When Nasty Breeds Nice: Threats of Violence Amplify Agreeableness at National, Individual, and Situational Levels.
White, Andrew Edward; Kenrick, Douglas T.; Li, Yexin Jessica; Mortensen, Chad R.; Neuberg, Steven L.; Cohen, Adam B.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Jul 2 , 2012, No Pagination Specified. doi: 10.1037/a0029140
Abstract
Humans have perennially faced threats of violence from other humans and have developed functional strategies for surviving those threats. Five studies examined the relation between threats of violence and agreeableness at the level of nations, individuals, and situations. People living in countries with higher military spending (Study 1) and those who chronically perceive threats from others (Study 2) were more agreeable. However, this threat-linked agreeableness was selective (Studies 3–5). Participants primed with threat were more agreeable and willing to help familiar others but were less agreeable and willing to help unfamiliar others. Additionally, people from large families, for whom affiliation may be a salient response to threat, were more likely than people from small families to shift in agreeableness. Returning to the national level, military spending was associated with increased trust in ingroup members but decreased trust in outgroups. Together, these findings demonstrate that agreeableness is selectively modulated by threats of violence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This is the last public appearance of the couple who have recently stated through their PR people that they are getting a divorce.
Some things to notice is the way they are very careful about hold they hold themselves, if you could see the video you would see two people very careful about their hands, this tells me they are mindful of the other presence which doesn't occur with people that are always with each other. There is a certain tenseness about how they deal with each other. Another thing: look at the way they are holding hands in the second picture, this is a more proper way to hold hands. When I see this I think of royalties. Looking at the video, they also are not as close to each other as much as they usually are.
Take a look at the following pictures when they were happier with each other.
The way a couple interacts with each other is very telling. In the past I have mentioned about couples and how their interaction on the red carpet has shown stress in their relationship (Brad and Angelina) but a month later they were back to their old affectionate ways. We shall see...
Okay, I'm going to do this quickly and from memory.
All body language and analysis are based on a couple of principals:
Body language has always been a part of being human, and humans have always displayed body language. It is only the last 3-4 decades that the study of body language developed.
Primordially we do things to protect ourselves.
Body language can be analyzed on the basis of dominance and submissiveness.
Body language can be analyzed on the basis of confidence and insecurity.
A little overview of the facts: What we know from the two witness is at one point Martin had the upper hand in the struggle and had Zimmerman pinned to the ground. At that point Martin was dominant. We know from the other witness that this changed after Martin was shot and the positions were reversed.
A couple of things stand out almost immediately. When and where Zimmerman first saw Martin he states that there were break-ins in certain houses. Police should investigate if this was indeed correct. If it is correct then it is easy for Zimmerman to make a connection between the break-ins and Martin (bad timing of being at the wrong place at the wrong time) on a subconscious level. IF however this was not the case then Zimmerman is making a statement that shows he is attempting to influence the detectives and he is not being truthful or confident in his position.
Following a person who is on foot in a car is a dominant and aggressive behavior.
When he states he lost him, and couldn't give the police an address, he could have given him the address of the house immediately behind him and told him he was heading up towards the other street. He states his goal was to get a street number on the street up the hill, but I do not remember if he reached his stated goal. if he did not reach his stated goal then he was searching for Martin.
Now the important part of the incident: Where did 2-5 seconds and 15 feet go?
Watch the two below videos describing the incident from the point when both individuals start verbally communicating and becoming physical.
Interview at the police station...
Now Let's take a closer look at the most interesting part of the reenacting video...
Okay did you notice some things?
1) It is not reasonable or believable that he would look down for his phone. From a body language prospective we do not place ourselves in a more dangerous position by taking our eyes off the potentially dangerous person, even for a split second.
2) At some point he states, "...to be honest," which we all know is a clear indication of deception and he not confident in what he is saying.
3) He also go on to say something like, "...I don't remember exactly."
From a statement analysis perspective we have gone from them being separated to being within each others personal space. Zimmerman does not fully explain how this has occurred. Furthermore there is another lapse in time lapse, when he states, "...somehow I end up on my back." This was some 15 feet from where is was standing in the video. This is a VERY STRONG area where he needs to be confronted about with a micro time interview.
It would have been better for the detectives to ask him to lay down when describing what happened. I find it odd that he reverses roles so easily. He is playing the part of Martin when Martin was being aggressive and hurting him. Often times the police will actually ask the victim to take on the role of their attacker, by saying things like: show me how he held the knife, how he swung his fist. Most always the victim does not want to do this, and feels very uncomfortable, and does so with little or no confidence- after all you are asking the victim to "relive" the horrible experience and this often is unsettling. In another post I'll explain this tactic.
