4 ms·

> Indeed, research shows that when suspects are provided with these instructions, they behave differently depending on whether they are telling the truth or not

> Indeed, research shows that when suspects are provided with these instructions, they behave differently depending on whether they are telling the truth or not. Truth-tellers typically seek to demonstrate their innocence and commonly provide more detailed information in response to such instructions. DiSC (or any related business personality measurement tools) will identify those who obsess over details vs those who do not (Cs vs Ds, for example). I’m a D; I don’t provide lengthy explanations for anything. I can get my point across with fewer details and I consider this a huge win; whereas, Cs will flood conversations with details that muddy the waters. So; in this case, because I’m not likely to share lots of details and information, I’m going to be flagged as lying, when in reality, I just don’t operate that way. Yet another pseudoscientific attempt at spotting liars which will be used in lieu of actual evidence and proof.

munchler 2y ago
So if you're explicitly requested to provide as many details as possible, you'll still refuse to do so?
- garciasn 2y ago
  The number of details I’m able and/or willing to convey is going to be far fewer than someone who obsesses over details for everything they do. Ds are a small percentage of the general population. When compared to baseline, they’re going to underperform to that baseline and potentially be identified as liars.
- kstrauser 2y ago
  That depends. To my wife or kids? My boss? My friends? I’ll go into as much detail as it takes to make them happy. To a police agency? Not a word unless my lawyer’s approved it first. But it’s that last group that’s most likely to be using formal lie detector systems. I don’t do criminal things. It’s just general life advice never to answer police questions without a lawyer, and to otherwise STFU until they’re on scene. Before that I’m not confirming the color of the grass in my yard.
  - qup 2y ago
    It's also general life advice to never take a polygraph, so maybe just don't do this thing either.
    - kstrauser 2y ago
      That too.
- jpc0 2y ago
  It's at that point I probably get a lawyer in the room. There's a reason human testimony is second to actual evidence. I was involved in a motor vehicle accident that went to court, the testimony I have maybe half an hour afterwards in a police report as well as to my lawyer was that the other vehicle was white. I got the brand and model of the other vehicle correct however the other vehicle was in fact black. I wouldn't believe it till my lawyer actually showed me a picture of the other vehicle. I didn't attempt to lie, I simply misremembered the details and if I misremembered that detail what else would I have misremembered. Pushing me for details after that experience makes me explicitly believe you are trying to catch me out and I would then shut up and request a lawyer because I don't see any good coming from that.
dcow 2y ago
I’m pretty sure the researchers aren’t _that_ stupid. It’s about whether you _can_ provide more details consistently when prompted. Not whether you’re terse in nature.
- resoluteteeth 2y ago
  It appears that they specifically didn't prompt subjects to provide additional details, because as noted in the first line of the abstract, "Liars can, when prompted, provide detailed statements"
- excalibur 2y ago
  > I’m pretty sure the researchers aren’t _that_ stupid. The researchers no. But the police? A jury of your peers?
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
> I’m not likely to share lots of details and information This sounds like a lot of people today when dealing with law enforcement, who tend to be rather interested in catching lies. Many people who just “want a lawyer, dawg” might be seen as lying even though they do really want to have an attorney present while being cordial.

munchler 2y ago

So if you're explicitly requested to provide as many details as possible, you'll still refuse to do so?

garciasn 2y ago
The number of details I’m able and/or willing to convey is going to be far fewer than someone who obsesses over details for everything they do. Ds are a small percentage of the general population. When compared to baseline, they’re going to underperform to that baseline and potentially be identified as liars.
kstrauser 2y ago
That depends. To my wife or kids? My boss? My friends? I’ll go into as much detail as it takes to make them happy. To a police agency? Not a word unless my lawyer’s approved it first. But it’s that last group that’s most likely to be using formal lie detector systems. I don’t do criminal things. It’s just general life advice never to answer police questions without a lawyer, and to otherwise STFU until they’re on scene. Before that I’m not confirming the color of the grass in my yard.
- qup 2y ago
  It's also general life advice to never take a polygraph, so maybe just don't do this thing either.
  - kstrauser 2y ago
    That too.
jpc0 2y ago
It's at that point I probably get a lawyer in the room. There's a reason human testimony is second to actual evidence. I was involved in a motor vehicle accident that went to court, the testimony I have maybe half an hour afterwards in a police report as well as to my lawyer was that the other vehicle was white. I got the brand and model of the other vehicle correct however the other vehicle was in fact black. I wouldn't believe it till my lawyer actually showed me a picture of the other vehicle. I didn't attempt to lie, I simply misremembered the details and if I misremembered that detail what else would I have misremembered. Pushing me for details after that experience makes me explicitly believe you are trying to catch me out and I would then shut up and request a lawyer because I don't see any good coming from that.

dcow 2y ago

I’m pretty sure the researchers aren’t _that_ stupid. It’s about whether you _can_ provide more details consistently when prompted. Not whether you’re terse in nature.

resoluteteeth 2y ago
It appears that they specifically didn't prompt subjects to provide additional details, because as noted in the first line of the abstract, "Liars can, when prompted, provide detailed statements"
excalibur 2y ago
> I’m pretty sure the researchers aren’t _that_ stupid. The researchers no. But the police? A jury of your peers?

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago

> I’m not likely to share lots of details and information This sounds like a lot of people today when dealing with law enforcement, who tend to be rather interested in catching lies. Many people who just “want a lawyer, dawg” might be seen as lying even though they do really want to have an attorney present while being cordial.