Exploring the movement dynamics of deception

Nicholas D. Duran, Rick Dale, Christopher T. Kello, Chris N.H. Street, Daniel C. Richardson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Both the science and the everyday practice of detecting a lie rest on the same assumption: hidden cognitive states that the liar would like to remain hidden nevertheless influence observable behavior. This assumption has good evidence. The insights of professional interrogators, anecdotal evidence, and body language textbooks have all built up a sizeable catalog of non-verbal cues that have been claimed to distinguish deceptive and truthful behavior. Typically, these cues are discrete, individual behaviors—a hand touching a mouth, the rise of a brow—that distinguish lies from truths solely in terms of their frequency or duration. Research to date has failed to establish any of these non-verbal cues as a reliable marker of deception. Here we argue that perhaps this is because simple tallies of behavior can miss out on the rich but subtle organization of behavior as it unfolds over time. Research in cognitive science from a dynamical systems perspective has shown that behavior is structured across multiple timescales, with more or less regularity and structure. Using tools that are sensitive to these dynamics, we analyzed body motion data from an experiment that put participants in a realistic situation of choosing, or not, to lie to an experimenter. Our analyses indicate that when being deceptive, continuous fluctuations of movement in the upper face, and somewhat in the arms, are characterized by dynamical properties of less stability, but greater complexity. For the upper face, these distinctions are present despite no apparent differences in the overall amount of movement between deception and truth. We suggest that these unique dynamical signatures of motion are indicative of both the cognitive demands inherent to deception and the need to respond adaptively in a social context.
Original languageEnglish
Article number140
JournalFrontiers in Psychology
Volume4
Issue numberMAR
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Mar 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Deception
Cues
Kinesics
Cognitive Science
Textbooks
Research
Mouth
Arm
Hand

Cite this

Duran, N. D., Dale, R., Kello, C. T., Street, C. N. H., & Richardson, D. C. (2013). Exploring the movement dynamics of deception. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(MAR), [140]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00140
Duran, Nicholas D. ; Dale, Rick ; Kello, Christopher T. ; Street, Chris N.H. ; Richardson, Daniel C. / Exploring the movement dynamics of deception. In: Frontiers in Psychology. 2013 ; Vol. 4, No. MAR.
@article{be779304af264026b57f77b15282257c,
title = "Exploring the movement dynamics of deception",
abstract = "Both the science and the everyday practice of detecting a lie rest on the same assumption: hidden cognitive states that the liar would like to remain hidden nevertheless influence observable behavior. This assumption has good evidence. The insights of professional interrogators, anecdotal evidence, and body language textbooks have all built up a sizeable catalog of non-verbal cues that have been claimed to distinguish deceptive and truthful behavior. Typically, these cues are discrete, individual behaviors—a hand touching a mouth, the rise of a brow—that distinguish lies from truths solely in terms of their frequency or duration. Research to date has failed to establish any of these non-verbal cues as a reliable marker of deception. Here we argue that perhaps this is because simple tallies of behavior can miss out on the rich but subtle organization of behavior as it unfolds over time. Research in cognitive science from a dynamical systems perspective has shown that behavior is structured across multiple timescales, with more or less regularity and structure. Using tools that are sensitive to these dynamics, we analyzed body motion data from an experiment that put participants in a realistic situation of choosing, or not, to lie to an experimenter. Our analyses indicate that when being deceptive, continuous fluctuations of movement in the upper face, and somewhat in the arms, are characterized by dynamical properties of less stability, but greater complexity. For the upper face, these distinctions are present despite no apparent differences in the overall amount of movement between deception and truth. We suggest that these unique dynamical signatures of motion are indicative of both the cognitive demands inherent to deception and the need to respond adaptively in a social context.",
keywords = "Body and facial movements, Deception, Dynamical systems theory, Embodiment, Multiscale entropy analysis, Non-linear measures, Recurrence quantification analysis, Time series analysis",
author = "Duran, {Nicholas D.} and Rick Dale and Kello, {Christopher T.} and Street, {Chris N.H.} and Richardson, {Daniel C.}",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
day = "27",
doi = "10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00140",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
journal = "Frontiers in Psychology",
issn = "1664-1078",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",
number = "MAR",

}

Duran, ND, Dale, R, Kello, CT, Street, CNH & Richardson, DC 2013, 'Exploring the movement dynamics of deception', Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 4, no. MAR, 140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00140

Exploring the movement dynamics of deception. / Duran, Nicholas D.; Dale, Rick; Kello, Christopher T.; Street, Chris N.H.; Richardson, Daniel C.

