Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ] 

minervx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,155
Location: United States

04 Sep 2011, 11:32 am

These are not 100% reliable methods, but these can help clear doubts or suspicions.

1) The person thinks or takes an unusually long time to respond.
This applies to face-to-face communication. There is a reason why a person would take a longer time to think of an answer to a simpler question. When a person has been habitually lying, they have to weigh their options. Will what I say now contradict with any of the lies I said before? Will this give away that I am lying? Is there a way I can evade this question or answer it indirectly? And so on.

2) The person is on the defensive, rather than the offensive.
This is the much more reliable method of the two. If a person is lying, and you accuse them or bring up the subject, they will be defensive. Overall, they want you to step away from the subject. They don't want you to dig deeper and find that they are lying, so they are covering up their tracks by trying to avoid that topic. But if a person is innocent and accused of lying, they have nothing to lose. They would want the other person to dig as deep as possible to find the truth that would vindicate them. They would draw more attention to the subject until they are proven innocent.

Your thoughts?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,949
Location:      

04 Sep 2011, 11:35 am

Well ... umm ...














Why are you picking on me?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,317
Location: Pacific Northwest

04 Sep 2011, 11:58 am

minervx wrote:
These are not 100% reliable methods, but these can help clear doubts or suspicions.

1) The person thinks or takes an unusually long time to respond.
This applies to face-to-face communication. There is a reason why a person would take a longer time to think of an answer to a simpler question. When a person has been habitually lying, they have to weigh their options. Will what I say now contradict with any of the lies I said before? Will this give away that I am lying? Is there a way I can evade this question or answer it indirectly? And so on.

2) The person is on the defensive, rather than the offensive.
This is the much more reliable method of the two. If a person is lying, and you accuse them or bring up the subject, they will be defensive. Overall, they want you to step away from the subject. They don't want you to dig deeper and find that they are lying, so they are covering up their tracks by trying to avoid that topic. But if a person is innocent and accused of lying, they have nothing to lose. They would want the other person to dig as deep as possible to find the truth that would vindicate them. They would draw more attention to the subject until they are proven innocent.

Your thoughts?



These aren't always true. Lot of people don't like false accusations and I sure don't take them well either but that doesn't mean I am lying and I can take a while to respond if I get lost in my words and thoughts. I am already sure people think I am lying but I still choose to not tell them I have AS or communication problems.



Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

04 Sep 2011, 12:10 pm

minervx wrote:
But if a person is innocent and accused of lying, they have nothing to lose. They would want the other person to dig as deep as possible to find the truth that would vindicate them. They would draw more attention to the subject until they are proven innocent


Exactly. I get sometimes accused of things I am not guity of, and in this case I would want to dig deeper and explain myself.

But it seems NT-s don't operate that way. Once I was even told "the more you will dwell on a topic, the more they will think their accusations are true". I guess people assume that if you know the accusations are false, you wouldn't really care about them. Well, that is not how I operate. Being accused of something I know is false is plainly enraging and frustrating, so OF COURSE I would care!



1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

04 Sep 2011, 3:27 pm

You can't be 100% with it no matter what you do...

For example in 1978 Richard Helms, the 8th Director of Central Intelligence, stated that:

Quote:
"We discovered there were some Eastern Europeans who could defeat the polygraph at any time. Americans are not very good at it, because we are raised to tell the truth and when we lie it is easy to tell [we] are lying. But we find a lot of Europeans and Asiatics [who] can handle that polygraph without a blip, and you know they are lying and you have evidence that they are lying."[43]


Quote:
Several countermeasures designed to pass polygraph tests have been described. Asked how he passed the polygraph test, Ames explained that he sought advice from his Soviet handler and received the simple instruction to: "Get a good night's sleep, and rest, and go into the test rested and relaxed. Be nice to the polygraph examiner, develop a rapport, and be cooperative and try to maintain your calm."[44]



What I do, I try to base my judgement less on "testimonies" and more on evidence.

One thing I'd say, not so much for just telling if someone is truthful or lying, but just in dealings with people in general. Humility. If someone is humble, I'm more likely to trust them than if they're cocky. Like with skating, I don't trust just anyone to sharpen skates. If they do it wrong especially on my figure blades, I might need to buy new blades, which is a lot of money. I first got my skates sharpened by a figure skating coach, $20. Numerous people including the coach told me the hockey sharpener would screw them up. Later, I was in VT away from home, there was a guy at the rink in VT, an old guy, who sharpened skates. I brought up my concern with him, that I've heard hockey sharpeners can screw up figure skates and I'm skeptical, he told me pretty humbly that my concern was justified, and told me how he sharpens skates, and he did an awesome job for $5. Couple months later, the older guy at my own rink I heard sharpened figured skates, though he's a hockey sharpener. $8 and he was awesome, too. But, when someone tells me "YEAH SURE I DO FIGURE SKATES I'M AWESOME" like the younger guy at VT rink, I was really really skeptical.