He is very clear about the words that both Martin and himself used throughout the incident, until this one time where he states what Martin said immediately after Zimmerman shot him. When describing that part of the incident he uses two sentences. He also states that he didn't think he hit him with the bullet. He is distancing himself from the actual act.
When their positions changed, Zimmerman was holding Martin's arms out to the side, and for the first time states he thought he might have been holding something. He should have mentioned that earlier if in fact he really thought Martin was holding something. Zimmerman is very clear about Martin hands being on him at all times. He is explaining his actions, of why he was continuing to be more dominant, when he didn't need to be dominant.
Now what is funny, at the end he states"...shot one time." and holds his palms up in a clear sign of honestly. As we know he never disputed shooting him. What is most interesting about this statement is notice how confident and comfortable he is with this one statement. More than any other thing that was said in the whole video.
Zimmerman is not confident in many parts of his statement, and you can see he uses nearly identical words and sentences to describe the event. This is usually a sign of at least some prior preparation.
On at least three plus occasions, he feels the need to explain why he did what he did, attempting to convince someone is not confident and are hot spots, especially if it turns out any of them are untrue.
Now I'm going to speculate as to what occurred based on logical guesses based on the above analysis:
Zimmerman was dominant and aggressive when following Martin in his car. This would not be appreciated by Martin. Whomever spoke first when they were approximately 15 feet from each other would be dominant. They both were dominant and confrontational. Zimmerman did not take his eyes off of Martin and likely they both approached each other, each in their own way feeling threatened. Quickly the confrontational became physical. Martin gained the upper hand physically and Zimmerman shot him. Zimmerman knew he shot him immediately (and it is likely Martian said so), Zimmerman used this as an opportunity to gain the upper hand. I do not know if he felt like he had to continue to be physical, but it is unlikely because Zimmerman even said that Martin said something and showed that he was giving up by raising his hands. If this is the case it is up to a MD to determine if Zimmerman continuing to hold Martin down contributed to his death. Likely it did not because close range gunshot wounds to the stomach are the worst and almost always lead to death.
Had this been a real analysis of the above videos, it would have taken hours and the tapes would have been reviewed countless times. First for initial impressions, another time transcribing the actually words, then based solely on body language (sound off), write up notes and think through it all, collecting my thoughts, taking a break, and watching it several more times. The next day watch it again, maybe another time if there is anything I am still interested in at this point. With this one I simply watch each of the videos once, so I was able to hear about the actual incident that likely lasted a minute or so 4 times in all.
◦
George Zimmerman Video: Where did 2-5 seconds and fifteen feet go?
I'm announcing that within a week I will be posting analysis of the two videos released earlier. One is a video of a reenactment on the scene of what happen the night of the incident, made by the police. Another is a video of his interview with the police the night the incident occurred.
My associate and I just watched both videos and came to some conclusions about what really occurred that night. Using statement analysis we were able to provide more clarity to the events of the evening.
I do not think what we found will drastically change the people's existing opinion about the people involved in the incident.
Lastly, because of the polarizing and political aspects of this case we will not respond to any media or any inquires from those associated with this case. All inquiries will be ignored.
◦
Notice Of An Upcoming Post: George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin What Happenned
First off there is odd moment in the interview but I will save that one until the end of this post.
Somethings to notice:
Eye Directional Clues: As I've said in the past not everyone gives off eye directional clues, but when they do it becomes obvious and is fairly consistent. Notice when he looks down and to the left, this is a sign of emotion. Notice when he looks to the right, this is a sign of remembering something auditory.
His eyes are expressive. Notice the intensity even when they are walking in the park. He doesn't blink all that often, so try to notice if his blink rate changes, this would be a sign of nervousness or stress.
When asked about Dottie Sandusky he paints a picture I see all to frequently from people that are abused. The victim always says something like he does here- how could she not know- then falls just short of assigning blame or responsibility. As he speaks, I am reminded of Nancy Garrido the wife of Phillip Garrido, the kidnappers who held Jaycee Dugard captive for 18 years. Nancy Garrido also was cold and detached from the victim, and distanced themselves from from both the victim and the situation.
When asked directly about his law suit, notice the unconscious head shake no, he shows us the most emotion of the interview. His pace of speech increases, he speaks freely, the eye directions... See the subtle sadness in his eye brows. You can tell he is thinking, but he is truly thinking and speaking freely.
Notice the interviewer when she says, "This stuff is really uncomfortable to talk about." She has either been taught by the best, or is a natural. She displays a subtle smallish wink which lets the interviewee know she is with him emotionally, and then subtle squint which is eye blocking because of the nature of content of this interview.
