This article was taken from the March 2014 issue of Wired magazine. Be the first to read Wired's articles in print before they're posted online, and get your hands on loads of additional content by subscribing online.
According to a 20-year study conducted at the University of California and published in 2004, only 0.25 percent of people are able to detect a lie 80 percent of the time. We can improve, though. Pamela Meyer, author of Liespotting and the founder of Calibrate, a deception-detection training company, explains how. "In a high-stakes negotiation you have to be careful because people are very stressed. It's easy to misinterpret what's someone's doing as lying," she says. Here, Meyer outlines her five-step "BASIC" method.
Build a baseline
Baselining is the "most crucial" aspect of the process. "What we're looking for is a reliable reference point we can measure changes against," says Meyer. Start by asking easy questions and observe your counterpart - especially his or her postural habits, along with eye movements and blink rate. The CIA refers to this step as "L2" - looking and listening. "This is not a parlour trick - you have to be very careful and increase your powers of observation."
Ask open-ended questions
"Although everyone likes to think a really good interrogation looks like the TV show Law & Order, where you pummel someone into submission, actually, a very good negotiation is one of the most boring things you've ever seen," says Meyer. Ask as many questions as you can. The aim is threefold: to develop rapport, to draw out information, and to listen for a theme in answers. "You want your subject to reveal what's important to them.
Pursue the facts, not the person."
Study the clusters
Lying puts people under a greater cognitive load. "You're looking for leakage." This may be non-verbal: grooming gestures such as touching the eyes, dusting shoulders, twirling hair; the upper body freezing up; eyes closing and asymmetric shrugs; and post-interview exhalation. Verbal clues include qualifying language, bolstering statements and repeating questions for time. Liespotting.com has a full list. "You don't need to look for each individually -- you're looking for a big cluster."
Intuit the gaps
Next, step back and fill in what's missing. The best time to do this is between interviews. "When someone's being deceptive there are many, many holes in their story, regardless of how convincing they may appear," Meyer says. Look for gaps in the facts, logic and emotion of the person you're questioning.
Compare with your previous research and notes. When you find a gap, "that's when you can go back to a subject and raise the cognitive load" by homing in on it.
Confirm your impressions
Be careful: "It's so critical that you don't accuse somebody wrongly," says Meyer. Three last tactics: minimise the significance of the offence ("they will tell you more"); ask the subject how they think the investigation will turn out - guilty parties tend to favour terms like "should" or "hopefully"; and last, think how angrily the person reacts to accusations - anger throughout the interview (as opposed to overwrought reactions at specific questions) tends to indicate innocence.
This article was originally published by WIRED UK