So for me, instead of trying to figure out so much if someone is just lying, I try to make more of a general character assessment based upon lots of factors.

I guess what I do for lying is more like, try to acquire more knowledge, hindsight is 20/20, so what you can do is learn and analyze from your hindsight and more or less turn it into foresight. One other thing is, in dealings with people, try to find all their little lies and inconsistencies, and more or less just save them for later. Anything they do against someone else can be done against you, so you must take that into account. Like if you see a salesman lie to an old lady who doesn't know anything, but he's all buddy buddy with you, because you're knowledgeable, then you know he has potential to lie to you.



purchase
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,385

04 Sep 2011, 3:49 pm

This must be why even people who know me well accuse me of lying or can't tell when I'm joking.

I always take too long to respond.

I'm always on the defensive because people have come to suspect I might be lying because of the above and other things I do that supposedly indicate a lie.



League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,317
Location: Pacific Northwest

04 Sep 2011, 8:47 pm

Roman wrote:
minervx wrote:
But if a person is innocent and accused of lying, they have nothing to lose. They would want the other person to dig as deep as possible to find the truth that would vindicate them. They would draw more attention to the subject until they are proven innocent


Exactly. I get sometimes accused of things I am not guity of, and in this case I would want to dig deeper and explain myself.

But it seems NT-s don't operate that way. Once I was even told "the more you will dwell on a topic, the more they will think their accusations are true". I guess people assume that if you know the accusations are false, you wouldn't really care about them. Well, that is not how I operate. Being accused of something I know is false is plainly enraging and frustrating, so OF COURSE I would care!



How hard is it to not keep trying to explain yourself? Try it three times and if they don't listen, drop it, you're talking to a brick wall and it's a waste of time and they are too dense to listen. Why waste time with dense people?



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

04 Sep 2011, 10:06 pm

minervx wrote:
These are not 100% reliable methods, but these can help clear doubts or suspicions.

1) The person thinks or takes an unusually long time to respond.
This applies to face-to-face communication. There is a reason why a person would take a longer time to think of an answer to a simpler question. When a person has been habitually lying, they have to weigh their options. Will what I say now contradict with any of the lies I said before? Will this give away that I am lying? Is there a way I can evade this question or answer it indirectly? And so on.

2) The person is on the defensive, rather than the offensive.
This is the much more reliable method of the two. If a person is lying, and you accuse them or bring up the subject, they will be defensive. Overall, they want you to step away from the subject. They don't want you to dig deeper and find that they are lying, so they are covering up their tracks by trying to avoid that topic. But if a person is innocent and accused of lying, they have nothing to lose. They would want the other person to dig as deep as possible to find the truth that would vindicate them. They would draw more attention to the subject until they are proven innocent.

Your thoughts?


Well I usually takes me longer to respond then most people, not because I am lying but it kinda takes me a minute to process everything...so I would hope people are not too quick to make that assumption. Also I admit sometimes I am rather defensive...I try not to be but its especally hard on the days where my depression effects me more severely. This is not to say I am always 100% truthful all of the time, sometimes it is better not to be totally honest about some things to some people.



Synecdoche
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 3 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 261

05 Sep 2011, 12:38 am

3. They tend to use less "I's" and "me's"' when confronted. Since they're lying, their brain is less likely to focus on themselves in relation to a specific event and instead, focus more on creating false details and facts.



Apple_in_my_Eye
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: in my brain

05 Sep 2011, 3:32 am

Ugh. Regardless of how true it might or might not be #1 annoys the hell out of me. I process information slowly (even have a neuropsych report that says so), which tends to result in longer-than-normal pauses before answering people.

As far as #2, one problem I have with countering that is if I can't immediately imagine (or can't determine from the availible information) a motive for doing whatever it is I'm being accused of. (Is not being able to quickly figure out what a thief/liar would do a Theory of Mind problem?)

"Did you touch that computer?"
"No."
"Are you lying?"
"No, why would I touch that computer?"
"Don't play dumb."