Microexpressions — Test Yourself


A micro expression of fear

A microexpression is a flash of emotion that tells what you are really feeling. For instance, if you ask someone how they are feeling and they reply they are doing great, when let’s say they are dying inside, people who can see microexpressions will potentially see a flash of pain or fear or sadness, regardless of what this person is actually saying.

In essence, your face has a natural lie detector built right in, which may indicate that you are being deceptive. And guess what, no matter how hard you try, you can’t fake it out or stop your true expressions from flashing themselves. They are involuntary.

Isn’t that wild?

But it is important to know that not all situations cause people to flash microexpressions. It’s just one piece of the detection puzzle.

Microexpressions may appear in the middle of a fake expression for an instant or a flash.

Even more interesting is that when you make a fake smile, you don’t use the same muscles you use when you genuinely smile. Isn’t that bizarre? The muscles you use for a fake smile are completely different. If I ask you to genuinely smile for me when you are not happy, guess what, you can’t do it. The smile will not be the same.

I find that fascinating!!

Before I knew microexpressions existed, I never noticed them (consciously, I suspect). Then once I heard about them, I suddenly noticed them all the time, as if someone turned the lights on. I’ll never forget the first one I was conscious about: I saw Scott Peterson flash an excited microexpression to Barbara Walters when she asked him a question. Instead of answering the question excitedly, he played the sad, downer-guy denying her the truth. It was clear as day what his true feelings were, and they didn’t match what he had just said and the expressed emotion on his face. He couldn’t hide them–just most people didn’t see it.

I believe I have always seen microexpressions and registered them, but I wasn’t consciously aware of them. I think for years, I have innately processed this information in my subconscious mind without ever being consciously aware of how I knew what I knew. I just knew it. (Finally, my world is making sense!!!)

In an odd twist, just because someone tells you microexpressions exist doesn’t mean you will see them like I do. I think in real life only handful of people out of 100 actually see microexpressions without training. Most people are oblivious to them. It’s not a common trait most people possess: the ability to see microexpressions.

When I saw the Scott Peterson microexpression, I asked my husband to see if he saw it. He missed it. Since that time, I have taped shows and I rewind them and repeatedly replay microexpressions to my husband and no matter what I do, he doesn’t see them.  For some people to see them, you must slow them down.

So, do you want to test your ability to work with and identify microexpressions?

I’ll warn you: This test is difficult. I believe it was difficult because all other verbal clues and hints from the face and body are stripped away. You have to solely rely on the face to do this test — and that is challenging. I am used to processing lots of clues and not just focusing in on one. Yet I think I scored 6 out of 10 on this test (I was too busy taking it and I didn’t keep score but I think I remember missing 4).

See how you can do… Good luck!
Facial Expressions Test

Update 2-11-2008:
I would say the microexpressions that I see consciously assist me in deception detection about 8-10% of the time. I wonder if I register a lot more subconsciously.

Update 3-25-2008:
See a new poll taken by my readers. It asks them what they think are the biggest clues to deception for me. Here is what I think are my biggest clues.

Ghost sells for $65,000

Have you heard of the Indiana woman who put her father’s ghost up for auction on eBay because supposedly her son was convinced Grandpa was haunting the house? She hoped by selling his ghost (and the cane of her father), that her son would be convinced he left the house — and he would no longer be afraid. This is a true story.

It intrigued me so I went to investigate it for myself. I found a video interview of the woman and her husband on MSNBC.com. I wanted to see what they had to say firsthand. I wanted to know if this woman was honest. The story could be plausible, in a clever effort to rid a child of fear. However, it could be a ploy for money.

After watching the video, I do not trust this woman. More than likely, this is a person who is out for financial gain. Regardless, I am going to view this with a clean slate and see what I find…

Review of the Video – Ghostly Sale:
NBC’s Ann Curry interviews Mary and her husband, Mickey Anderson. Below I recount spots in the video that make me question the people and their motives.

