then people of middle and lower classes. The most common consensus for this is greed. Although greed applies to both lower and upper class, Studies conducted at the University of California, Berkeley showed that upper-class individuals were more likely to exhibit unethical decision-making tendencies, take valued goods from others, lie in a negotiation, cheat to increase their chances of winning a prize, and endorse unethical behavior at work, than were lower-class individuals. However the lower class individuals who almost never lied in the