April 25, 2012 -
Did John Edwards work with his aide to hide his affair or didn't he? Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, faces up to 30 years in prison and $1.5 million in fines if he is found guilty on six charges of violating campaign finance laws, allegedly paid off to his mistress Rielle Hunter. As his trial plods along, there are certain tells, experts say, that reveal when a person is lying -- whether that be him or his aide, Andrew Young. But as detective shows and police know, liars always have their tells. In this slideshow, we take a look at the ways liars show their true colors.
Even if a liar can put on his or her best poker face, unconscious emotional "cracks" -- or unintentional and brief flashes of emotion -- give away a subject's real mental state, according to a study by Stephen Porter's Forensic Psychology Lab at Dalhousie University.
Although sudden cracks in facial expression could give away subtle clues to deception, one researcher found that tiny movements in facial muscles -- such as the zygo maticus major and the orbicularis oculi -- can unmask liars. Social psychologist Mark Frank used computer technology to analyze facial expressions, following a large body of research "about the evolutionarily-derived nature of emotion and its expression," according to a press release on EurekAlert!. Micro-expressions in subjects' faces, such as tics, smiles, frowns and wrinkles, essentially serve as accurate windows into the emotions, even if the person being interrogated is trying to suppress his or her feelings. Frank's system can be used not only to uncover potential criminals, but also even reveal terrorist threats. Frank, however, is quick to point out that his system only provides investigators with "very good clues" and "not proof of anything."
The Eagles may have been on to something. Eyes may reveal a liar in the act, and scientists at the University of Utah have developed technology to detect just that, as reported by Discovery News' Tracy Staedter in 2010. A computer camera and tracking software record minute eye movements to measure cognitive reaction. By contrast, a polygraph measures a subject's emotional reaction. The system "also records other variables, including the time it takes to respond to a question, how long it takes a subject to read or even reread a question and how many errors are made," according to the report. The researchers hope that the technology will be adopted by various U.S. defense, intelligence and law enforcement agencies that regularly employ polygraph tests.
As anyone who has ever dealt with a bad liar before can attest, some people just can't keep a story straight. But even the most talented studied storyteller can fall into some familiar speech patterns that indicate a truthful tale. In a study published in American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, UCLA professor of psychology R. Edward Geiselman and his colleagues reveal speech patterns they have detected that are often red flags for deceit. Liars very often provide few details, have a tendency to repeat questions, actively monitor listener reactions, speak in sentence fragments and more. To unmask dishonesty, Geiselman and colleagues suggest listeners have potential deceivers tell their story backwards, ask open-ended questions and never interrupt.
If the source of every lie is the brain, shouldn't it be possibly to simply see if that particular region of the brain associated with deceit is active when a subject is lying? Scientists are attempting to use functional-magnetic-resonance-imaging (fMRI) as a lie detector. In a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2009, Joshua Greene, an assistant professor of psychology at Harvard University, found that "areas within the volunteers' prefrontal cortices registered vigorous activity," according to a report on TIME.com. However, as Greene admits, the technique can't tell the difference between someone who intends to lie and a person who is contemplating whether to lie. Despite the limitations of this kind of technology, at least two companies have offered lie detection services using the same technique. This application has led some scholars to criticize these lie detection methods as no better than the polygraph. Even though these kinds of studies currently have their detractors, the efforts aren't without warrant. A 2005 study out of the University of Southern California and published in the British Journal of Psychiatry found brain abnormalities in people who are habitual liars. "The liars had significantly more 'white matter' and slightly less 'gray matter' than those they were measured against," according to a press release available on Science Daily. The wiring in the brain, white matter may help liars with the extra cognitive effort needed to fabricate information.
Liars may not actually have their pants on fire, but their faces sure seem to heat up when they're not telling the truth, according to a study led by the Mayo Clinic and published in Nature in 2002. In 80 percent of cases studied for the experiment, heat patterns in the face change dramatically when a person is lying. Using high-definition thermal imaging technology, an investigator can monitor these heat patterns to assess the veracity of a subject's statements.
