for those who think their body language skills blow....

Post Reply New Topic

you want proof that NTs aren't all that much better with it?


Watch this video from the Dating Game....


The contestant is asking questions to a man who, at the time, was convicted of being a serial killer. Apparently the audience didn't know, but for people who are supposedly so good at picking up on body language, the audience, the contestant, and everyone else involved with this show completely missed some potentially tell-tale signs:


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uf95INZmWI&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

You found this on Cracked didn't you? I read that article about bizarre murderers last night. Fascinating stuff.

Yes I did; and I have to say....I think the gal is pretty nice looking. But I do agree with other posters who say she's just as creepy as he is, if not slight more so.

I watched the clip.

I thought they were both about as plastic and creepy as any other bachelor/bachelorette on that gawd awful show (I was pretty young, but I remember this show, although not this particular episode, back when it first aired).

Frankly, I think that almost all participants in "realty tv" are a bit on the strange side, whether from the 70's or now.

As for picking up creepy signs and "reading people" - remember, we are looking at this with 20/20 hindsight. If we were watching this clip without realizing that bachelor #1 was actually a serial killer - we wouldn't pick up anything unusual over any other contestant on other episodes of this show, whether the person watching was NT or Aspie with well honed and learned "people reading skills".

Also - the scary thing about many serial killers is that they don't SEEM like bad people. Think Bundy - he was attractive, articulate and even did volunteer work in helping capacities. Without knowing that Bundy is a serial killer, if we looked at him, read about him or even saw clips of him speaking, we wouldn't have a clue as to his violent nature. I believe there is a book, written by Ann Rule, called "Stranger Beside Me" - where a woman who was involved in police work (Ann Rule) actually worked/volunteered with Bundy before he was caught and convicted of his crimes - she didn't have a clue either - and she would have been very good at reading peoples body language..

I didn't notice anything either, except perhaps he briefly looked up to his left, indicating a lie. Of course, the whole show is a smarmy "lie".

Well I understand that we wouldn't have likely thought anything of it, but you'd think that NTs who are "so good at picking up body language" would've figured otherwise. Apparently not the case.

NTs might be good at reading body language - but that would be knowing when someone is angry, sad, disappointed, frustrated, bored, etc.

NTs can't read someone's body language and tell that they either have or will be a serial killer, beat their spouse, use recreational drugs, or anything else. They can read someone's body language for CURRENT emotions. They are not mind readers.

NTs might have an edge over Aspies in their ability to tell whether the person they are talking to at a social event is interested in what they are saying. They can't tell whether the person in front of them is killed someone in the last week or two.

As someone who merely has a few aspie traits - I have become pretty good at reading people, in fact, I can be better than most (including NTs) due to honing the skill through my work as a nurse. I couldn't pick up anything from this clip - even with knowledge that the man indeed was a serial killer.

An interesting documentary to watch is called, "Faces". It was made in the late 90's and is hosted by John Cleese. It was all about faces (perceptions of beauty, face blindness, ability to read emotions, etc). There was one episode of this short series where an experiment was conducted and people who one think would be able to detect lying were asked to predict whether someone was lying or not (these people included psychologist, police officers, etc). Again, one would THINK that they could tell if someone was lying. In reality - there did no better than random guessing. The only group of people who actually did better than chance were secret agents. Even then - the person would have to be asked, "did you kill someone" and then the secret agents might pick up on a micro-expression. If the subject was not about whether the person killed someone or not - even our secret agent friends wouldn't have a clue by merely watching this particular person on an episode of the Dating Game.

BTW - I recommend the documentary "Faces" - it was available at my local video store and I imagine there are copies available on-line or at the public library.

Taking a look...

As soon as John spoke I noticed he was lying and am quite seriously wondering why no one else spotted it?

If you notice the line "We're going to have a great time together Cheryl" you will notice just before that he pushes his face in a sideways motion, he wants to shake his head to indicate no but that would be too obvious...

On a completely unrelated topic, isn't shameless product placement wonderful?

Actually, according to wikipedia, the girl refused to go out with him after, because she said he was creepy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Alcala

[quote="1000Knives"]Actually, according to wikipedia, the girl refused to go out with him after, because she said he was creepy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Alcala
/quote]

Wow. That probably saved her life. He was an active serial killer at that time too!

Paul Ekman (authority on this stuff) found the same results - police, etc were no better than random. It was the secret service who did better - people whose job is to protect the president by scanning crowds for suspicious behaviour.

His teeth are kind of ugly and his smile seemed weird. None of this would automatically make me think he's a serial killer. I can't imagine anyone not coming off as slightly creepy on such a silly contrived thing like that.

They're both obviously acting. Do this for an experiment: Listen to a TV show. Any TV show; preferably one with actors featured prominently, a sitcom or something. Forget about the words, and just listen to the pitch and rhythm, and memorize the patterns of the "song" of the speech. Then compare that to a real-life conversation, preferably one you can comfortably watch without getting involved. Listen to that one the same way--ignoring the words, paying attention to the rest. You'll probably notice a difference--and a pretty big one too--between the two sorts of patterns. You'll see a difference between experienced actors and people who are being interviewed for the news, or are featured on a reality TV show--more monotone, less drama. Experienced actors will often exaggerate their voices, like a caricature of speech. There's another pattern that comes out when someone's giving a speech. And there are others, too, subtler ones I'm still figuring out that have something to do with established relationship and social structure. Sometimes I can hear those patterns; sometimes not. Usually only possible if I don't try to think about what words they're saying. I just can't do it fast enough otherwise. Naturally, in a normal conversation, I pay attention to the words, because that's what I get the most out of.

It could be an interesting tool, anyway, to learn how to use rhythm, pitch, speed, etc. in a conversation; but don't expect you'll be able to learn to multi-task it without years of practice, and even then not perfectly. I know I can't. But it's still a useful exercise to help you understand what those things mean in NT communication.

Wow. This show is pathetically bad.

True, it's acting and bad acting at that. All that smarmy teeheehee sexual innuendo.
I did notice when she asked if they were going to have a good time, he frowned briefly.

it's not acting; at least not in the traditional sense.

It's people making asses of themselves on a game show to get ratings for TV.