What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
63 Comments
- amishjim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6i know my gf is lieing because her mouth is moving
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Keep the lying detection crap coming, this sure makes a field trip for politicians, serial killers, con artists and religion freaks.
- mr804, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The best test is if they have a vagina, you know they are lying.
- terminalfreeze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ptknight said "Wow! My girl is sooo busted"
Hahahah! - databyss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No fair... my woman is ambedexterious!
- Marcelo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't forget to read the original article (the first part): http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies.php
By the way, it has been shown that people do show certain mannerisms when lying...extending that to the eyes is not unreasonable. Of course not everyone does it, so it cannot be extended to everyone. But speaking in generalities, people do tend to look away, etc, to hide in their shame. Unless, of course, you are great at lying and have perfected your skills. ;) - ptknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow! My girl is sooo busted
- sychotoast, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1it's reversed for lefties? now you tell me...
- amishjim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1lying* d0h
- jeffreym, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No problem. If someone asks me a question I just go cross-eyed.
http://celestial-reasoning.blogspot.com/ - 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1> kimos wrote: "Interesting article, but I doubt if it is as simple as they make it sound..."
I'm sure you're right. After all, nothing in life ever is. :) However, I wonder if it might be used in combination with other techniques to establish the truth. - jumjum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Almost a sure way to tell if someone is lying is if they scratch their nose shortly afterward. If they lie to you, they feel guilty about it, blood rushes into their nose, and they have to (relative) scratch it. Try it with someone and let them know you're going to do it beforehand of course, and let the scratching begin.
- Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hey, that's pretty cool. +digg.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A technique that "sort of" works isn't very useful.
- ebenthurston, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0looks like lots of you think your girlfriend is cheating on you. that sucks. you think her other boyfriend spends his days reading digg.com?
- SuperFarStucker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Neuro-Linguistic Programming? Come ***** on, any tool can come up with a 'scientific' name. The practices suggested under such an umbrella are laudable at best and at worst deleterious to the well being of the individual reading them. For example, if you repeat other people's memes, ticks & preferences, they will be more 'susceptible' to your suggestions. Such broad strokes in themselves are the mark of a fraud... I mean, trying to suggest that some 'intrinsic' rule can account for all variations in human cognitive behavior is ridiculous. And it doesn't even hold up to cursory examination! Just try agreeing with everything somebody says in a auditory manner. They'll think you're a bloody loon!
- halophoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0despite the hate above, it's a good article and was thought provoking. Whether or not it was absolute truth is another story. +digg.
- mikeroySoft, on 10/19/2009, -0/+0all your base are...
WHAT YOU SAY?!?! - serra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yikes, there's some bitter boys on here!
- funk-bot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"i know my gf is lieing because her mouth is moving"
hahahaha thats such a funny line
At least u know it sucks when people believe it - terminalfreeze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Not really THAT slow.
- LeeVal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0slow website
- jpc82, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Its not even thought provoking.
Its crap like this that make people believe in this stuff. Cops that still believe in this can charge an innocent person based on these lies, it has happened.
Its all junk science, and I would be hard pressed to find a real academic with scientific data to back it up. - ToadPedestal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Funny people mention that "anyone with a psychology background knows this is bs," because I'm almost certain that I've seen actual research done on it.
We do have statistical evidence (sorry to not link it) that people look different directions when doing certain tasks. They do this by recording eye movements and asking people various questions, including identification questions or complex math questions that involve higher level processing. - gfreak49, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0*** Many critics believe the above is a bunch of bull***t.
lol. interesting, but probably only works some of the time, and not enough to actually base an opinion on whether someone is lying. +digg - kimos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0From TFA:
" *** A typical left-handed person would have the opposite meanings for their eye-directions. "
So you'd need to know if they were left handed or not before you could actually know if they were lying or not? Interesting article, but I doubt if it is as simple as they make it sound... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What if the person lying knows this info and deliberatly looks in an off direction?
- jpc82, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Marcelo
I would believe you if you can show me any credible study that shows the number of people that do these visual queues is statistically higher then any other action someone may do. I have never seen a SCIENTIFIC study to show this.
