New TV series: "Lie to Me"

[PepperFritz]

Just watched the pilot for a new series called "Lie to Me", starring Tim Roth. It is inspired by the work of Dr. Paul Eckman, a clinical psychologist who pioneered the technique of detecting minute facial "micro-expressions" that people are unable to control, and which betray their true thoughts and emotions. Many criminal investigation units now use his work to to their advantage when inerviewing suspects.

Anyway, I recommend the show, as it is well-written and acted, and entertaining. And, although some of the "science" involved is a little "dumbed down" and simplified for the average TV audience, I think it has the potential to be a good educational tool for teaching people methods for recognizing deceptive and psychpathic behaviour....

 

[anart]

Just watched the pilot for a new series called "Lie to Me", starring Tim Roth. It is inspired by the work of Dr. Paul Eckman, a clinical psychologist who pioneered the technique of detecting minute facial "micro-expressions" that people are unable to control, and which betray their true thoughts and emotions. Many criminal investigation units now use his work to to their advantage when inerviewing suspects.

Anyway, I recommend the show, as it is well-written and acted, and entertaining. And, although some of the "science" involved is a little "dumbed down" and simplified for the average TV audience, I think it has the potential to be a good educational tool for teaching people methods for recognizing deceptive and psychpathic behaviour....

One thing you might be missing is the fact that psychopaths - essential psychopaths - have no problem at all lying, therefore the 'micro-expressions' that give away a normal person who is lying would likely not apply.  I only say likely since I have no research at hand to reference as a source regarding micro-expressions specifically.  There, is, however copious evidence via Hare, Cleckley, et al that psychopaths lie as easily and naturally as they breath, thus no 'sweaty palms' and other physiological affects that normal people exhibit when lying that are caused by stress of one type or another.  The psychopath feels NO stress about lying. 

So, while the television show might illustrate deceptive behavior, it's highly unlikely that it would illustrate essential psychopaths that are not given away by such 'human' signals.  Then again, it is television 'programming' after all. It would be interesting to see what research if any has been done on micro-expressions in essential psychopaths.

 

[PepperFritz]

Anart:

Not surprisingly, you are assuming that this technique works much the same way as a polygraph, in that it detects "stress". But that is not its primary focus. For instance, part of the technique involves being able to read subtle eye movements, how and where the eyes travel as the brain accesses the memory of actual events, vs recall of a prepared story, or making a story up on the spot. While a psychopath may be able to control their stress (or actually feel no stress at all), in their microexpressions they usually give away other non-stressful emotions, such as amusement, pleasure, contempt, disgust, curiosity, surprise, etc.

Also, while it is true that *some* psychopaths are able to beat polygraphs, it is by no means true that they are ALL able to do so. Likewise, even if there may be *some* psychopaths who might be able to control their micro-expressions, there will still be many who cannot, and therefore the technique has great value. Also, with this technique, the very fact that someone would have NONE of the "normal" microexpressions, or NO unconscious eye movement, and too much DELIBERATE eye contact, would be a huge clue that something was not right about the guy and/or that he is hiding something.

Bottom line: I wasn't trying to portray Dr. Eckman's techniques as some kind of "fool proof" method of identifying psychopaths, not at all. But from everything I've read, for those trained in the method, they do seem to be highly effective in the detection of deception. And to the extent that a "TV show" can accurately portray such techniques, I think i has to potential to be an educational tool -- if only by arousing someone's interest to the point of going to the source of the material, Dr. Eckman's books and training material itself.

 

[anart]

Anart:

Not surprisingly, you are assuming that this technique works much the same way as a polygraph, in that it detects "stress". But that is not its primary focus. For instance, part of the technique involves being able to read subtle eye movements, how and where the eyes travel as the brain accesses the memory of actual events, vs recall of a prepared story, or making a story up on the spot. While a psychopath may be able to control their stress (or actually feel no stress at all), in their microexpressions they usually give away other non-stressful emotions, such as amusement, pleasure, contempt, disgust, curiosity, surprise, etc.

No, actually I'm well aware of the technique, could you provide a link to research on essential psychopaths and micro-expressions to back up what you're saying about the 'non-stressful' emotions as it applies to psychopaths?

Also, while it is true that *some* psychopaths are able to beat polygraphs, it is by no means true that they are ALL able to do so.

Again, if you could provide some back up for that, it would be great.  I'm talking about essential psychopaths - not just people exhibiting psychopathic behavior - perhaps that's the confusion - you are talking about people exhibiting psychopathic behavior and not essential psychopaths, per se.

Bottom line: I wasn't trying to portray Dr. Eckman's techniques as some kind of "fool proof" method of identifying psychopaths, not at all.

Well, if it relies on normal human emotional expression via micro-expressions it could not be fool proof, if it's even applicable, for essential psychopaths.

But from everything I've read, for those trained in  the method, they do seem to be highly effective in the detection of deception.

I would agree about the detection of deception - the issue I brought up is about how it applies to psychopaths, since you brought that up in your initial post.  It appears that you are confusing essential psychopaths with people who exhibit psychopathic behavior - or, more likely, I am simply confusing what you meant by your initial post.

