Deceptive Language: Part II (FightWrite™)
Last month with FightWrite, we began what will be a three-part series on deception. First, we looked at what deception is then several ways our characters may speak when attempting to deceive. In this post, we will look at a few more ways that deceiving characters, both on and off the page, use words to in attempt to conceal their deception.
(Deceptive Language: Verbal Content and Style (FightWrite™))
What is Deception?
To review, deception is not the same as lying. Lying is a falsehood. Deception is causing someone to believe something that isn’t completely true or absolutely untrue. The truth can be a part of someone’s deception.
Our Limbic System
Deception is related to our inborn survival system. When we feel threatened, be it emotionally or physically, our limbic system goes to work to keep us safe. Both deception and lies are a function of our flight response. We are attempting to put distance between ourselves and whatever is threatening us in some way.
The problem with the flight response in connection to our attempts to deceive is that our limbic system is beyond our conscious control. Once our threat response is engaged, it doesn’t do a great job of hiding itself. It is designed to make us run from the bear not hide the fact we are doing so.
More Deceptive Communication Patterns
Because our threat response isn’t meant to hide, it tends to leak out in ways that we don’t even realize and are often beyond our command. One of the ways the threat response shows itself is in the speech patterns we use when we attempt to deceive, as well as the words we use in the process.
These are certain communication patterns that, statistically, signal deception. That is not to say that someone who speaks like this is attempting to lie or deceive. They may communicate in this manner because they are nervous and that has engaged their threat response. But in our writing, these are red flags other characters might want to look for. If you ever watch interrogation shows, you will see these patterns
(Oh, and by the way, if the character in your work lies in the course of an interrogation, know that it’s not actually called an interrogation. It is called an interview. The one conducting it is an interviewer. The one being questioned is a client. Most people don’t know that, which is why shows that feature such interviews call them interrogations.)
1. Overly Specific: Sometimes those attempting to deceive will make their response very technical or overly specific to one aspect of the question. A very technical response would bring in wording that a lay person might not understand or provide facts that were never requested. “Did you go to the store on Thursday?” “Oh, I only go to the store on Wednesdays when the new sale ads come out. I want to get those sale items before anyone else. You know how fast they fly off the shelf.”
Another way an overly specific answer would be, “I didn’t drive there.” What that character is not saying is that her husband drove her. So, yes, she did go. But, just as well, she didn’t drive.
2. Distancing: When attempting to deceive, people will distance themselves from the event by avoiding reference to their own self. For example, “the gun went off,” rather than, “I shot the gun.” They may also exchange “we” for “I” or simply blame someone else and completely omit their part in the event.
3. Sometimes, the verb tense is the problem. If a missing person is presumed alive, pay attention to the one who refers to that missing person in the past tense. Why would they do that if the person is presumed alive? You see this very often in interrogations with murderers.
4. Answering a Question with a Question: Deceivers don’t necessarily want to deceive. Deception and lying can be taxing on the limbic system and our brain knows it. In an effort not to lie but still deceive, some will answer a question with a question. That volleys the attention back to the one who first asked a question.
Sometimes repeating a question verbatim back to the speaker can be indicative of deception. The idea is that in repeating what was asked, word-for-word, the one deceiving is buying themselves time to create an answer. This is especially true if the question has several specific details. Paraphrasing the question back is not seen as deceptive but rather a desire for clarification.
Bookshop | Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]
5. Answering, But Not Answering: Responding to a question is not the same as answering the question. When attempting to deceive, people will bury the answer in a mountain of words. They may do this by deflecting to another subject. Rather than saying, “I was not at the gas station that night,” they may say, “Didn’t that gas station close, or am I thinking of another?”
Sometimes the person will deny something without taking specific culpability. They will deny in a non-specific way. They might say, “I didn’t do anything,” rather than, “I didn’t do it.”
6. Attempt to Manage Perception: Although this is not related to deception in relation to an event, it is no less a tool of deception. Giving a great deal of glowing information about oneself when it isn’t requested can be an attempt to manipulate other’s impression of us. The manipulator’s hope is that their image will shine so brightly that anything negative associated with them will be lost in the glow. If your interviewing character asks someone what they do for a living and they say they are an Ob/Gyn, that is answering the question. If they say they have been an Ob/Gyn for 15 years and have delivered over 300 babies and there is nothing more precious than ushering a new life into the world and being the first to touch such an innocent soul … that is not answering the question. It is more likely an attempt to manipulate the perception of the one asking the question.
7. Overboard Niceness: Niceness and politeness is not an indicator of deception. In some cultures and communities, it is the standard. However, when the niceness/politeness meter rises suddenly in the midst of a conversation, pay attention. When compliments abruptly appear in the conversation, that too can be a red flag.
8. Making Simple Questions Difficult: When a person tries to make something simple difficult, they may be trying to minimize the scope of the accusation, deflect it, or distract the person asking the question. For example, “Did you do it?” “Well, that all depends on your definition of the word do.” Don’t laugh at that example, by the way. It is based on an actual criminal deposition from a public figure.
Tips to Trip a Deceiver
If your interviewer suspects deception, there are a few strategies they can employ to get to the truth. First, the interviewer can interrupt the client’s alibi and ask a question not related to it. For example, the client says they were having lunch in a restaurant during the time of the crime. If the interviewer asks anything about the lunch, the client will likely have an answer because they have rehearsed everything surrounding the event. If, however, the interviewer asks what other items they considered ordering, that will likely not be something the character rehearsed.
The interviewer can also ask the client to recount their story backwards. When you invent an account, telling it in reverse is very difficult because they are actually doing two things. Not only are they having to rearrange what they said, they have to remember what they said. A person telling the truth only needs to focus on what happened. They don’t have to use the same words they used in the first telling. They just need to describe the event in a similar fashion.
In our next post we will look at body language more closely. We will look at what it shows, what it doesn’t, and many misconceptions associated with it. So, come on back next month. Same bat time, same bat channel. (Wow, I just dated myself there big-time.)
Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD blog, get blood on your pages.
Struggling to choose a fighting style for your character? The struggle is over. The way your character does battle isn’t up to you. It’s up to the story. The time and place of the work, the society in which your character lives, their inherent and fostered traits and the needs of the story will determine how your character responds to aggression.