Sure some people look away, sure some people don't look away, sure some people close their eyes. I have never seen anything that would show that any action is significantly higher then any other action - gwjc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Old; but I'll give it a digg for the NLP tie in.
- roguepirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0how that I know, i'll just look the other way.
- drowelf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes it is. Both mental and physical countermeasures work. It helps if you can practice. Physical countermeasures can be detected if the examiner has the right equiptment (usually special chair or chair pads to detect muscle tension). It also helps to know exactly which question paradigm your examiner is using and how it is scored. After that, it's pretty easy to force an inconclusive result. Appearing truthful if you're lying depends a little, but not appearing deceptive is fairly straight forward.
- skyhighrockets, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0:/
I heard this like 7 years ago. - anti_hax0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Have you seen the episode of Mindfreak when he found the keys to the Viper? He did it on the sales manager or head salesman. You just need to talk or be the the person and be able to read the tells.
It's not BS unless you don't know how to read someone. Of course some people are hard to read. - wmtrader, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is all BS. It is silly to assume that everyone shows the same body language when the try to lie. The best liars believe that their own lies are true, true in some ass backwards weird sort of way. Try this nonsense on a Sociopath (car sales man) and see how far you get.
- anti_hax0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"be with the person"
- pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There is dome truth to how peoples eyes move when thinking but that does not mean that are lying. Its about how you think. I find it alot easier to tell if people are lying not from there eyes but by the ***** they try and pass off.
- anti_hax0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The authorities do this all the time, it's more usable and easier to use than a lie detector or voice-stress analyzer. Poker players do it all the time - analyzing the "tells" of a particular player. It's a mix of psychology and non-verbal communication.
Both of these are pseudo-sciences (not hard sciences) so there will always be interpretations and many exceptions to the rule.
There is no debugger for this... - Nullifidian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In general people look away because they are searching for an answer NOT because they're a liar.
- sabster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0cool but very complicated.. awesome i wonder if thats waht everyone does
- MrOrange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Great article.
If you interested in the subject, then you should give a look at this book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312204280/002-9029264-2824056?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance - aoeu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Have to recall George Costanza's old saying: "It is not a lie when YOU believe it!"
> this is bull, because I never look anyone in the EYE :) Unless shes hot, I'm not looking in no damn eye.
And when she's hot you look her straight in the eyes? Eyes would be the last thing I'd stare at if I were you. - jeznav, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I found videoclips of Derren Brown showing his skills to people detecting lies.
http://www.channel4.com/entertainment/tv/microsites/M/mindcontrol/lying/index.html - ah802, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I stick a pebble into the liars mouth, if it's dry after I ask the question's he gets beheaded. Works everytime.
- AllenS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Give me a "B"
"B!"
Give me a "S"
"S!"
Put it together and what do you get?
"BS!" - drowelf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This stuff is all fun, but it doesn't work. Actually, it work just fine, but the problem is that both the hit rate and the false alarm rate are too poor. Both are roughly at chance. You can check the research on this, or take my word for it. I study lying and deception. The book(s) that the linked page's information is based on is crap and there are a couple hundred others out there just like it. Also, Sicilians are no better liars than anyone else (referring to a previous post). These seem unrelated, but they both "work" for the same reason. People (whether considering the innate deception monitoring powers of their countrymen, or tracking someone's eyes for lies) tend to make a big deal out of the times they get it right and discount the time they get it wrong. This is called confirmation bias by us cognitive scientists. Just because your hits are above chance doesn't mean you've got a good test. You need the false alarms too.
- jeznav, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So then it is possible to beat the lie detector test?
- burntfire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't agree for looking down and to the right for talking to yourself. In my experience, it can be any direction.
- doddilus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"A study was done on this at Oregon State University in 1997. It was found that in this only worked for approx 65% of people.
That is only a 15% increase over flipping a coin! Mildly useful at best." - slicc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Can you point me to any research on this? I cannot seem to find anything on the internet.
- peerk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you suspect someone of lying, just punch them in the throat.
They get what they deserve for being a liar.
And if they are not lying...well do you really want friends you can't trust? -
Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is