Comments on: More Lying http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:23:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Douglas Knight http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422081 Douglas Knight Thu, 15 Feb 2007 05:01:57 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422081 Poker players are an example of RH's class of "private professionals whose job is to detect lies," and I'm glad RF provided an example. I don't know what you mean by "criminologists," but I think that would fall under the category of public professionals, who do not seem to do very well, as RH said above, their livelihoods don't depend the quality of their work. I read in some secondary source, probably Gladwell, that although the median police aren't better than the median civilian, the proportion of really good police is higher. Perhaps Navarro is of this class. Or maybe that's not true, it's just easier to find good police because they get a reputation. Re: criminals. Yes, the papers say they do better, but do they use studies designed without this objection in mind? I doubt it. Studies with half the people lying are probably cheaper than with 10%. An easy enough thing to check. Poker players are an example of RH’s class of “private professionals whose job is to detect lies,” and I’m glad RF provided an example. I don’t know what you mean by “criminologists,” but I think that would fall under the category of public professionals, who do not seem to do very well, as RH said above, their livelihoods don’t depend the quality of their work. I read in some secondary source, probably Gladwell, that although the median police aren’t better than the median civilian, the proportion of really good police is higher. Perhaps Navarro is of this class. Or maybe that’s not true, it’s just easier to find good police because they get a reputation.

Re: criminals.
Yes, the papers say they do better, but do they use studies designed without this objection in mind? I doubt it. Studies with half the people lying are probably cheaper than with 10%. An easy enough thing to check.

]]> By: Rafe Furst http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422080 Rafe Furst Wed, 14 Feb 2007 04:03:25 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422080 Joe Navarro, formerly of the FBI, went up against a psychic, a poker player (Annie Duke) and a few other people in a televised experiment to see who was best at detecting lies. Navarro and Annie were the best. If the question is "is there any group that is actually good at detecting lies?", my money is on the criminologists and poker players. After all, their livelihoods depend on it very directly. Joe Navarro, formerly of the FBI, went up against a psychic, a poker player (Annie Duke) and a few other people in a televised experiment to see who was best at detecting lies. Navarro and Annie were the best. If the question is “is there any group that is actually good at detecting lies?”, my money is on the criminologists and poker players. After all, their livelihoods depend on it very directly.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422079 Stuart Armstrong Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:40:23 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422079 <i>Do private professionals whose job is to detect lies do any better?</i> Most of these papers seems to imply that private professionals perform just as badly as anyone else, but have more confidence in themselves. It's the feedback that seems key. <i>They may be just as bad as the general population, except that they have defaulted to believing people lie rather than tell the truth.</i> The papers' claim that they are stictly better, not differently defaulted. And relationships in the criminal world are much more dependent on trust (with no legal system to enforce contracts, trust and fear are the main tools to do so). So it's not just a question of ferretting out the liars but of figuring out the truth tellers. <i>shouldn't it be possible to have hardened criminals watch the investor relations presentations of corporate officers</i> The best idea here would be to get people who were involved, as a group, in long-term financial fraud (like the Enron crew). They would probably be superb at this. Do private professionals whose job is to detect lies do any better?

Most of these papers seems to imply that private professionals perform just as badly as anyone else, but have more confidence in themselves.

It’s the feedback that seems key.

They may be just as bad as the general population, except that they have defaulted to believing people lie rather than tell the truth.

The papers’ claim that they are stictly better, not differently defaulted. And relationships in the criminal world are much more dependent on trust (with no legal system to enforce contracts, trust and fear are the main tools to do so). So it’s not just a question of ferretting out the liars but of figuring out the truth tellers.

shouldn’t it be possible to have hardened criminals watch the investor relations presentations of corporate officers

The best idea here would be to get people who were involved, as a group, in long-term financial fraud (like the Enron crew). They would probably be superb at this.