The technique is fascinating, which is why I'd love to know if they've done any research on essential psychopaths.

 

[FireShadow]

In a recent episode, the main character actually made a distinction that "sociopaths" may not show these signs of deception (actually signs of emotions that contradict what someone is saying).

Also, I found this website (http://paulekman.com/) of Dr. Paul Ekman (whose work the show is based on), but I have not yet had time to peruse it.

This article at Scientific American explains Dr. Ekman's work (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-look-tells-all)

According to Dr. Ekman:

"The most I can do is tell how you are feeling at the moment but not what you are thinking."

So, the task is to read the emotion expressed in the context of the question. As they say on the show, it is not if someone is lying, but why. Context is everything.

Further in the article,

To test his own hunch, Ekman headed for Brazil with a stack of photographs in his suitcase. The portraits showed sad, angry, happy or disgusted faces of white Americans, yet Brazilian college students had no trouble identifying the feelings depicted. Expeditions to Chile, Argentina and Japan generated the same results; regardless of where he went, local people seemed to understand, and use, the same facial expressions as the North Americans.

Concerned that perhaps inhabitants of "modern" societies had somehow cross-pollinated their facial movements, Ekman in 1967 visited extremely isolated tribes living in the jungles on the island of New Guinea. There again, though, he found that the basic emotions he had postulated, such as happiness, sadness, anger, fear, surprise and disgust, were associated with universal facial expressions. The excursion sealed it for him: the language of the face has biological origins, and culture has no significant effect on it.

I found the show and the article very interesting. I have just not had time to explore further.

 

[anart]

In a recent episode, the main character actually made a distinction that "sociopaths" may not show these signs of deception (actually signs of emotions that contradict what someone is saying). 

Interesting, though there's that 'sociopath' word as opposed to 'psychopath', again - blurring those lines. 

One of the reasons I'd be interested in seeing any research done on psychopaths in this area is because of Hare's experience with the EEGs of psychopaths.  Laura has discussed it in several places, this being one of them...

Robert Hare once submitted a paper to a scientific journal. The paper included EEGs of several groups of adult men performing a language task. The editor of the journal returned the paper saying "Those EEG's couldn't have come from real people."

But they did. They were the EEG's of psychopaths.

My point being that the brain is different - it works differently, thus my interest in whether any research has been done on micro-expressions and psychopaths. Assuming what would apply to normal human beings would apply to a psychopath isn't usually the case.

 

[FireShadow]

Interesting, though there's that 'sociopath' word as opposed to 'psychopath', again - blurring those lines.

Exactly. However, there is a lot of disagreement even among experts as to whether or not sociopaths and psychopaths are the same thing or not. I am thinking there is a deliberate blurring of these lines injected throughout the entire body of knowledge on psychopaths and sociopaths. Only since finding SOTT, have I seen the distinctions.

[quote author=anart]

One of the reasons I'd be interested in seeing any research done on psychopaths in this area is because of Hare's experience with the EEGs of psychopaths. Laura has discussed it in several places, this being one of them...

Robert Hare once submitted a paper to a scientific journal. The paper included EEGs of several groups of adult men performing a language task. The editor of the journal returned the paper saying "Those EEG's couldn't have come from real people."

But they did. They were the EEG's of psychopaths.

My point being that the brain is different - it works differently, thus my interest in whether any research has been done on micro-expressions and psychopaths. Assuming what would apply to normal human beings would apply to a psychopath isn't usually the case.
[/quote]

I would also find that interesting.

Pondering: I wonder if the absence of emotional cues on someone's face is a cue in itself?

 

[PepperFritz]

I wonder if the absence of emotional cues on someone's face is a cue in itself?

Yes, that's what I was suggesting above. While a given psychopath may have the ability to suppress "normal" microexpressions, or may simply not have them at all, would he have the ability to have them "just enough" to appear "normal"? I don't think so. As you say, the fact that there is an absence of microexpressions would be a clue in itself....

 

[PepperFritz]

I'm talking about essential psychopaths - not just people exhibiting psychopathic behavior - perhaps that's the confusion - you are talking about people exhibiting psychopathic behavior and not essential psychopaths, per se.

Yes, I think that *is* the confusion. In my initial post I was not talking about "essential psychopaths", what I said was "I think it has the potential to be a good educational tool for teaching people methods for recognizing deceptive and psychopathic behaviour...."

could you provide a link to research on essential psychopaths and micro-expressions to back up what you're saying about the 'non-stressful' emotions as it applies to psychopaths?

I mis-stated that. I *should* have said: "While a psychopath may be able to control their stress (or actually feel no stress at all), in their microexpressions they usually probably/might give away other non-stressful emotions, such as amusement, pleasure, contempt, disgust, curiosity, surprise, etc.

The technique is fascinating, which is why I'd love to know if they've done any research on essential psychopaths.

No, I don't know of any, but I'll look into it....