Now the part that will throw some people off- right away- that is odd- but then again not so odd when examined closely. It is when he is asked what he would do if Jerry Sandusky was here and he responds with, "I would punch him in the mouth," then smiles. Some people will believe that it doesn't fit the emotional context of the content. But if it was edited as it happened, and you see in the cutaway to the reporter, you can see she is subtly smiling with the corners of her mouth. He could be mimicking her. But I watched this part of the interview several times and I believe this was a LIE. Let me now say, I think I see raw intensity throughout the interview, and an honest person. I think we are seeing dupers delight here, because he wouldn't be able to punch him in the mouth because deep down inside, a part of him is still that 10 year old who was controlled, manipulated, and scared of Sandusky.
He was there and it happened to him. He is being truthful about everything that matters.
Tampa Bay manager Joe Maddon was clearly upset with the umpires on the field, and afterward he called Johnson ''cowardly'' for requesting the check of the reliever who pitched for the Nationals in 2010.
''Insider trading, man. It's bush,'' Maddon said. ''It's bogus. That's way too easy, right there.''
Peralta did not directly answer when asked if he intentionally added pine tar to the glove.
''That's a glove that I use for batting practice every day,'' he said. ''I'm every day playing catch with it, it's hot here - that's all I'm going to say about it.''
Where to start?
Let's start with the manager's statement, "insider trading"
What?!?! When someone starts talking like Gary Busey, watch out- They are either crazy or dealing with a very sensitive topic and avoiding the question.
"That's way too easy, right there," is a quasi admission of guilt.
Now onto Mr. Peralta. Answer the question, would you?!?!? if you didn't do it you'd simply say NO. Not some song and dance about batting practice, with it EVERY DAY thrown in?!?! That makes me want to believe you, EVERY DAY, but of course.
Lastly Peralta, "...that's all I'm going to say about it."
Like most liars, all you want to do is move one and not talk about it anymore.
A toddler can pull off a more convincing lie.
I never knew you existed until I read about this incident online, but trying to get an unfair advantage in the game of baseball in my book is as bad as players using steroids- at least with steroids the athlete is also punishing themselves, all but guaranteeing future health issues.
Karma is a kicker. Every batter you face in your future will be thinking about this incident, and that will throw off your game- unless you're are a sociopath...
◦
Tampa Bay's Relief Pitcher, Joel Peralta Ejected from Game: Possible Worst Statement Ever
"The fact is, we all almost certainly know at least one or more sociopaths already. Part of the urgency in reading The Sociopath Next Door is the moment when we suddenly recognize that someone we know—someone we worked for, or were involved with, or voted for—is a sociopath."
Several years ago I listen to this book and found interesting. The book will show you how to recognize and defeat the devil you may know.
I was reading an article about the newest serial killer William Clyde Gibson III who happens to be from my current home state of Indiana and it made me think about the above book, and take it one step further and teach you how to identify a sociopath with the things I talk about on this website.
First about the article, it lists the typical stereotypical behaviors of being nasty, loner, attempting to lure women into dangerous situations. He was unique because he did have criminal record and had spent time in both prison and in mental hospitals, which most serial killers have very little or no record because they want to fly "under the radar." He had said things that were big time clues to his violent ways, that anyone who is reading this blog would have known he was a sociopath. But what about seemingly normal people who live, work and interact with us- sometimes daily- that are sociopaths?!?!? Could your boss who likes to bully employees around be a sociopath? What about the controlling and manipulative spouse or friend. What about the relative or friend you always seem to have to prove yourself to?
At one point in the article a psychologist said, "At times Gibson seemed rather incongruent, smiling for example while talking about distressing or sad events.” Here lies the key.
Paying special attention to those around you, look for the subtle expression of joy or happiness at the wrong time(s). Like the example of the yelling boss, he/she is "yelling" because he is truly angry? Do you see some joy in the eyes and mouth? Also think of the drill sergeant or football coach motivating players with negative loud words being screamed at someone else, are they secretly enjoying they are providing emotional pain to another human being?
Is there more activity in the eyes? The eyes convey emotion. They convey interest. Is the interest misplaced? Let's take a look at two sociopaths like Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. Charles Mason had the deep penetrating eyes that screamed with overt intensity that we'd easily identify with danger. While Ted Bundy was different, and he operated like a confidence flim-flam man. But look at his eyes and demeanor of almost any archive video footage, his eyes and expressions leak joy and pride at times where he was attempting to show other emotions.
Without going into the psychological definition of sociopaths let's examine some of the common traits that are directly related to things I talk about on this site:
Pathological Lying
Love of Themself- Narcissm
Shallow Emotions
Lack of Empathy
Incapable of Real Human Attachment to Another
Lack Remorse, Shame or Guilt
Something to thing about, but even more to notice in those around you...
◦
Are You Living or Working For a Sociopath? How to Tell.
"...passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one."
