0:00:09.205,0:00:11.195 "Sorry, my phone died." 0:00:11.195,0:00:13.494 "It's nothing. I'm fine." 0:00:13.494,0:00:16.847 "These allegations [br]are completely unfounded." 0:00:16.847,0:00:20.799 "The company was not aware[br]of any wrongdoing." 0:00:20.799,0:00:23.543 "I love you." 0:00:23.543,0:00:26.656 We hear anywhere from 10[br]to 200 lies a day, 0:00:26.656,0:00:30.022 and we spent much of our history[br]coming up with ways to detect them, 0:00:30.022,0:00:32.700 from medieval torture devices[br]to polygraphs, 0:00:32.700,0:00:36.042 blood pressure and breathing monitors,[br]voice stress analyzers, 0:00:36.042,0:00:38.725 eye trackers, infrared brain scanners, 0:00:38.725,0:00:42.324 and even the 400 pound[br]electroencephalogram. 0:00:42.324,0:00:45.296 But although such tools have worked[br]under certain cirumstances, 0:00:45.296,0:00:48.156 most can be fooled with[br]enough preparation. 0:00:48.156,0:00:52.121 And none are considered reliable enough[br]to even be admissible in court. 0:00:52.121,0:00:54.665 But what if the problem is not [br]with the techniques, 0:00:54.665,0:00:59.066 but the underlying assumption[br]that lying spurs physiological changes? 0:00:59.066,0:01:01.071 What if we took a more direct approach, 0:01:01.071,0:01:05.146 using communication science to [br]analyze the lies themselves? 0:01:05.146,0:01:09.983 On a psychological level, we lie partly[br]to paint a better picture of ourselves, 0:01:09.983,0:01:12.859 connecting our fantasies to the person[br]we wish we were 0:01:12.859,0:01:15.317 rather than the person we are. 0:01:15.317,0:01:19.569 But while our brain is busy dreaming,[br]it's letting plenty of signals slip by. 0:01:19.569,0:01:23.728 Our conscious mind only controls [br]about 5% of our cognitive function, 0:01:23.728,0:01:25.288 including communication, 0:01:25.288,0:01:28.931 while the other 95% occurs[br]beyond our awareness. 0:01:28.931,0:01:31.874 And according to the literature on[br]reality monitoring, 0:01:31.874,0:01:35.426 stories based on imagined experiences[br]are qualitatively different 0:01:35.426,0:01:38.117 from those based on real experiences. 0:01:38.117,0:01:42.143 This suggests that creating a false story[br]about a personal topic takes work 0:01:42.143,0:01:45.226 and results in a different[br]pattern of language use. 0:01:45.226,0:01:48.231 A technology known as[br]linguistic text analysis 0:01:48.231,0:01:50.955 has helped to identify four such[br]common patterns 0:01:50.955,0:01:53.942 in the subconscious language of deception. 0:01:53.942,0:01:58.497 First, liars reference themselves less[br]when making deceptive statements. 0:01:58.497,0:02:02.248 They write or talk more about others,[br]often using the third person 0:02:02.248,0:02:05.509 to distance and disassociate[br]themselves from their lie. 0:02:05.509,0:02:07.158 Which sounds more false: 0:02:07.158,0:02:09.990 "Absolutely no party took [br]place at this house," 0:02:09.990,0:02:13.178 or "I didn't host a party here"? 0:02:13.178,0:02:15.757 Second, liars tend to be more negative 0:02:15.757,0:02:19.262 because on a subconscious level,[br]they feel guilty about lying. 0:02:19.262,0:02:21.422 For example, [br]a liar might say something like, 0:02:21.422,0:02:25.613 "Sorry, my stupid phone battery died.[br]I hate that thing." 0:02:25.613,0:02:28.877 Third, liars typically explain events[br]in simple terms 0:02:28.877,0:02:32.155 since our brains struggle[br]to build a complex lie. 0:02:32.155,0:02:36.240 Judgement and evaluation are [br]complex things for our brains to compute. 0:02:36.240,0:02:38.678 As a U.S. President once [br]famously insisted, 0:02:38.678,0:02:41.998 "I did not have sexual relations[br]with that woman." 0:02:41.998,0:02:44.683 And finally, even though liars keep[br]descriptions simple, 0:02:44.683,0:02:48.158 they tend to use longer and[br]more convoluted sentence structure. 