News / Science News |
The most reliable scientific model to date for detecting when a person is lying, based on thermography
Researchers from the University of Granada (UGR) have designed the most accurate laboratory model to date for determining if a person is lying or telling the truth. This method, which uses thermography techniques, is based on the so‑called ‘Pinocchio Effect’: when a person is lying, the temperature of the nose decreases while that of the forehead increases, among other facial thermal changes.
The researchers point out that this system is more accurate than the famous polygraph –a measuring instrument used for recording physiological responses– and other brain‑imaging techniques used in research, since thermography offers an accuracy of up to 80% (10% higher than that of the polygraph).
The two facial regions key for measuring this ‘Pinocchio Effect’ are the forehead and the tip of the nose. When we lie, the temperature of the tip of the nose decreases between 0.6 ºC and 1.2 ºC, while that of the forehead increases between 0.6 ºC and 1.5 ºC. The greater the difference in temperature between both facial regions, the more likely the person is lying.
The reason for this phenomenon to occur is quite simple. When someone lies, the body experiences an emotional response, anxiety, which is revealed in the temperature of the nose.
Besides, a cognitive response also occurs since, for lying, we have to think, to plan our excuses, to analyze the context…, and that causes a cognitive charge in us, a strong demand for attentional control which translates into an increase in the temperature of the forehead.
In other words, one has to think in order to lie, which rises the temperature of the forehead; but at the same time we feel anxious, which lowers the temperature of the nose.
The UGR researcher warns that it is necessary to differentiate between the study of lying in a laboratory and in real life. “The methods we use in the laboratory are very different of those used, for example, by the Police, which uses the so‑called strategic interviewing (with questionnaires including ‘tricky’ questions and demanding a lot of details) to try and catch a liar.”
True detection of lies, even carried out by professionals, is only slightly higher than pure chance (54%), and the rate rises to 60%‑70% with strategic interviewing.
The ideal case would be to combine both methods, strategic interviewing and thermography, moving our system to, for example, police stations, airports or refugee camps. That way, it would be possible to detect if a criminal is lying or to know the true intentions of people trying to cross the border between two countries. (University of Granada)