Is the eye detect from Love Never Lies really foolproof?

Netflix viewers of Love Never Lies may have noticed the negative reaction of one of the participants when his answer is deemed a liar by the mysterious Eye Detect System [whatever that is…].

For those unfamiliar with this reality show, Netflix explains that “six couples undergo a lie detector test in this reality show where lies are costly, but truth and trust are worth big cash prizes.”

It is presented by Monica Naranjo, who stars in a scene of confrontation with the unsubmissive John Doe. At this point, she guarantees that the method used by the program to discover the truth/lie is INFALLIBLE, the exact word used by the presenter. Is this really a foolproof method to obtain the truth?

The first step was to look, in the episodes’ credits, to what method the program was referring to, but there is no mention of the company or researcher supporting the method.

So, let´s clarify what science, generally speaking, knows about getting the truth through some of the elements of the eyes [pupil opening and closing, eye movement, blinking, etc].

 

Is there any relation between eyes movement and lying?

What is the Eye Detect method? The thesis that eye movements could be associated with lying was popularized in the context of neuro-linguistic programming [NPL] in an association [clumsy and disjointed] of different theories whose resultant myth can be summarized in the figure below:

Details about this myth, you can find in the references.

In those articles you can find detailed explanations about how it emerged and about its spread, despite the large amount of scientific work that demonstrates the non-existence of a relationship between lying and eye movement.

 

Are other elements of the gaze indicative of lying? Is there an eye detect?

Our eyes, in addition to sensory cells, also have a series of muscles that will obviously react in the same way as other skeletal muscles.

Nervousness, the discharge of adrenaline and other substances in the bloodstream provoke reactions in our muscles, whether in the arm, neck or eyes. The big problem with uncertainty about the relationship between these movements and lying is that not only does it provoke these reactions.

So, the muscle movement that we can observe may be related to other events that activate the Autonomic Nervous System.

Claiming that ocular indicators are more accurate or even foolproof is, to say the least, an exaggeration, since we have no scientific proof of this [and we don’t even know about the method].

Furthermore, the moral and social consequences for the person who is labeled a “liar” are irreversible, so we should all be careful about that.

Obviously, whoever participates in the program must believe in this unknown method and be responsible for the consequences of submitting to it. I certainly wouldn’t.

You can see further information about the show about on Netflix: Love Never Lies

 

References on the NPL myth about the relations of lying and eyes movements

• Ertheim, E.H.W., Habbib, C. & Gumming, G. (1986) Test of the neuro-linguistic programming hypothesis the eye-movements relate to processing imagery. Perceptual and Motor Skills: Volume 62, Issue , pp. 523-529.
• Lapakko, David (1996). Three cheers for language: A closer examination of a widely cited study of nonverbal communication. Communication Education 46(1):63-67
• Test of the eye-movement hypothesis of neuro-linguistic programming
• Thomason, T.C, Arbucklet., & Cady D. (1980) Test of the eye-movement hypothesis of neuro-linguistic programming. Perceptual and Motor Skills: Volume 51, Issue , pp. 230-230.
• Wiseman R, Watt C, ten Brinke L, Porter S, Couper S-L, et al. (2012) The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming. PLoS ONE 7(7): e40259. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040259

This post is also available in pt_BR.