Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Fate versus chance
Effectiveness of lie detection
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Fate versus chance
I agree when you state that some people can calm themselves. Pathological liars do exist. Lie detectors are not a 100 percent sufficient. Some claim that lie detectors could put an innocent man or woman in jail. There are many tests where an individual’s actually told the truth, but the lie detector results showed that they lied. There are even cases where the convicted claim that they were manipulated. Could that be possible? I’d say yes, it can be possible. However, most cases follow up more evidence to follow its claims. It is rare for someone to be arrested just because of lie detectors. However, failing a test would raise suspicion. In that case, the luck is not on your side if you fail. We always hear people say, “If did nothing wrong,
than you got nothing to worry about”. That is true to some point. However, some people may feel threatened or nervous which leads to unusual behavior. Active listening is a good technique to avoid such situations. Sometimes people are not listening attentively. I usually ask the other person to repeat or clarify what they just said to make sure I am not misinterpreting there nonverbal behavior. That was a funny story you wrote. He could have punched you without thinking about it. People misinterpret nonverbal behavior all the time. Sadly, sometimes it can cost a life.
In a handful of occasions such as in an interrogation it seems reasonable enough to lie to an individual in order for them to confess to a crime. A case law that shows this was Frazier v. Cupp in which according to Police Link, “ The case involved the interrogation of a homicide suspect who was falsely told that an accomplice had already implicated the suspect in the killing.” In the case of Frazier v. Cupp kept on getting integrated even after he asked to speak to a lawyer so as a result he ended up doing a written confession where he confessed about being part of the murder that was later used as evidence against him.
Lying is bad but the fear that can come from it is worse. Fear can rule a person which drives them to extreme and irrational acts that can shape society in a negative way. We as people are so accustomed to how we should act that during times of fear and crisis our vision is blurred and sometimes our decision making abilities are impaired. We often look past at how much fear can affect us and our society. Starting from Salem 1692 and going to the McCarthy era fear ruled the people and even now in present time America we are constantly living in fear.
Judith Viorst is an American journalist. Her essay “The Truth about Lying”, printed in Buscemi and Smith’s 75 Readings: An Anthology. In this essay, Viorst examines social, protective, peace-keeping and trust-keeping lies but doesn’t include lies of influence.
In The Liars ' Club, Mary Karr recounts her dysfunctional childhood and the various struggles she and her family endured. Although both of Mary’s parents were suffered from severe alcoholism, Mary’s mother was also incredibly abusive as a result of mental illness. Growing up, Mary frequently witnessed violent episodes, fits and delusions that eventually landed her mother in a mental institution. Inevitably intensified by the alcoholism, her parents fought all the time, resulting in physical violence and constant threats of divorce. In just a few of her mother’s episodes, she tried to drive their car off of a bridge, starts fires and almost stabs her children with
Are everyday rituals, such as, facades reflected as to being a lie? Simply preparing for a meeting or interview does not come off as lying, although another type of façade such as when someone asks, “Are you okay,” after a death of someone close to you, in reality it is a form of a lie, because you are not being honest. In Stephanie Erricsson’s article “The Ways We Lie,” she discusses many different types of lying, that most wouldn’t even consider. Ericsson claimed, “But façades can be destructive because they are used to seduce others into an illusion” (409). Depending how a façade is used, the outcome can be beneficial or damaging. There are facades that are used to cover up one’s true feelings, in order to protect an individual and then there is a type in which one puts on a mask to cover up how awful of a person they are. Charity, a former friend, deceived me with the qualities of everything she was not, my mom is a great example of when it comes to hiding when she is saddened. In this article “The Ways We Lie,” Stephanie Ericsson has a great point of view on the destructiveness of facades, although, it can very well be used in a good way just as much as in a bad way, in fact, like my protective mother, using facades for mine and my sisters own good and then a conniving friend using facades in
One of the last types of ways investigators are coached to detect deception is in the behavioral attitudes of a person being interviewed such as being unconcerned or over anxious (Kassin, 2005). The success rate of looking for these cues are very successful in telling if an individual is being deceitful and has surpassed any laboratory tests conducted on the subject. The laboratory test however did reveal some interesting facts. The research showed that people who had training and experience did not score better than the control group who received no training. In fact all individuals scored at the chance level with the people who had training scored just above chance or at the chance level. To check if special training in the detection of deception was more accurate a study ...
