Althouse: "The researchers believe that verbosity in some ways might be a marker for deception because the person doing the lying is doing a lot to paint a picture that actually isn't true."

November 12, 2015

"The researchers believe that verbosity in some ways might be a marker for deception because the person doing the lying is doing a lot to paint a picture that actually isn't true."

"It's worth pointing out here that different studies have produced different results on this, Steve, so context certainly matters. In analyses of online dating profiles, for example, people who lie about themselves have often been found to use shorter descriptions rather than longer descriptions. It could be because dating actually offers better fact checking. If you claim to be a rock climber but refuse to go rock climbing, you'll be very quickly found out.... On the other hand, in a presidential primary debate, politicians might throw out several hundred claims, most of which are not going to get fact checked. So politicians who might actually have greater latitude to stretch the truth."

From an NPR discussion titled "Researchers Examine How To Spot A Lying Politician."

This gets what is one of my favorite tags: clear speech.

36 comments:

David Begley said...: If researchers want to learn about deception they should just study the Clintons.; 11/12/15, 8:33 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: Red Flag: It can be challenging to teach the shift in perspective that lying requires.

I am Laslo.; 11/12/15, 8:33 AM
Birkel said...: Politicians bite voters.
Not a news story.; 11/12/15, 8:33 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: How To Spot A Lying Politician.

1) Come to New Hampshire during presidential campaign season. ( Presidential campaign season is confined to the 4 years immediately preceding a presidential election. )

2) Open your eyes.; 11/12/15, 8:37 AM
campy said...: If researchers want to learn about deception they should just study the Clintons.

And Obama. And Warren.; 11/12/15, 8:38 AM
Scott said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 11/12/15, 8:39 AM
Scott said...: Define "lying" as a quality of a politician, as in "lying politician." You can't do it.; 11/12/15, 8:41 AM
Curious George said...: "Researchers Examine How To Spot A Lying Politician."

Well, cankles and feeling no ways tired is a good start.; 11/12/15, 8:47 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: How To Spot A Lying Politician.

This gets what is one of my favorite tags: clear speech.

That does remind me of another way to spot a lying politician:

They include the phrase Let me be clear.; 11/12/15, 8:47 AM
Scott said...: Lies: And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" by Al Franken, United States Senator for Minnesota.

Written by a lying politician who's also a shithead.; 11/12/15, 8:48 AM
Dr Weevil said...: "feeling no ways tired"? It's spelled "tard" - in more ways than one - and "no ways" is a lie.; 11/12/15, 8:49 AM
Meade said...: "Written by a lying politician [...]"

How do you know it was actually written by Al Franken?; 11/12/15, 8:56 AM
tim maguire said...: I've always found "their lips move" to be a sufficient tell. Political speeches are very much a read-between-the-lines thing as what they choose to lie about can give insight into what they're thinking. That coupled with the larger context can give significant hints of what they're likely to do.

Barack Obama, for instance, many of us found to be quite transparent in his own way. We knew what kind of president he would be and we have been proven right. All the right-thinking people who voted for him were deluding themselves (Obama told you that himself, if you cared to notice).; 11/12/15, 9:00 AM
traditionalguy said...: Eureka! What an amazing discovery...and the sun comes up in the morning, maybe.

Words are pictures of images internalized by members of the culture. We use words to control ourselves. Without a new set of words we cannot make Engineering or science that can be taught.

An enemy wants to put his words into your mind as a way to confuse you or to direct you.

That is another reason the National language matters.; 11/12/15, 9:10 AM
Scott said...: "How do you know it was actually written by Al Franken?"

Well, the guy was a SNL writer, and they probably don't hire writers who can't write, so we can safely assume that he has at least the basic chops for the task.; 11/12/15, 9:12 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: "From an NPR discussion titled "Researchers Examine How To Spot A Lying Politician.""

There is a good chance lying is involved if it is on NPR.

I am Laslo.; 11/12/15, 9:18 AM
traditionalguy said...: We all love hearing our own sweet loving lies.

Madison Avenue had us figured out 70 years ago. Now the rest of you must surrender to what we say.; 11/12/15, 9:34 AM
Chris N said...: But many activists and secular humanist idealists/crusaders aren't mere politicians, omitting much and carefully choosing words to tap into public sentiment, am I right, NPR?

I mean, this is science, right? Current truth verified by experts?

I think an honest litmus test is noticing when you yourself react positively to a politician's words. What buttons have they pushed? What are you willing to do/believe with the least thought? A little skepticism and self-examination is a good start in those instances, I find. A pursuit of what might actually be true and possible.; 11/12/15, 9:38 AM
MikeR said...: See the comments to the article by Michael Braun - lead author in the study. They didn't ask him for comment, and they got the results wrong, and it's complicated. But journalists don't need to tell the truth either.; 11/12/15, 9:42 AM
rehajm said...: This stuff helps with just about everyone.

Also, anyone assigning Pinocchios is probably lying about what they claim is a lie.; 11/12/15, 10:05 AM
Anonymous said...: All politicians lie. They gaff the truth.