  • Watch when Mickey Anderson is asked by Ann Curry whose idea it was to put the ghost up for auction. Listen to how Mickey responds. He stutters by saying “um, and “ah” a lot. He also says “she” when he means “he”. His answer doesn’t roll off his tongue. He clearly struggles in his reply. When a story is genuine, you don’t struggle. It flows naturally. I don’t believe he is being honest here.
  • Watch his wife’s response as he talks to Ann Curry about whose idea it was to list the auction. She is sitting there carefully listening to her husband’s every word. She makes stressed faces as he talks. Why? Is she fearful he might not say the right things? Did she coach him on exactly what to say — and she fears he may not say it exactly as he is supposed to? She nods her head in confirmation at other times concurring with what he is saying. Then when he finishes, she cracks a smile and looks relieved. Why? I think the answer is obvious: perhaps the answers were practiced?

    (Let Mary’s expressions guide you. They will guide you more appropriately than will her words… )

  • When Ann Curry asks Mary if she is scratching-her-head (figure of speech) because the auction (at that point) was sitting at FIVE THOUSAND (odd) dollars, listen to Mary’s response. Ann Curry is in shock. Why doesn’t Mary respond that she, too, is shocked (at the price)? Wouldn’t you be if a non-material item on eBay was selling for thousands?

    Wouldn’t any normal person be shocked?

    I speculate a person who is lying wouldn’t be shocked. They’d suppress their feelings because they wouldn’t want to let out a hint of excitement about their true motivation — which would more than likely be monetary gain. An honest person would exude shock, like everyone else.

  • Mary says,”I figured who is going to want this? I figured we could get a penny out of it.”

    She says she could get a penny? Isn’t that a weird response? Who would think about a penny? Again, Mary is downplaying this – downplaying her interest in monetary gains.

    I suspect people would have one or two motives in this situation: to help their son (in a weird albeit abnormal funky mystic-kind-of-way) — or to get their hands on money like the money made by the crazy woman who sold a grill cheese sandwich just a few weeks before!! Which motive is Mary thinking about?

  • Watch when Ann Curry says, “What are you going to do with the money?”

    Mary blows air through her teeth and lips. That’s a true, trustworthy expression of frustration. It truly indicates how she is really feeling. Her reply, “If it…It really depends on what it (the amount) goes up to now….We told him he is supposed to get all the money…but if it goes up from there… we are giving to charity, too.” Mary fears Curry is honing in on her desires to take money — and she is sick of it! She doesn’t want to talk about it anymore.

  • Mary goes on to say that she has had tons of e-mail telling her what she should do with the money. Look closely, you see an expression of anger (a microexpression, I suspect)! She is mad about that. She doesn’t want anyone to tell her what to do with her money but she tries to hide it. Where are her thoughts about her son & charity? Does she not have any? Her emotions are not consistent with what she is saying.
  • Ann Curry goes on to ask…”Have you thought about ‘what if’ this doesn’t work? What if you sell the ghost and Collin still thinks the ghost is in the house? What are you going to do then?”

    Look at how cocky Mary is when she replies so confidently, “I don’t think that is going to be a problem (pause) because… I’ve been reading e-mails to him…” The pause between the word because and I’ve is interesting. She is thinking as she speaks.

    A mother whose son is honestly afraid of ghosts knows that situations like this aren’t that easily rectified. Mary’s confidence doesn’t add up to normal behavior.

  • Watch Mary’s husband as she talks about how excited her son is about giving the ghost away. Why is her husband so somber? If his son was excited, wouldn’t he be genuinely enthused as well? Would he be joyous? He’s not. Why? Does he know things are less than honest, perhaps?

Another inconsistency from Mary in other news stories is that she says her son says Grandpa was “mean” yet she swears he was the nicest man you’d ever meet in her actual auction description. This shows Mary is inconsistent. Inconsistency points to less than honest behavior.

When people don’t tell the truth, they just don’t respond normally.

In the end, what is even more odd to me is why the son, Collin, isn’t part of the interview. Why didn’t they have him on with them? People might say that is because they want to protect the identity of their child — but clearly that is not the case because they offered a photo of Collin in the video above. Were they afraid to have Collin speak? Children are usually brutally honest. Is Mary afraid of this?

In the end, I personally don’t trust what this couple is saying.

Was it a hate crime?