To begin, the definition of pathological actually means abnormal or grossly atypical. Therefore, a pathological liar prevaricates more frequently than the average person or tells more abnormal lies. In most cases, pathological liars tell lies that are "unplanned and impulsive" (Hausman). These lies are usually very emotional stories that tend to serve no purpose except to impress people (Ford 133). As of now, psychiatrists are unsure whether or not pathological liars are fully capable of realizing if and when they are lying, so detecting whether or not a person is a pathological liar is a very difficult task (Hausman).
When confronted with a problem, why does the human brain default to lying? Dishonesty is never a solution, although it may seem like the best option in the spur of a moment. My grandma always gave the example of her youth: she avoided and deceived her friend’s sister because the little girl riled everyone. Come to find out, the sister passed the following month due to an illness. I could never imagine the guilt she experienced. Nevertheless, everyone has been deceitful before and many characters were in the tragedy, The Crucible, by playwright Arthur Miller. Reasons for lying are understandable, but most people will admit that mendacity has only caused pain. Lying’s outcome is never positive: it may seem like a good option, for falsehood can save a person’s life, benefit someone, and it eases stress, but these are all transitory.
The question of what constitutes morality is often asked by philosophers. One might wonder why morality is so important, or why many of us trouble ourselves over determining which actions are moral actions. Mill has given an account of the driving force behind our questionings of morality. He calls this driving force “Conscience,” and from this “mass of feeling which must be broken through in order to do what violates our standard of right,” we have derived our concept of morality (Mill 496). Some people may practice moral thought more often than others, and some people may give no thought to morality at all. However, morality is nevertheless a possibility of human nature, and a very important one. We each have our standards of right and wrong, and through the reasoning of individuals, these standards have helped to govern and shape human interactions to what it is today. No other beings except “rational beings,” as Kant calls us, are able to support this higher capability of reason; therefore, it is important for us to consider cases in which this capability is threatened. Such a case is lying. At first, it seems that lying should not be morally permissible, but the moral theories of Kant and Mill have answered both yes and no on this issue. Furthermore, it is difficult to decide which moral theory provides a better approach to this issue. In this paper, we will first walk through the principles of each moral theory, and then we will consider an example that will explore the strengths and weaknesses of each theory.
In Laurence Armand French Ph.D. and Thomas J. Young Ph.D.’s article The False Memory Syndrome: Clinical/Legal Issues for the Prosecution talks about memory recall being an unreliable form of evidence in the Criminal Justice System. French and Young state that hypnosis and lie detector tests are a misconception because “the cognitive interpretations of the emotional/autonomic aspects of the central nervous (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems are not true indicators of reality,” (p. 38).
The article, “Is Lying Bad for Us,” accurately describes the intentions of a “liar.” The author says, “Though liars do not tell the truth, they care about it, while the bullshitter does not even care about the truth and seeks merely to impress” (Gunderman). This statement proves that lying should not be viewed as out of the ordinary, or unacceptable, and that liars should not be viewed as bad people. Lying can be shown as a way of protecting or caring
The polygraph test, introduced nearly a century ago, has been widely used in the detection of deception and for some time, has been considered by law enforcement representatives, an exceptionally valid testing apparatus. The media and law enforcement representatives describe the various methods of detecting deception to be extremely valid and reliable in detecting deceptive cues, although the various research done through field studies and controlled experiments demonstrate significant error rates amongst the various testing procedures used. Physiological responses of an individual may vary from person to person. No matter how small the error rate may be, there is always a chance that environmental conditions as well as physiological conditions induced by the individual or the interpreter can have an effect on the interpretational conclusion of what were considered to be deceptive cues. These influential factors may illustrate a small positive or negative error rate, but when the conclusion is applied to a conviction, it can possibly establish or distinguish false results to be accurate or inconclusive.
What are lies? A lie is defined as follows: To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intent to deceive. There are several ways that lies are told for instance, there are white lies, lies of omission, bold faced lies, and lies of exaggeration. No matter what type of lie that one chooses to tell many people believe that lies do more harm than good.
A polygraph test can record a person's breathing rate, pulse, blood pressure, perspiration and other significant physiological changes that suggest a person is lying, but it should not be used as evidence in a court of law because it does not provide reliable proof of a person's physical reaction to the stress of lying.
The lie detector Sometimes known as polygraph. But its not really reliable. They basically base these lie detectors off of nervousness. Like the old times. They made people lick hot irons, put rice powder in your mouth see if you would spti it out, and even try to swallow bread and cheese. (Source #3, Paragraph 2). Now days the check blood pressure, Skin resistance, pulse, and also breathing. But people can easily get nervous. They might even get nervbous to come into an office to be accused of a crime. What if your the wrong person and they come ask you to lick a iron. I bet you would be nervous too. So most people think that the shouldnt base lie detectors off of nervousness.