0:02:48.158,0:02:49.764 Inserting unnecessary words 0:02:49.764,0:02:53.590 and irrelevant but factual sounding [br]details in order to pad the lie. 0:02:53.590,0:02:56.164 Another President confronted with[br]a scandal proclaimed, 0:02:56.164,0:02:59.574 "I can say categorically that this[br]investigation indicates that 0:02:59.574,0:03:02.751 no one on the White House staff,[br]no one in this administration 0:03:02.751,0:03:06.301 presently employed was involved in this[br]very bizarre incident." 0:03:06.301,0:03:10.188 Let's apply linguistic analysis to some[br]famous examples. 0:03:10.188,0:03:13.444 Take seven-time Tour de France[br]winner Lance Armstrong. 0:03:13.444,0:03:15.397 When comparing a 2005 interview, 0:03:15.397,0:03:18.274 in which he had denied taking[br]performance-enhancing drugs 0:03:18.274,0:03:21.212 to a 2013 interview,[br]in which he admitted it, 0:03:21.212,0:03:25.192 his use of personal pronouns[br]increased by nearly 3/4. 0:03:25.192,0:03:27.859 Note the contrast between the[br]following two quotes. 0:03:27.859,0:03:32.170 First, "Okay, you know, a guy in a French,[br]in a Parisian, laboratory 0:03:32.170,0:03:36.131 opens up your sample, you know,[br]Jean-Francis so-and-so, and he tests it. 0:03:36.131,0:03:38.816 And then you get a phone call[br]from a newspaper that says, 0:03:38.816,0:03:43.129 'We found you to be positive[br]six times for EPO.'" 0:03:43.129,0:03:46.757 Second, "I lost myself in all of that.[br]I'm sure there would be other people 0:03:46.757,0:03:49.728 that couldn't handle it, [br]but I certainly couldn't handle it, 0:03:49.728,0:03:52.750 and I was used to controlling [br]everything in my life. 0:03:52.750,0:03:55.412 I controlled every outcome in my life." 0:03:55.412,0:03:58.318 In his denial, Armstrong described[br]a hypothetical situation 0:03:58.318,0:04:00.321 focused on someone else, 0:04:00.321,0:04:03.003 removing himself from the [br]situation entirely. 0:04:03.003,0:04:04.980 In his admission, he owns his statements, 0:04:04.980,0:04:08.609 delving into his personal [br]emotions and motivations. 0:04:08.609,0:04:12.576 But the use of personal pronouns[br]is just one indicator of deception. 0:04:12.576,0:04:14.909 Let's look at another example[br]from former Senator 0:04:14.909,0:04:17.984 and U.S. Presidential candidate[br]John Edwards. 0:04:17.984,0:04:20.662 "I only know that the apparent [br]father has said publicly 0:04:20.662,0:04:22.678 that he is the father of the baby. 0:04:22.678,0:04:25.664 I also have not been engaged in any[br]activity of any description 0:04:25.664,0:04:29.172 that requested, agreed to, or supported[br]payments of any kind 0:04:29.172,0:04:32.377 to the woman or to the [br]apparent father of the baby." 0:04:32.377,0:04:36.420 Not only is that a pretty long-winded[br]way to say, "The baby isn't mine," 0:04:36.420,0:04:39.330 but Edwards never calls[br]the other parties by name, 0:04:39.330,0:04:43.163 instead saying "that baby," "the woman,"[br]and "the apparent father." 0:04:43.163,0:04:46.216 Now let's see what he had to say[br]when later admitting paternity. 0:04:46.216,0:04:47.817 "I am Quinn's father. 0:04:47.817,0:04:49.998 I will do everything in my [br]power to provide her 0:04:49.998,0:04:52.967 with the love and [br]support she deserves." 0:04:52.967,0:04:54.768 The statement is short and direct, 0:04:54.768,0:04:58.327 calling the child by name [br]and addressing his role in her life. 0:04:58.327,0:05:01.558 So how can you apply these lie-spotting[br]techniques to your life? 0:05:01.558,0:05:05.219 First, remember that many of the lies[br]we encounter on a daily basis 0:05:05.219,0:05:09.844 are far less serious that these examples,[br]and may even be harmless. 0:05:09.844,0:05:12.528 But it's still worthwhile to be aware[br]of telltale clues, 0:05:12.528,0:05:16.240 like minimal self-references,[br]negative language, 0:05:16.240,0:05:19.518 simple explanations and [br]convoluted phrasing. 0:05:19.518,0:05:22.843 It just might help you avoid[br]an overvalued stock, 0:05:22.843,0:05:26.333 an ineffective product,[br]or even a terrible relationship.