Although handwriting analysis is often regarded as a pseudoscience, it may have a potentially legitimate application in assisting with lie detection, according to researchers at the University of Haifa in Israel. Using a computerized tool to detect a user's hand movements, the researchers found that certain cues, such as "the duration of time that the pen is on paper versus in the air; the length height and width of each writing stroke;
the pressure implemented on the writing surface," can signal when someone is about to write an untruthful statement, according to a release in Science Daily. This technology is intended to work in tandem with verbal-based lie detectors.
When Richie Incognito was suspended from the Miami Dolphins last week under allegations of bullying teammate Jonathan Martin, most of his teammates came to his defense, claiming that Incognito's actions stemmed out of football tradition.
"If entrance into a group requires a lot of effort or enduring something that is unpleasant or embarrassing, we attribute greater worth to the group," said Clark Power, Notre Dame professor of psychology and founder of the Play Like A Champion Educational Series for youth and high school sports. "In sports, we might say that we will value being a member of the team more to justify going through the hazing we are put through."
Proponents of initiation rites and hazing say that the traditions build character and team unity. Still, Power and other experts agree that hazing should never be condoned.
"Studies show that harder tasks required to get into a group can increase (the standing of a new member) for a group," said Hank Nuwer, a journalism professor at Franklin College in Indiana who has written four books on hazing. "But this is a quick fix and doesn't stop cliques and resentment from forming."
Look at the extreme groups that promote hazing-type violence, suggested Susan Lipkins, psychologist and author of "Preventing Hazing: How Parents, Teachers and Coaches Can Stop the Violence, Harassment, and Humiliation."
"People bond by sharing an experience," Lipkins said. "When conditions are dramatic or traumatic, bonding happens almost instantly. Hazing activities are based on traditions and are used to discipline or to maintain a hierarchy. These acts are either physically or psychologically harmful or potentially harmful."
So when do acceptable rites of initiation cross the line into hazing?
Although current members of the Miami Dolphins have publicly supported Incognito, denying that his actions were harmful, some former teammates expressed their doubts.
"Hate is a strong word but I've always hated Incognito," Lawrence Jackson, a former NFL player, said on Twitter. "Just for perspective, he's the guy that makes you want to spit in his face."
College teammate David Kolowski said Incognito's bullying goes back to 2002, when one player walked out of practice after Incognito knocked him to the ground during practice, USA Today reports.
Bystanders, most hazing and bullying experts agree, have a great deal of power in such situations. But football players are so indoctrinated in a culture that celebrates a narrow view of masculinity that it's easier to blame the victim, said Dan Lebowitz, executive director of the Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University in Boston.
Jeff Lewis/Icon SMI
"We have a skewed view of what manhood is," Lebowitz said. "If our definition of masculinity can't include kindness and compassion, and if you're acculturated in that definition for the entirety of your upbringing, the first thing you do is blame the victim. Teammates were saying he should've just punched him out. Of course, at the end of the day, he did something that takes even more courage."
By not speaking up for Martin, teammates were reinforcing Incognito's behavior, according to the bystander theory.
"Bystanders often become part of a cycle, repeating the bullying that they saw or experienced," Lipkins said. But bystanders also have the power to help the victim.
"Bystanders are actually the answer to the problem," she said. "If we could train bystanders to report, or to train them to act as a group to intervene, hazing might be reduced."
A 2008 study showed that 55 percent of college students in clubs, sports or other organizations experienced hazing.
"I believe that hazing is becoming more prevalent, more violent, and more sexualized," Lipkins said. "One reason is that with each hazing the perpetrators want to leave their own mark so they usually increase the violence, the humiliation, the sexuality, etc."
But experts have differing opinions on whether hazing is getting better or worse.
"We have seen lots of organizations ban it and in most states (44) it is against the law," Power said. "I do see it becoming less violent when it does occur."
By walking out of the situation, Martin helped shed light on bullying and hazing in the NFL by sparking a conversation, Lebowitz said.
For example, an unscientific survey of NFL players by ESPN conducted last week showed that most of the 72 players surveyed -- 57 percent -- would not want Incognito as a teammate. And 43 percent said they had been victims of hazing while playing in the NFL.
"Change happens because of conversation," Lebowitz said. "These types of incidents raise the conversation to a national level."