Lying Is Rare, but for Those Who Lie It Is Prolific

As elections approach, voters are assessing the performance of their elected representatives. I have observed and written about corruption in office for two decades. The following psychology research tips can help voters test the credibility of their public servants.

The Good News

Most people are not inveterate liars. Michigan State University communication researcher Kim Serota and his colleagues, in a study of 1,000 participants, find that of those who admit they lie, half of the lies come from just 5.3% of participants. Since lying tends to be rare, except for a small group of frequent liars, it makes sense to start with the premise that people are telling the truth until, as attorneys say, you observe a "pattern and practice" of lying. Or, as President Reagan said, “Trust but Verify.”

The experts agree that no one trait definitively reveals a liar. Listen, watch, and read carefully. Often it takes knowledge of the material and observation over time before patterns become evident.

Liars Tell You Who They Are

Singer, poet, author, and activist Maya Angelou is famous for saying, "When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” I have observed that liars often inadvertently tell you who they are or what they are doing. For instance, an attorney joked during an annual general meeting that disclosed high legal expenses, “Of course, I encourage the association to engage in expensive litigation because then I make more money.”

Liars may use phrases or words that betray what they are doing. Recently, a government clerk rejected a document because it contained uppercase rather than lowercase letters. The attorney dubbed it, "unauthorized capitalization." The document was about complaints by citizens that the city was committing them to hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses and taxation without the vote or permission of the people—in fact, unauthorized capitalization!

In a March 25, 2024 online article, "Psychological Signs That Someone Is Lying," the Australian National Psychology Service identifies several of the studies and behavioral cues and solutions that follow, with the proviso that while psychological research has identified several patterns associated with lying, no single cue definitively indicates dishonesty.

This person had just finished saying, “We have had no conflicts of interest.”

Source: Debbie Peterson / Public Record

Microexpressions and Incongruent Body Language

Micro expressions are brief, involuntary facial expressions that occur when someone tries to conceal their true feelings. Ekman and O'Sullivan (1991), in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, find that concealed emotions may indicate deceit. This may include body language that does not match what is being said. Research by Vrij, Edward, Roberts, and Bull (2000) published in Psychology, Crime & Law shows that liars might exhibit gestures that contradict their verbal statements, such as shaking their head "no" while saying "yes." These can often be caught on camera when meetings are recorded.

Behavioral Cues

I am surprised at how often the “hand over the mouth” cue shows up. It may indicate, “I don’t believe what you are saying,” or “what is being said isn’t true.”

Body Language: This is a sewer district meeting in which the mayor on the left had just presented findings of 40 red flags in the agency’s financials. Her position was supported by a district president in the middle. The mayor on the right had been in authority during the time the red flags emerged. They are listening to the response from the agency administrator who was later convicted of self-dealing.

Source: Debbie Peterson / Public Record

Conversational Cues

In addition to the non-verbal cues, psychologists note that certain verbal cues may indicate lying, although the best of liars may not exhibit these cues, and sometimes the cues expose nervousness. The nervousness might be due to the veracity of their comments, and it might not. These include clearing throat and vague responses. Increased cognitive load and emotional stress are common in deceptive individuals. Vrij (2008), in Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities, noted that signs of cognitive strain or stress, like fidgeting, may indicate deceit.

Certain verbal patterns may hint at dishonesty. DePaulo et al. (2003), in Psychological Bulletin, noted that deceptive speech often includes distancing language (e.g., avoiding personal pronouns). Clearing of the throat can reveal nervousness, perhaps induced by a dishonest response.

Questioning Answers and Answering Questions

Liars often provide less detailed, more ambiguous answers. According to Levine, Park, and McCornack (1999), in Human Communication Research, deceptive answers are typically less compelling and contain fewer specifics than truthful responses. They find that unexpected questions disrupt a deceiver's prepared narrative, making it harder to maintain their lie. This technique leverages the element of surprise to elicit spontaneous responses that may betray deceit. These are common practices of journalists as an interview technique or simply due to curiosity.

Recently, I unwittingly used this technique. I asked a few questions of a city manager who stated that the city only received 10% of its property taxes from the county. My understanding was that it was a fixed rate varying from 14-17%, set when the city was incorporated, so I was curious about the lower figure. I provided these figures and asked what had changed. The response was, “Well, that’s the national average cities get.”

Deception Essential Reads

Understanding the Private-to-Public Filter

How Lies Get Under Your Skin

Liars often struggle to maintain complex lies. Asking for details increases the cognitive load and makes it more difficult for liars to keep their story straight. Vrij, Fisher, Mann, and Leal (2006), in Applied Cognitive Psychology, found that asking open-ended questions requiring detailed answers can reveal discrepancies in a liar’s account. Strömwall, Granhag, and Hartwig (2004) in Legal and Criminological Psychology suggest that evaluating a story's coherence, plausibility, and detail can provide insights into its truthfulness. Honest accounts are more vivid, with logical sequences and spontaneous corrections.

Unexpected Questions and Strategic Use of Evidence

This can include withholding evidence until the right moment in conversation. According to Granhag and Hartwig (2015) in Annual Review of Law and Social Science, strategically revealing information that contradicts the speaker's account challenges the liar to adjust their story on the spot, often leading to inconsistencies.