3 ms·

>Paul Ekman... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17221309 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17221309 "M. O'Sullivan and P. Ekman (2004) claim to have discov

by thesz 14y ago

>Paul Ekman... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17221309 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17221309 "M. O'Sullivan and P. Ekman (2004) claim to have discovered 29 wizards of deception detection. The present commentary offers a statistical critique of the evidence for this claim. Analyses reveal that chance can explain results that the authors attribute to wizardry..."

graeme 14y ago
I wasn't talking about the "wizard" claims. Ekman literally wrote the book of facial expression classification: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_Action_Coding_System#section_1 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_Action_Coding_System#s... You could argue that the system is bunk, of course, but that's a different argument from te wizardry claims.
- thesz 14y ago
  First I read about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy in the book from from 190x. Yes, the beginning of the twentieth century. They stimulated facial muscles with electricity and it allowed them to create emotions' expressions and classify them. So Ekman isn't even first to do that. I see the FACS as a modern extension of the physiognomy. With all the scientific foundation of the latter.