I am sure the face and story of Matthew Shepard are seared into the brains of most people. Young beautiful gay guy beaten, tied up and left for dead in Wyoming. The year was 1998. Matthew Shepard was a college student with a big bright future. That’s the story most of us know…

However last night, I decided to watch a video tape recording of ABC’s 20/20 from November 26th which had the first ever interview with the two convicted murderers: Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson.

Since I am fascinated with lies, I was really interested to watch these two guys. However, they proved much harder to read than the average guy. They are polished. Plus other sources in the story added to the mix and confusion as they weren’t trustworthy either.

Certainly these two young killers had years of practice at lying and deception as they were heavily involved in drugs scene, most specifically with meth. McKinney, the instigator of the killings, says he was strung out on meth for an entire week without sleep prior to the murder. He says he just wanted money and more drugs — so when Shepard, drunk in a bar, asked for a ride home from him as they sat and talked that night — McKinney says he saw an opportunity to rob Shepard. Henderson said he quickly realized the plan of action.

I believe them here. I believe the motivation for the crime initially was money for drugs.

McKinney continues to say the killing wasn’t motivated by Shepard’s sexual orientation. It was when he answered Elizabeth Vargas that I saw a expression (I suspect what experts would call a microexpression –an expression that flashes on someone’s face for an instant — which most people aren’t privy too). He squinted his eyes with a deep sincere anger for a flit of an instant. It made his statement completely convincing. By this expression, you knew he was really pissed off by the fact people thought this was a hate crime when it was really just a case of drugs, money, robbery and murder. However, he didn’t want people to see this emotion. He was trying to hide it.

As for Henderson, when Vargas asked if he had an prejudice against gays, he flat out lied. He paused, looked around and didn’t have a good answer. He truly had problems with gay people but apparently he didn’t beat Shepard. He just never stopped McKinney and helped save Shepard.

McKinney goes on to say that on the ride to Shepard’s home, he had planned to pull a gun on Shepard to rob him but Shepard put his hand on his knee — and that send him into a rage. He said he then just beat Shepard with a gun and continued to beat Shepard. He said it was a rage that once was started couldn’t be stopped.

Meth is known to cause violent outburst for the most benign circumstance. I believe McKinney here. I have no doubts.

Several people spoke on 20/20 about McKinney. They said he was known to have sex in a threesome: two men and a woman. The mother of his child says today she believes he is bi-sexual because before all of this, he asked her to be part of a threesome with two guys. Another man, a limo driver named Copp, also spoke about stories he had supposedly heard about McKinney having sex in a threesome. When asked how he knew, Copp then switched his story and said he knew because he was one of the guys. Copp was lying. You could see it by the phony machismo face he made. It wasn’t sincere at all.

The facts of this case are overwhelming. I don’t believe McKinney hated gays. I believe him when he says this killing wasn’t motivated by hate. Nor does anyone ever offer anything to the contrary — that McKinney did talk about hating gays — yet a simple gesture for sex is what started a violent outburst from McKinney and caused him to kill Shepard.

What a FINE LINE.

Another odd fact: McKinney says he didn’t know Shepard prior to the killing — yet multiple people spoke out on 20/20 stating that they did in fact see them together. However, none of the people speaking up were convincing. I don’t believe they were lying but due to the fact they were all drug users, I don’t trust their perception which leaves a gray area for me.

Was McKinney bisexual and keeping it a secret?

Did he know Shepard beforehand — and perhaps had some secret encounters with him? Is that why when Shepard put his hand on McKinney’s knee that night, McKinney flipped? Did McKinney flip because he knew Henderson hated gays and would never let him live it down??

It’s all so intertwined and twisted! I do firmly believe:

  • McKinney didn’t hate gays.
  • Henderson did.
  • McKinney intended to rob Shepard, Henderson just followed along.
  • McKinney didn’t plan on killing Shepard but did in a rage.
  • McKinney was bi-sexual.

I wonder:

  • if McKinney knew Shepard beforehand. I suspect yes, he is lying but I am uncertain. McKinney is hard to read here.
  • if McKinney had secret sexual encounters with Shepard before (pure speculation).