Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Better and worse ways to spot a liar

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 152 posts

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#81

Post by hngiszmo »

JonnieCache wrote: post #38
piokoch wrote: post #32

"Thomas Ormerod’s team of security officers faced a seemingly impossible task. At airports across Europe, they were asked to interview passengers on their history and travel plans" It is so sad that nowdays it is not seen as absurdal that some kind of policeman is asking passangers about their travel plans. The journalist get excited that new methods of catching "cheating passangers" are beind developed. Apparently i…

Have border guards not always asked those questions? I'm pretty sure it's been like that since before the 20th century.

Apparently the brain-washing works well.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#82

Post by abawany »

gambiting wrote: post #78
abawany wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly your experience of a journey from communist Poland to Germany was full of Brave New World experiences. Now that that regime is gone, your travel is easier. The GP is pointing out that the rest of the world appears to be adopting the tactics that you encountered 20 years ago. Traveling to the US or Israel, for example.

I said 20 years ago - after the fall of communism. The situation looked like that pretty much until we entered the EU in 2001. Funnily enough, passing the border was easier during communism,because so few people did it that the guards assumed that since you are holding a passport in your hand you must have gone through a very stringent process of obtaining one, and would mostly have a look at your picture, your visa…

My mistake in misunderstanding your original point. However, my point stands in that travel within the EU, which for most countries is like traveling from one state/province to another, does not quite represent the increasing cumbersomeness of international travel to some countries.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#83

Post by agarden »

veb wrote: post #70

I grew up very deaf. I went to mainstream schools, I did everything everyone else would do... except hear much at all. I wore hearing aids which helped somewhat, but that just makes all that jumbled noise louder, which isn't that helpful. I was deaf since birth. So at a very early age I picked up body-language, micro-expressions and of course lip-reading which were rather an integral way for me to communicate! > "The…

Fascinating. The way you describe navigating the world based on people's expressions is similar to how Joe Navarro described his experience. He immigrated to America when a youth and knew no English at the time, forcing him to rely on reading body language to understand what was going on. He went on to be an FBI interrogator and used the skills he developed in reading body language in evaluating the truthfulness of those he questioned.

Navarro wrote a book called "What Every Body is Saying".[0] In it he identifies a number of universal body language patterns and sets out guides for interpreting what they mean based on context.

[0] http://www.amazon.com/What-Every-BODY-Saying-Speed-Reading/d...

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#84

Post by stefantalpalaru »

j_s wrote: post #34

In the 3-season TV show Lie to Me (IMDB: 8.0), the protagonist relies on "micro-expressions" to catch criminals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_Me

Like many theories coming from psychology, micro-expressions are a story without a proof. It's probably the same projection of the investigator's suspicions that takes place when reading tea leaves.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#85

Post by yason »

haberman wrote: post #68
rorykoehler wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to take things as I go (at least when planning seems like overkill, e.g. for non-critical things). This caught me by surprise the last time I flew into NYC from Europe. I had intended to get into the city and then call a friend I was staying with to meet up and go to their place from there. Naturally I didn't get the address before hand. They wouldn't let me into the country without an address on my dis-embark…

The UK does the same thing when you fly there, in my experience.

Flying to UK from where? When flying to the UK from Europe or USA nobody has ever asked me about the address where I would be spending the first night. USA does ask that.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#86

Post by patcheudor »

justzisguyuknow wrote: post #43

This seems to me like the technique that is already employed by Israeli airport security agents. They have a normally-flowing inquisitive conversation with every passenger boarding flights to or from the country, and they are very good at detecting when the details don't add up or when the person is acting too uncomfortable.

I do wonder, and this is a serious question. Why would someone trying to be deceitful because they have something very serious to hide even take the chance on speaking with a security agent? I'm not suggesting they "plead the fifth," but rather carry a card explaining that they are mute. Doctors papers are easy to forge.

If the incident leading to the condition happened recently, then that would be an excuse for not knowing sign language. Yes, they may still need to write their answers, but it is universally accepted that most people don't like to write so they could keep their answers brief without raising suspicion. By writing slowly, they may even drive the interviewer to the point they cut the questioning short. Very serious bad guys could even get a botox injection beforehand, paralyzing their lips or get their mouth wired shut.

My point is that at the end of the day, the goal here is to catch very serious bad guys. Any truly dangerous person with the intent and actual capability to do something very bad should have tools of deceit on par with their capabilities for harm up to and including getting one's mouth wired shut. Note that for this discussion I'm discounting "shoe bomber" types as not really having a capability for harm. I suppose that at the end of the day, that's who techniques like these are aimed at in the first place. Alas, there is no such thing as perfect security.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#87

Post by larrys »

samuellb wrote: post #19

Not sure if trying to "trap" the liar is always the right way to go. Once I had to work with a freelance web master and we were trying to cancel his contract and make him transfer the domain name to us (an association I was working for). I confronted him by asking politely for a written copy of his contract because I thought he was lying about the length of the contract. He was insulted and claimed there was a verbal…

"Not sure if trying to "trap" the liar is always the right way to go."

Agree almost never the right thing to do. Trapping people makes them dig in their heels typically as opposed to giving them a graceful way to give you what you want. All of this is situation specific of course but as a rule I never call people out on their lies in negotiation.

"Once I had to work with a freelance web master and we were trying to cancel his contract and make him transfer the domain name to us (an association I was working for)."

Honestly, best way to handle this type of things is to go the "scary lawyer letter" route. Try nicely (without threatening) and if that fails get an attorney to write the "scary lawyer letter". At that point the idea of actually getting some money (rather than having to hire an attorney to defend a verbal contract) would seem very attractive. There are other methods that can be employed (UDRP, trademark law) however they are more expensive and depend on the specifics.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#89

Post by andreyf »

patcheudor wrote: post #86
justzisguyuknow wrote: post #43

This seems to me like the technique that is already employed by Israeli airport security agents. They have a normally-flowing inquisitive conversation with every passenger boarding flights to or from the country, and they are very good at detecting when the details don't add up or when the person is acting too uncomfortable.

I do wonder, and this is a serious question. Why would someone trying to be deceitful because they have something very serious to hide even take the chance on speaking with a security agent? I'm not suggesting they "plead the fifth," but rather carry a card explaining that they are mute. Doctors papers are easy to forge. If the incident leading to the condition happened recently, then that would be an excuse for not…

I think questions at a border don't really fall under the fifth, as you're submitting to them voluntarily because you want to get in the country. You can refuse to answer any question, of course, but then the border agents can refuse to let you into the country.

I'm not sure if the goal is solely to stop "truly bad guys" who want to bring down a plane from getting on it, but rather make a note of anyone who might be traveling under false pretenses for any number of reasons.

Re: Better and worse ways to spot a liar

#90

Post by haberman »

yason wrote: post #85
haberman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK does the same thing when you fly there, in my experience.

Flying to UK from where? When flying to the UK from Europe or USA nobody has ever asked me about the address where I would be spending the first night. USA does ask that.

Every time I've flown to the UK from the USA, the entry card has asked for an address in England. The first time (in 2005) I left it blank and they wouldn't let me pass immigration until I filled it out.
Post reply on HN