You’ve probably heard that the so called “Lie Detector” test (the polygraph) doesn’t actually detect when you’ve lied, but rather just takes some physiological measures from your body and these have to be interpreted by experts. Sometimes those experts make mistakes. Join me as I describe a psychological study that tested a new kind of “Lie Detector” – drawings. This study involved Agents, Missions, an Interception, and a mysterious “package”. This is psychology? You better believe it. It’s a subfield of psychology called “forensic psychology“.
3 Comments
Leave a comment
You may also like
Critical Thinking
Research and Stats
Episode 3: Predictions, Predictions
Have you ever heard of someone who says they can predict the future? Perhaps you’ve seen magazine articles in which
Cognition, Intelligence and Language
Emotion
Therapy
Episode 6: The Negative Side of Positive Thinking
What could possibly be wrong with thinking positively? As it turns out, there could be a lot wrong with it.
Uzi Paz
February 27, 2011I wonder also if in forensic investigations, drawing can help identifying less digested visual experience from unconscious filling the gaps to built a reasonable story.
Michael
February 27, 2011David: “micro-expressions” is quite a hot topic these days (http://www.vancouversun.com/Entertainment/Gallery+tell+tale+faces+Lightman+played+actor+Roth/1223364/story.html). I’ll have to get around to doing an episode on it. I’m not really familiar with Ekman’s work. I’ll look into it though.
Derek Weber
February 27, 2011Hi Michael,
I really enjoyed this episode too. You’re on a roll! 🙂
BTW, I thought I’d mention that I’m a real Lie To Me fan (Tim Roth is one of my favourite actors) and I’ve heard a few interviews with the scientist that the show is based on (Dr Paul Ekman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ekman) and it seems quite real – not quackery. I agree that he can’t tell if someone is lying, as you claimed, but he (and the character and his team) are able to spot ‘micro-expressions’, small unconscious expressions that reveal a person’s actual current disposition. You can’t tell what someone is actually thinking or what the truth is, but you can get a clear idea if what they’re saying is at odds with the truth. Coupled with good personal skills the character can guess (educatedly) his way through mysteries.
My point is that I think it’s genuine science, but of course isn’t a silver bullet for lie detectors. 🙂
I’d love to know what you think of Ekman’s work if you happen across it.