從眼神手勢(shì)識(shí)破撒謊者雙語(yǔ)

從眼神手勢(shì)識(shí)破撒謊者雙語(yǔ)

　　　研究人員還發(fā)現(xiàn)，騙子的手部活動(dòng)可能更多、眼神交流頻繁，并且會(huì)頻頻點(diǎn)頭和皺眉。下面是學(xué)習(xí)啦小編整理的雙語(yǔ)閱讀：從眼神手勢(shì)識(shí)破撒謊者，歡迎大家閱讀!

　　You might expect a liar to struggle with eye contact, when lying through his teeth. But a study by University of Michigan researchers suggests that liars may look their questioners in the eye more often than people telling the truth. People who are lying also wave both hands around far more than those who are being honest.

　　你可能會(huì)認(rèn)為，騙子撒謊時(shí)眼神會(huì)亂瞟。但是密歇根大學(xué)的一項(xiàng)研究調(diào)查顯示：與講實(shí)話的人相比，騙子看質(zhì)問(wèn)者眼睛的次數(shù)更多。正在撒謊的人揮手次數(shù)也遠(yuǎn)比誠(chéng)實(shí)的人多。

　　Those who were lying were found more likely to have animated hand movements, make strong eye contact, nod their heads, and scowl. Researchers also found that liars were more likely to say “um” and to use pronouns that distanced themselves from the action, such as “he”or “she”rather than “I”or “we.”

　　研究人員還發(fā)現(xiàn)，騙子的手部活動(dòng)可能更多、眼神交流頻繁，并且會(huì)頻頻點(diǎn)頭和皺眉。此外，撒謊的人更喜歡用“嗯”以及一些撇清關(guān)系的代詞，比如“她”和“他”，而不是“我”或者“我們”。

　　The same gestures were also used by some people telling the truth, but to a lesser extent: 25% of truthful people gestured with both hands, compared to 40% of liars. Sixty percent of truthful people looked directly at the questioner, compared to 70% of liars.

　　當(dāng)然，講真話的人也會(huì)做類似的手勢(shì)，但人數(shù)較少，只占25%左右;與之相比，撒謊者中做這種手勢(shì)的占到40%。誠(chéng)實(shí)的人中有60%的人會(huì)直視質(zhì)問(wèn)者，而騙子中，該比例則占到70%。

　　The researchers believe their work could be useful for security agents and juries, but of course it’s far from foolproof. It’s also impossible to know for sure whether the courtroom verdicts are right, and if the “liars” being examined are definitely being dishonest. This is a problem for all lie detection; Polygraph tests, which measure stress in response to questions, have similarly variable results. Though they have roughly 85% accuracy when testing guilty people, some polygraph tests have just 56% accuracy for innocent people.

　　研究者們認(rèn)為，這項(xiàng)成果可以幫助保安和法官，但依舊做不到高度準(zhǔn)確。當(dāng)然，想要徹底弄明白法庭審判是否公正，或者正在受審的撒謊者是否真的在說(shuō)謊，這根本不可能。對(duì)所有的謊言測(cè)試來(lái)說(shuō)，這都是個(gè)問(wèn)題。測(cè)謊儀(通過(guò)測(cè)試受審者的壓力)的結(jié)果也是多變的。即使測(cè)謊儀在測(cè)試犯罪人員時(shí)的準(zhǔn)確率有85%，但對(duì)于無(wú)辜的人，測(cè)謊儀的準(zhǔn)確率只有56%。

　　The truth is, we all behave slightly differently when we’re dishonest, and there’s no definitive telltale sign that unmasks all liars. But the University of Michigan research can help build a picture of dishonesty.

　　事實(shí)是，撒謊時(shí)，我們表現(xiàn)的都會(huì)略有不同，并沒(méi)有絕對(duì)的跡象能夠使我們揭露騙子。但密歇根大學(xué)的這項(xiàng)研究依舊可以幫我們構(gòu)建一幅撒謊者的畫像。