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.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
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.