]]> By: Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422078 Eliezer Yudkowsky Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:47:16 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422078 If this is true, shouldn't it be possible to have hardened criminals watch the investor relations presentations of corporate officers, and point out which ones were suspect? Would it be possible to beat the stock market this way? Actually, one would probably prefer to call upon a disciple of Ekman then a hardened criminal per se. If this is true, shouldn’t it be possible to have hardened criminals watch the investor relations presentations of corporate officers, and point out which ones were suspect? Would it be possible to beat the stock market this way?

Actually, one would probably prefer to call upon a disciple of Ekman then a hardened criminal per se.

]]> By: Carl Shulman http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422077 Carl Shulman Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:54:58 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422077 TGGP, The experience is valuable if combined with feedback on accuracy. The parole boards don't get rewarded or punished on the basis of recidivism rates among those they release. TGGP,

The experience is valuable if combined with feedback on accuracy. The parole boards don’t get rewarded or punished on the basis of recidivism rates among those they release.

]]> By: will mcbride http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422076 will mcbride Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:34:57 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422076 Maybe this is the answer to Robin's previous post. Use criminals to define the objective truth, then compare popular opinion to that. Also, if you believe that politics is mostly a sham, as I do, then this would predict that voter turnout is low among criminals. Maybe this is the answer to Robin’s previous post. Use criminals to define the objective truth, then compare popular opinion to that.

Also, if you believe that politics is mostly a sham, as I do, then this would predict that voter turnout is low among criminals.

]]> By: TGGP http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422075 TGGP Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:38:19 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422075 "you'd expect that those whose job involves ferreting out liars, such as police officers or immigration judges, would be better at it than the rest of us. But this study claims that Swedish judges on the Migration Board (MB) are about as good at recognising the signs of lying as students" "unless you have [...] a great experience in being lied to, the best is most definitely not to trust your gut." The two quotes seem to conflict. Wouldn't people whose jobs involve ferreting out liars have a lot of experience with being lied to? “you’d expect that those whose job involves ferreting out liars, such as police officers or immigration judges, would be better at it than the rest of us. But this study claims that Swedish judges on the Migration Board (MB) are about as good at recognising the signs of lying as students”

“unless you have [...] a great experience in being lied to, the best is most definitely not to trust your gut.”

The two quotes seem to conflict. Wouldn’t people whose jobs involve ferreting out liars have a lot of experience with being lied to?

]]> By: Robin Hanson http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422074 Robin Hanson Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:11:39 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422074 Perhaps government civil servants do not have much relevant expertize in their tasks because voters have a hard time monitoring them. Do private professionals whose job is to detect lies do any better? Perhaps government civil servants do not have much relevant expertize in their tasks because voters have a hard time monitoring them. Do private professionals whose job is to detect lies do any better?

]]> By: Gordon Worley http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422073 Gordon Worley Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:53:36 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422073 I question, though, if prisoners (and people with paranoia, for example) are *accurate* judges of deception, specifically, if in being able to better detect liars their success is from simply suspecting more people are lying. And even if they do successfully catch all of the liars, how often do they wrongly claim non-liars? They may be just as bad as the general population, except that they have defaulted to believing people lie rather than tell the truth. I question, though, if prisoners (and people with paranoia, for example) are *accurate* judges of deception, specifically, if in being able to better detect liars their success is from simply suspecting more people are lying. And even if they do successfully catch all of the liars, how often do they wrongly claim non-liars? They may be just as bad as the general population, except that they have defaulted to believing people lie rather than tell the truth.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/02/more_lying.html#comment-422072 Stuart Armstrong Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:22:21 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/02/more-lying.html#comment-422072 <i>As I suggested on my blog, maybe we should make sitting on the migration board a punishment for repeat offenders?</i> Good idea! But my favourite punishment for repeat offenders is to get them to fill in pages and pages of surveys. A specific population, of course, but within that population a hundred percent response rate and no self-selection... As I suggested on my blog, maybe we should make sitting on the migration board a punishment for repeat offenders?

Good idea! But my favourite punishment for repeat offenders is to get them to fill in pages and pages of surveys. A specific population, of course, but within that population a hundred percent response rate and no self-selection…

]]>