7 ms·
There's plenty of science behind micro-expressions and detection of deception. Paul Ekman [0] is "ranked 59th out of the 100 most cited psychologists of the tw
by keville 9y ago
There's plenty of science behind micro-expressions and detection of deception.
Paul Ekman [0] is "ranked 59th out of the 100 most cited psychologists of the twentieth century" and I thought the TV show based on his research [1] was very entertaining. (I am surprised that the article used the phrase "micro-expression" without any reference to Ekman's work.)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ekman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ekman
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_Me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_Me
- QAPereo 9y agoDo you know what science actually is?
- wadkar 9y agoYour question seems to be inconsistent with HN guidelines: comments should be constructive. Specifically, comments should encourage discussion and allow for multiple perspectives on topic. It appears to me that your comment is borderline name calling and is anything but constructive.
- QAPereo 9y agoThanks for your concern, but I disagree. Science means something, and really don’t confuse word count with value.
- wadkar 9y agoI fail to see how asking someone if they know what science is would help with a constructive discussion. Did you mean to imply that the micro-expression related work the the GP cited is not scientific in your opinion? Or are you questioning the GPs knowledge about science?
- QAPereo 9y agoIt seemed like a legitimate question to ask someone referring to the content of those links as “plenty of science...”
- otempomores 9y agoAny Hollywood persona with botox is innocent for the lack of them? Innocent by injection your honor. I rest my case for lack of expression