快猫短视频

An investigation into the best way to identify lies has found that focusing on the level of detail in what people say, while ignoring all other cues, is the most successful method 鈥� but if liars know that, they might more easily deceive you.

People trained to detect lies often rely on multiple cues, such as eye contact, length of responses and the details in what people say, but studies have shown that 聽to decide if someone lying.

at the University of Amsterdam and his colleagues wondered whether solely focusing on the detail of statements could provide more consistent results.

To test this idea, the researchers asked 44 students to either go for a walk or steal from a postbox in a mock crime. The team then conducted recorded interviews with the students, who were instructed to lie if they had committed the fake theft or otherwise tell the truth.

Next, the researchers recruited 171 people to watch six truthful and six deceptive interviews from these recordings. The team asked around half of the participants to rate how much the interviewees averted their eyes, which is widely believed to indicate when someone is lying. The other participants ranked the level of detail in interview statements.

This revealed that both truth-tellers and liars averted their gaze a similar amount, but truthful statements were substantially more detailed than deceptive ones, suggesting the latter cue is a more useful way to tell that someone is lying.

Free newsletter

Sign up to The Daily

Sign up to newsletter

The researchers then asked 405 people to judge the true nature of six truthful and six deceptive statements randomly chosen from transcripts of the interviews.

Around half of the participants used multiple cues to identify liars, including monitoring how detailed the answers were, whether statements described unexpected events and if people spontaneously corrected their answers 鈥� which has previously been found to indicate truthfulness. The remaining participants solely ranked the level of detail in answers on a scale of 1 to 10, with a score of 6 or above counting as truthful.

The people relying on multiple cues accurately distinguished lies from the truth just 59 per cent of the time, while those relying on level of detail alone fared better, identifying the right answer 66 per cent of the time.

鈥淥ur take is that using just one cue can provide a much simpler way to judge lies from the truth,鈥� says Verschuere. Nevertheless, in the real world, you would probably want to verify the veracity of statements through further investigations or follow-up questions says Verschuere.

鈥淭he results of this study are in line with the scientific literature, but clash with stereotypes held by the general public and presumed lie experts, such as law enforcement,鈥� says at the City University of New York.

But if someone knows you are only using the level of detail to assess their veracity, they could easily trick you, says at the University of Portsmouth, UK.

鈥淚f investigators are just going to pay attention to the number of details, it would make them vulnerable to countermeasures,鈥� he says. 鈥淎ll the interviewee has to do to be believed is to provide a lot of information.鈥�

That comes with its own problems, says Verschuere. 鈥淭he more detail you give, the more there is to be checked, so you take a big risk if you try to make up details.鈥