An Exercise in Exceptions

Medicine, regardless of how effective it is, can have negative side effects. Normally we are willing to tolerate even severe side effects if it can cure a more serious illness – like awful side effects of chemotherapy that can send cancer into remission. Similarly, we sometimes accept intrusive investigative tactics if they help protect society – such as investigators pretending to be criminals while undercover to catch serious criminals. But what of tactics that pose side effects with only questionable benefit? This week, we discuss one such example – the “bait question” which may help detect deception but has the unintended consequence of creating false memories. When investigating a crime, detectives often collect evidence by talking with people, such as an eyewitness that saw the crime, someone who can corroborate an alibi ( well, hopefully ), or a suspect who may have committed the crime. Of course, people’s statements to police aren’t always trustworthy. After all, if they co...

Psychologists in virtually every field have myths they have to fight. Personality psychologists have deal with the baseless but popular Myers-Briggs personality types 1,2 . Developmental psychologists have to deal with the false claim that playing Mozart for babies improves their intelligence 3 . Like other deception researchers, I have to deal with people’s persistent and inaccurate beliefs about lies and how to catch them. I’d roughly estimate that – in my own limited experience – somewhere around 60% of the time, when I tell someone I study deception, they ask me if I can read people’s behavior and tell when someone is lying. My typical answer is, “No, I can’t do that. You can’t do that. No one can do that.” Myths are often more appealing than reality. They’re frequently simpler, easier to understand, and more romantic than what science tells us 4 . People seem to enjoy the idea that lies can be caught by carefully observing a person’s body language or slight muscular movem...