In: Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 4, No. MAR, 140, 27.03.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring the movement dynamics of deception

AU - Duran, Nicholas D.

AU - Dale, Rick

AU - Kello, Christopher T.

AU - Street, Chris N.H.

AU - Richardson, Daniel C.

PY - 2013/3/27

Y1 - 2013/3/27

N2 - Both the science and the everyday practice of detecting a lie rest on the same assumption: hidden cognitive states that the liar would like to remain hidden nevertheless influence observable behavior. This assumption has good evidence. The insights of professional interrogators, anecdotal evidence, and body language textbooks have all built up a sizeable catalog of non-verbal cues that have been claimed to distinguish deceptive and truthful behavior. Typically, these cues are discrete, individual behaviors—a hand touching a mouth, the rise of a brow—that distinguish lies from truths solely in terms of their frequency or duration. Research to date has failed to establish any of these non-verbal cues as a reliable marker of deception. Here we argue that perhaps this is because simple tallies of behavior can miss out on the rich but subtle organization of behavior as it unfolds over time. Research in cognitive science from a dynamical systems perspective has shown that behavior is structured across multiple timescales, with more or less regularity and structure. Using tools that are sensitive to these dynamics, we analyzed body motion data from an experiment that put participants in a realistic situation of choosing, or not, to lie to an experimenter. Our analyses indicate that when being deceptive, continuous fluctuations of movement in the upper face, and somewhat in the arms, are characterized by dynamical properties of less stability, but greater complexity. For the upper face, these distinctions are present despite no apparent differences in the overall amount of movement between deception and truth. We suggest that these unique dynamical signatures of motion are indicative of both the cognitive demands inherent to deception and the need to respond adaptively in a social context.

AB - Both the science and the everyday practice of detecting a lie rest on the same assumption: hidden cognitive states that the liar would like to remain hidden nevertheless influence observable behavior. This assumption has good evidence. The insights of professional interrogators, anecdotal evidence, and body language textbooks have all built up a sizeable catalog of non-verbal cues that have been claimed to distinguish deceptive and truthful behavior. Typically, these cues are discrete, individual behaviors—a hand touching a mouth, the rise of a brow—that distinguish lies from truths solely in terms of their frequency or duration. Research to date has failed to establish any of these non-verbal cues as a reliable marker of deception. Here we argue that perhaps this is because simple tallies of behavior can miss out on the rich but subtle organization of behavior as it unfolds over time. Research in cognitive science from a dynamical systems perspective has shown that behavior is structured across multiple timescales, with more or less regularity and structure. Using tools that are sensitive to these dynamics, we analyzed body motion data from an experiment that put participants in a realistic situation of choosing, or not, to lie to an experimenter. Our analyses indicate that when being deceptive, continuous fluctuations of movement in the upper face, and somewhat in the arms, are characterized by dynamical properties of less stability, but greater complexity. For the upper face, these distinctions are present despite no apparent differences in the overall amount of movement between deception and truth. We suggest that these unique dynamical signatures of motion are indicative of both the cognitive demands inherent to deception and the need to respond adaptively in a social context.

KW - Body and facial movements

KW - Deception

KW - Dynamical systems theory

KW - Embodiment

KW - Multiscale entropy analysis

KW - Non-linear measures

KW - Recurrence quantification analysis

KW - Time series analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878785766&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00140

DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00140

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - Frontiers in Psychology

JF - Frontiers in Psychology

SN - 1664-1078

IS - MAR

M1 - 140

ER -