Much like 1960s work by Robert Rosenthal, you can used "stats" to show a better than chance rating on deception detection but this is just an electronic means of much of the work that was done towards contextual analysis over the last 30 years.
No new ideas, just simply spinning the lie-facts in another realm of analysis. Just a pencil pusher with a computer.
Someone look at the context of the question that is posed and the environment in which it was presented and I'll start to pay attention.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John from Buffalo @ Mar 30th 2007 8:33PM
Bogus.
Much like 1960s work by Robert Rosenthal, you can used "stats" to show a better than chance rating on deception detection but this is just an electronic means of much of the work that was done towards contextual analysis over the last 30 years.
No new ideas, just simply spinning the lie-facts in another realm of analysis. Just a pencil pusher with a computer.
Someone look at the context of the question that is posed and the environment in which it was presented and I'll start to pay attention.
Just figures .... spun in different light.