What he is being accused of is the manipulation of his blood, which in layman's terms is withdrawing blood and then reinserting it in the body so there is more oxygen flowing white blood cells which helps endurance. This is not an activity that can be "drug tested."
I had previously commented on a teammate who appeared on the television show Sixty Minutes as not showing signs of deception.
Here is the sad thing- he was the best athlete and proved it over and over again, and he was doing something that a majority of the competitors were doing. His legacy will be forever tarnished. There is work being done to test for the smallest amount of plastic in the blood, because the blood is stored in plastic bags, until this is perfected no test can be done to show that blood manipulation has occurred.
If you look at all his statements on the subject it is clear his definitions of the key words are skewed. He has justified certain actions as okay, because they involved not introducing "things" that were not a part of his body, or could be produced by his body at one time.◦
A great man who knows everything about this topic warns everybody to be sure you really want to learn this, because once you learn it you cannot unlearn it, says Dr. Paul Ekman.
I also have a couple of warnings: (1) Don't read people and tell people what you're seeing in them. People hate it- and you become instantly creepy; (2) Be careful, if all of a sudden you are looking at everything more clearly you can become super sensitive. This can be very dangerous to yourself and all of your relationships. Recognize if at least 70% of our communication is not the words that are used- all of a sudden you could be seeing 3 times more information it can be scary- so chill out a little.
Starting to Learn: With a little investment of money and many hours of study you to will see the world differently.
Step 1:
Get a good body language book. I can recommend this book because it covers all the bases.
Step 2:
Practice, Practice, Practice. I find airports and sandwich shops (on weekday lunches) are the best places to read people. There always a electic mix of people- sometimes they are there for business, other times it is catching up with friends. Do it at least once a week, if not more. Go to parties and different events to expose yourself to different reads, notice the differences. Learn.
Step 3:
Get advanced micro expression training at Humintell.
Get certified in microexpressions, then do it until you get a perfect score. There is no sense learning to recognize what is going on but getting it wrong. Once your perfect, keep up your skills to maintain your score by going back every so often.
Step 4:
Get yourself a good pair of dark or mirrored sunglasses because when you are outside you do not want to be caught starring at someone, and then stare at everyone. Think Secret Service.
Step 5:
The best book on lying I have come across for the non professional is this one. Memorize it. Read and skim it every so often. If you know and understand the concepts presented in this book, it is like you’ve been working as a police detective for 20+ years.
Step 6:
Get Subtle Expression Recognition Training at Humintell. This training examines how the core emotions can be shown on only part of the face. They occur when an emotion is first beginning. They also occur when someone is trying to suppress any sign of how they are feeling. Recognizing true feelings is important to the craft.
Step 7:
Detecting Deception Through Statement Analysis
People's words betray their true thoughts, and they will provide you with more information than they realize. This book will show you what to look for in verbal and written statements to determine if they are telling the truth. If you are a fan of "Lie to Me" the stuff in this book is their secret weapon that they never explain the science of, but use in every episode.
Step 8:
More books. These I can recommend because they are really interesting. Sure they will cover some of the concepts you already learned from the first body language book, but they have something to add, and it becomes a refresher now that you have some experience under your belt.
Step 9 (Become Advanced):
Branch out. Get more technical books. Read FBI profiler books. Check out some NLP stuff. Watch the news show that feature interrogations like 48 hours and Dateline. Watch some reality shows like the Bachelor. Read scientific articles on the latest research in the area. Play poker. Offer to interview candidates for job openings at work. Watch the news. Pay attention in meetings. Sell something to someone. Watch Lie to Me and some of the non technical crime shows are pretty good. Meet someone at a meeting or social setting. Make sure your family and friends know you care about them by using what you learned here to show them.
Some of the other items in my tool kit are:
I buy my books in pdf format, that way I can search across all the pdfs with Adobe Reader. I also have a pdf print driver so if I see something on the web I print it to a pdf file and it is part of my library. I probably have twenty books and hundreds of articles that I have collected over the years.
I have a Namesysco voice stress analyzer. It is a powerful tool but it is only one tool in the whole toolbox.
I also have several programs that help me analyze written copy.
Then for fun I have this...
and now for MORE FUN, season 2 is now available for ordering...
Deception "is a huge, multidimensional space," he said, "in which every combination of things matters."
Robin Marantz Henig's article in NYT magazine, where Henig quotes Steve Kosslyn.
Fact
The English language has 112 words for deception, according to one count, each with a different shade of meaning: collusion, fakery, malingering, self-deception, confabulation, prevarication, exaggeration, denial.
Lies can be verbal or nonverbal, kindhearted or self-serving, devious or baldfaced; they can be lies of omission or lies of commission; they can be lies that undermine national security or lies that make a child feel better. And each type might involve a unique neural pathway.
Posts