The MSM take whatever a Democrat says as is, truth or not; will question anything a Republican says, even his own name. When a Republican exposes a Democrat lie, the Republican is attacked for the disclosure. When a Democrat exposes a Republican, the Republican is pilloried.; 11/12/15, 10:23 AM
Static Ping said...: The depressing/annoying/truthful thing is we really don't care if politicians lie, at least in general. If we did I suspect that 95% of Congress would be thrown out and our politicians would be very different animals. What we really want are results. He or she can lie to us and have various people murdered and have the Secret Service smuggle you in hookers and blow, but if the economy is good and the nation is safe then that is acceptable to most of the voters. Actually, for a non-trivial number of voters they don't care if the economy is good and national defense is in shambles as long as they get whatever is they want whether that be free stuff, their favorite social issue position, or whatever.

An honest incompetent is useless. (See Jimmy Carter.) Really, the only reason we care about morals as such is we figure that if a man is embezzling money, cheating on his wife, and drunk half the time, his failures in the rest of his life will results in failures elsewhere. The funny thing is sometimes the folks with the bad habits are really good as leaders. The less funny thing is then we assume that because it wasn't a bar for this leader then it isn't important. Usually it is very important; it was just this guy was so good that he could overcome what virtually anyone else could not.; 11/12/15, 10:47 AM
grimson said...: Isn't Obama known for giving long-winded answers to questions?; 11/12/15, 10:52 AM
Tibore said...: Good grief. Instead of relying on the meta-information - verbosity, body language, etc. - why do people not use an evidence based approach to analyzing claims? Yes, yes, I understand that for some things - personal profiles when dating, for example - there may not be much evidence laying around (I'm a Star Trek fan, but I don't have a lot of tchotchkes demonstrating that). And that it's not as simply as getting a fact and saying "Aha! You're wrong!".

But at the same time, for a lot of things, it's still the most logical way to validate stuff. Someone running for office claiming they're ex-military? Have they got a DD-214? Someone claiming to be a doctor with a good treatment for your condition? Where's their state license and board certification? And: Is the treatment backed by published studies?

I'm not going to pretend that this works for everything. But I'm distressed that it seems like people don't feel the need to go this route for anything. How about holding a person's claims in suspension until evidence is gathered? It's not like everything in life is a poker game and you're stuck with not knowing a person's hand but must act right now. When you're listening to a politician, you're normally not doing so for the first time on the way to the voting booth. You've almost always got some time to analyze what's being said. So why not do so on in a more logical manner than trying to be a combination psychologist/poker-tells-reading-whiz? Not everyone is good at the latter sort of analysis.; 11/12/15, 11:05 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: I don't think I've been surprised by any president.

The biggest surprise with Bill Clinton is that it took almost six years for him to be impeached. I thought it would happen sooner.; 11/12/15, 11:54 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: @Static Ping.

Jimmy carter wasn't honest.

He was also somewhat incompetent, because he wasn't honest. He trusted the experts.; 11/12/15, 11:56 AM
Nichevo said...: You know, sometimes Ann talks a lot without saying anything...; 11/12/15, 12:20 PM
Gahrie said...: It's easiest just to assume that they are all lying.

If I have to discriminate, I just look for the "D" after their name.; 11/12/15, 12:40 PM
furious_a said...: long-winded answers to questions...

...because if one is lying one needs to buy time in order to remember what one has said. Another reason why Obama helpless without his teleprompter.; 11/12/15, 1:01 PM
Brent said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 11/12/15, 1:51 PM
Brent said...: `
`

The real purpose of all of this "research" news is to give Democrats a line to use against the nominee they fear most:

Marco Rubio

Because Marco can talk at length AND make his points easily understood - s skill that is much harder than ever givenm credit - Dems will HAVE to persuade that Rubio must be lying: not because what he says makes sense, but because he can explain things - again understandably - in more than sound bites.

Watch. You have been warned.
`
`; 11/12/15, 1:53 PM
FullMoon said...: I feel it appropriate to insert a favorite AA quote here:

See, whatever happens can be said to have happened for the reason you've already reasoned is the reason for whatever happens to have happened.

And, of course, for fun, the always popular:
“I know you think you believe you understand what you thought I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is exactly what I meant.”

Very handy if you want to leave someone dazed and confused.; 11/12/15, 1:56 PM
Nichevo said...: You could always jam a gunbarrel into their mouths and tell them next thing they say that you don't understand will be the last. I bet half the racking in the Inquisition was due to Inquisitors tiring of double talk.; 11/12/15, 2:22 PM
mikee said...: Inquisitors had the advantage of knowing, with absolute certainty, that they already had the Truth, or maybe the all-caps TRUTH, in their possession. All they were doing was trying to get heretics and sinners to confess and save their souls before being executed. That the Inquisitors were themselves horribly wrong in their actions was beyond their comprehension and incompatible with their most sincere beliefs.

Actually, change "Inquisitors" to "Democrats" and the above sentences work perfectly well today.

I, for one, plan on going my way without satisfying the modern Inquisition by confessing to any of the sins they claim I have committed.; 11/12/15, 3:18 PM
Ann Althouse said...: LOL. Thanks, Full Moon.; 11/12/15, 3:20 PM
Michael K said...: "How To Spot A Lying Politician."

Look.; 11/12/15, 7:38 PM