Nonverbal indicators of Affect and Deception in an Interview Setting1

Relationship between Nonverbal Sensitivities and Detection of Deception

Subjects took a test of skill at interpreting nonverbal communication, the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS), and a videotaped test of ability to distinguish between truthful and deceptive statements. It was hypothesized that skill at reading the types of nonverbal cues known to indicate deception, i.e., body movement, paralinguistics, would be related to actual accuracy at detection of deception. Correlations between 23 PONS scales and 3 deception measures were generally nonsignificant, suggesting that accurate detection of deception may not be merely a function of sensitivity to nonverbal cues.

Perceived Honesty in the Parole Interview

The perceived honesty of parole clients in actual parole interviews was found to be related to both the content of clients' statements and clients' nonverbal behaviors during the interviews. Contrary to evidence from parole hearings in California, clients' perceived honesty appeared to have an effect on interviewers' parole decision.

Perceptions of Deception

A study was conducted to identify facial nonverbal behaviors and interactants' perceptions associated with deception. Forty males attempted to deceive both a perceived expert and nonexpert in detecting deception. Subjects were able to effectively, control their facial cues when they, were being deceptive, emitting similar cues when they were lying and telling the truth. However, they glanced more frequently and maintained more eye contact with the expert than the nonexpert. Interestingly, although subjects were confident in their ability to deceive interviewers, in reality they, overestimated their actual success. Interviewers were able to identify both their deceptive and truthful statements at a better than chance level.

The contingent smile: a meta-analysis of sex differences in smiling

The authors present a meta-analysis of sex differences in smiling based on 448 effect sizes derivedfrom 162 research reports. There was a statistically significant tendency for women and adolescent girls to smile more than men and adolescent boys (d = 0.41). The authors hypothesized that sex differences in smiling would be larger when concerns about gender-appropriate behavior were made more conspicuous, situational constraints were absent or ambiguous, or emotion (especially negative) was salient. It was also predicted that the size of the sex difference in smiling would vary by culture and age. Moderator analysis supported these predictions. Although men tend to smile less than women, the degree to which this is so is contingent on rules and roles.

Cues to deception

Do people behave differently when they are lying compared with when they are telling the truth? The combined results of 1,338 estimates of 158 cues to deception are reported. Results show that in some ways, liars are less forthcoming than truth tellers, and they tell less compelling tales. They also make a more negative impression and are more tense. Their stories include fewer ordinary imperfections and unusual contents. However, many behaviors showed no discernible links, or only weak links, to deceit. Cues to deception were more pronounced when people were motivated to succeed, especially when the motivations were identity relevant rather than monetary or material. Cues to deception were also stronger when lies were about transgressions.

Does Facial Expression Affect Attention Orienting by Gaze Direction Cues?

In 6 experiments, the authors investigated whether attention orienting by gaze direction is modulated by the emotional expression (neutral, happy, angry, or fearful) on the face. The results showed a clear spatial cuing effect by gaze direction but no effect by facial expression. In addition, it was shown that the cuing effect was stronger with schematic faces than with real faces, that gaze cuing could be achieved at very short stimulus onset asynchronies (14 ms), and that there was no evidence for a difference in the strength of cuing triggered by static gaze cues and by cues involving apparent motion of the pupils. In sum, the results suggest that in normal, healthy adults, eye direction processing for attention shifts is independent of facial expression analysis.