Hacker News Reader

From what I understand you typically need a 'base-line' of normality to know when someone has deviated from that. People can get nervous or make mistakes at any point. The best way to set the base-line is to have a general conversation to put them at ease and then ask the more consequential questions. This could lead to longer queues though which would be an unfortunate side effect.

TL;DR

Use the deviation from the base-line to work out if someone is lying.

View on HN

Incidentally, this is how I interview people. Random BS for 5-10 minutes followed by interview questions. It also works for one on ones with staff to tell a recent funny anecdote about some subject they're interested in to get them to breathe and open up a little.

I do the same when interviewing. I came across this technique when looking at a Body Language course hosted by Vanessa Van Edwards. Most of it was superfluous but I thought the parts around 'reading' the truth from non verbal clues was very interesting.

That's how the polygraphing process works, right? Isn't that generally regarded as useless?

In short yes but the approach I've seen work is less 'science' and more about judgement calls when analysing micro expressions. Without the base-line, it's hard to work out what a normal reaction is and what could potentially be a tell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com