 

[Approaching Infinity]

First of all, some things to consider on related subjects. On the subject of lie detectors/galvanic skin response, while psychopaths generally give a lowered GSR response than normal humans, it is still present in situations in which normal people feel stress. As such, psychopaths do not actually have any innate ability to beat a lie detector test. True, they lie easily and without effort. However, their autonomic nervous system still reacts to the situation. In Hare's 1970 book "Psychopathy" he summarizes the research available up until that time and speculates that the GSR they present is a result of the excitement of lying. They enjoy the game of lying, which gives a noticeable ANS response. Hare quotes one psychopath who gleefully told him he passed a lie detector test by digging one fingernail under another. So while psychopaths well-skilled in lying may not feel "detection apprehension", or "deception guilt" (as Ekman calls them), they may feel excitement, what Ekman calls "duping delight".

In his book Telling Lies Ekman points out that in his studies he found what he called "natural liars". Ekman differentiates this group from psychopaths, but I think the only reason he does so is his lack of understanding of so-called "successful psychopaths". He says this group was not psychopathic because "there was nothing anti-social in their makeup. Unlike psychopaths, they did not use their ability to lie to harm others." How does he know? Ekman does say that psychopaths, well-practiced liars, and "natural liars" are the hardest to catch in a lie. He also says psychopaths have a greater ability than normal to control their facial expressions. However, I haven't found anything that he says about psychopaths and microexpressions.

I would hypothesize that some emotions that might come up in micro-expressions would be contempt, disgust, and pleasure, but I don't know for sure.

Exactly. However, there is a lot of disagreement even among experts as to whether or not sociopaths and psychopaths are the same thing or not. I am thinking there is a deliberate blurring of these lines injected throughout the entire body of knowledge on psychopaths and sociopaths. Only since finding SOTT, have I seen the distinctions.

Actually, the distinction is made quite clearly among almost all researchers studying psychopathy. It is only in those groups unaware of psychopathy research that the "debate" comes up.

 

[Beau]

I wonder if the absence of emotional cues on someone's face is a cue in itself?

Yes, that's what I was suggesting above. While a given psychopath may have the ability to suppress "normal" microexpressions, or may simply not have them at all, would he have the ability to have them "just enough" to appear "normal"? I don't think so. As you say, the fact that there is an absence of microexpressions would be a clue in itself....

Remember also that psychopaths study "normal" people's facial expressions to learn how to use them themselves. In fact I remember reading about one psychopath who would work on his facial expressions by staring at himself in the mirror while he did them. My guess is a very good pantomime would be impossible to detect from a normal microexpression.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Remember also that psychopaths study "normal" people's facial expressions to learn how to use them themselves. In fact I remember reading about one psychopath who would work on his facial expressions by staring at himself in the mirror while he did them. My guess is a very good pantomime would be impossible to detect from a normal microexpression.

One thing to keep in mind about microexpressions is that they are involuntary and last for about a quarter of a second. I've read a lot saying that psychopaths mimic facial expressions, but haven't seen anything about them mimicking microexpressions. Not saying it's not possible, though. If one was mimicking a microexpression of fear, for example, that would mean that they were pretending to hide the fact that they're afraid, which is a pretty complex manipulation! My guess is that the psychopath would just pretend to be scared, or not show any fear.

 

[PepperFritz]

One thing to keep in mind about microexpressions is that they are involuntary and last for about a quarter of a second. I've read a lot saying that psychopaths mimic facial expressions, but haven't seen anything about them mimicking microexpressions. Not saying it's not possible, though. If one was mimicking a microexpression of fear, for example, that would mean that they were pretending to hide the fact that they're afraid, which is a pretty complex manipulation! My guess is that the psychopath would just pretend to be scared, or not show any fear.

Yes, apparently a lot of these microexpressions have to be filmed, and then played in slow-motion, in order to be seen....

 

[Beau]

One thing to keep in mind about microexpressions is that they are involuntary and last for about a quarter of a second. I've read a lot saying that psychopaths mimic facial expressions, but haven't seen anything about them mimicking microexpressions. Not saying it's not possible, though. If one was mimicking a microexpression of fear, for example, that would mean that they were pretending to hide the fact that they're afraid, which is a pretty complex manipulation! My guess is that the psychopath would just pretend to be scared, or not show any fear.

I see their is a difference and may have gone a bit too far. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Inti]

One of the reasons I'd be interested in seeing any research done on psychopaths in this area is because of Hare's experience with the EEGs of psychopaths. Laura has discussed it in several places, this being one of them...

Robert Hare once submitted a paper to a scientific journal. The paper included EEGs of several groups of adult men performing a language task. The editor of the journal returned the paper saying "Those EEG's couldn't have come from real people."

But they did. They were the EEG's of psychopaths.

My point being that the brain is different - it works differently, thus my interest in whether any research has been done on micro-expressions and psychopaths. Assuming what would apply to normal human beings would apply to a psychopath isn't usually the case.

I would also find that interesting.

Pondering: I wonder if the absence of emotional cues on someone's face is a cue in itself?

Yes, I think it probably would be the absence of emotion that would give clues. One of the first things that struck me about Bush was his utter lack of facial expression. Except for the occasional look of mild confusion or anger or contempt, there seemed to be no emotion whatsoever on his face.