Social Engineering Blogs

An Aggregator for Blogs About Social Engineering and Related Fields

The Efficacy of Training to Recognize Microexpression of Emotion

A new study performed by Dr. David Matsumoto and Dr. Hyi Sung Hwang demonstrated that the ability to read microexpressions, facial expressions of emotion that can appear on the face as fast as 1/2 second,  can be trained.

They present two studies that prove this claim as well as evidence for the retention of the training effects.  Their study is the first scientific evidence of training efficacy to read microexpressions in normal adult populations.

These findings are important because they demonstrate that not only can people be taught the ability to read emotions on the face, but also that this ability can be retained.

See the full paper and the research for both studies here.

Lie Spotters

What are the tricks to spotting liars?   Well, the answer is simple training, training, and more training.  The Huffington Post wrote about deception detection techniques used in the law enforcement and Intelligence world every day.

They suggest that extroverts lie more than introverts and that extroverts maintain their lies longer in interrogations.  Huff post writes that liars are verbal and gregarious as well as being strategic thinkers who can intuitively sense how others perceive them.

Another interesting tidbit is that men tell eight times more lies about themselves than others, while women lie more to protect others.

LieSpotting clue #2: Listen for distancing language and non contracted denials:  Watch as Bill Clinton says “ I did NOT” instead of “I didn’t” — that’s a non contracted denial.  Listen as he says “ THAT WOMAN … Miss Lewinsky”… classic distancing language

LieSpotting tip#6: Watch for gaps between someone’s words and their body language.  One of the most common deception “tells” is saying “yes” while shaking the head “no.” John Edwards is a prime example of this

Check out Huffington’s website for more interesting lie detection tips and videos:  Be sure to look at slide 10 Putting it all together of A-Rod and his denial of drug use.

Toddler Shoots Mom-Statement Analysis by Susan Constantine

The way one phrases and constructs their words are strong indicators to what the truth is and to what really happened. People say what they mean, and they mean what they say.

Humintell’s associate and body language expert, Susan Constantine comments on this terrible tragedy and the “distressed” 911 caller.

Susan’s advice while listening to the call: don’t get caught up by the hysterical voice, rather listen to what is said and the background noises to tie it all together.

Susan states, “I listened to the tape over and over again and it was clear “the father was lying.” Here is why…

DISPATCHER: “Okay.  Who shot her?”
CALLER:  “I was taking the gun from him.  I was trying to take it from him.”

Susan: A truthful person would have said who did it “the son” not what happened. The father also said I was
TAKING the gun from him, and right after said I was TRYING to take it from him. Trying is an attempt or
struggle to take something away. Keep in mind the child is under 3 years old.

DISPATCHER:  “From who?  From Who?  From Who?”
CALLER:  “From my son.  From my son.  He’s right here.”

Susan: Why did the father say he is right here “this is irrelevant and unsolicited information?

CALLER:  “Oh God.”
DISPATCHER:  “Okay.  What’s going on there?  You need police or rescue.”
CALLER:  “Yes.  Police.  We need ambulance.  She’s on the ground right now.  I have the gun.

Susan: Father says she is on the floor RIGHT NOW, Where was she before? Then he says he has the gun and
later says it’s on the couch

My little boy had the gun and he picked it up off the ground, I don’t know.  He never have been (inaudible).”

Susan: Father had to have seen the gun on the floor before the toddler picked it up

DISPATCHER:   “Okay.  Okay.  Slow down for me and tell me what happened.
DISPATCHER:  “Listen. Listen. Listen.  I already have a call in for dispatch.”
CALLER:  “(inaudible)  Oh God.  I can’t believe this.  Oh God.  Please she is still on the ground.  Please.  Please.”

Susan: Father says she is STILL on the floor, where was she before? If mom was shot you would expect her to
be on the floor if that is where shooting occurred.

DISPATCHER:  “Okay, listen.  I already have a call in to dispatch.  I need you to tell me how old is your son.”
CALLER:   “My son is 3 years.   He will be 3 years in two months time please.”
DISPATCHER:  “Okay.  Where is the gun right now?”

Susan: Dispatcher – great clarification

CALLER:   “It’s on right here.  Right here.  Right here now.  It’s right there on the couch.”

Susan: The father says its right here NOW. Right here NOW (where was it before). Then he
contradicts himself by saying “It’s right THERE on the couch” (now it is in a different place)

DISPATCHER:  “Okay.”
CALLER:  “Jesus Christ God.  Why do you put myself in this spot?

Susan: He now takes ownership that HE is in this SPOT not his son or victim

Oh God.  Oh no.  Nothing in my life.  I never go through nothing like this in my life.”

Susan: Now becomes his agenda (victim).  Qualifier statement, irrelevant, unsolicited

The major element that’s missing is the father never calls out the mother’s name (distancing). He also
pauses when the dispatcher asks if she is breathing I believe he made the call from a different room and
walks into the room she is in to see if she is breathing. The father also says the son is with him, you never
hear the son in the background.

What do you think about this caller?  Is he being truthful?