Editing Microexpression (section)

==Lies and leakage==
The [[sympathetic nervous system]] is one of two divisions under the [[autonomic nervous system]], it functions involuntarily and one aspect of the system deals with emotional arousal in response to situations accordingly.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/limbicsystem.html|title=The Limbic System|last=Boeree|first=George|website=webspace.ship.edu|access-date=2018-03-25}}</ref> Therefore, if an individual decides to deceive someone, they will experience a stress response within because of the possible consequences if caught. A person using deception will typically cope by using nonverbal cues which take the form of bodily movements. These bodily movements occur because of the need to release the chemical buildup of [[cortisol]], which is produced at a higher rate in a situation where there is something at stake.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.hormone.org/hormones-and-health/hormones/cortisol|title=Cortisol {{!}} Hormone Health Network|website=www.hormone.org|language=en|access-date=2018-03-25}}</ref> The purpose for these involuntary nonverbal cues are to ease oneself in a stressful situation. In the midst of deceiving an individual, leakage can occur which is when nonverbal cues are exhibited and are contradictory to what the individual is conveying.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pozzato|first= Lydia R. |journal=Forensic Examiner|volume=19|issue=3|date=Fall 2010|pages= 86-89,92-97,126 |title=Interpreting Nonverbal Communication for Use in Detecting Deception|language=en|id = {{ProQuest|859010149}}}}</ref> Despite this useful tactic of detecting deception, microexpressions do not show what intentions or thoughts the deceiver is trying to conceal. They only provide the fact that there was emotional arousal in the context of the situation. If an individual displays fear or surprise in the form of a microexpression, it does not mean that the individual is concealing information that is relevant to investigation. This is similar to how [[polygraphs]] fail to some degree: because there is a sympathetic response due to the fear of being disbelieved as innocent. The same goes for microexpressions, when there is a concealed emotion there is no information revealed on why that emotion was felt. They do not determine a lie, but are a form of detecting concealed information. [[David Matsumoto]] is a well-known American psychologist and explains that one must not conclude that someone is lying if a microexpression is detected but that there is more to the story than is being told.<ref>Matsumoto, D. (2010, March 21). Dr. David Matsumoto: How to Tell a Lie with the Naked Eye. Retrieved from Spying for Lying: {{cite web |url=http://www.spyingforlying.com/2010/03/dr-david-matsumoto-how-to-tell-lie-with.html |title=Spying for Lying: Dr. David Matsumoto: How to Tell a Lie with the Naked Eye |accessdate=2012-11-23 |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130528045728/http://www.spyingforlying.com/2010/03/dr-david-matsumoto-how-to-tell-lie-with.html |archive-date=2013-05-28 }}</ref> Matsumoto was also the first to publish scientific evidence that microexpressions may be a key to detecting deception.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Matsumoto|first1=David|last2=Hwang|first2=Hyisung C.|date=2018|title=Microexpressions Differentiate Truths From Lies About Future Malicious Intent|journal=Frontiers in Psychology|language=English|volume=9|page=2545|doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02545|pmid=30618966|pmc=6305322|issn=1664-1078|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Despite the prevailing belief among law enforcement and the public that micro-expressions are able to reveal whether a person is being deceitful,<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last1=Porter|first1=Stephen|last2=ten Brinke|first2=Leanne|date=May 2008|title=Reading Between the Lies|url=http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02116.x|journal=Psychological Science|volume=19|issue=5|pages=508–514|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02116.x|pmid=18466413|s2cid=20775868|issn=0956-7976|url-access=subscription}}</ref> there is a lack of empirical evidence to support this claim.<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last1=Porter|first1=Stephen|last2=Brinke|first2=Leanne|date=February 2010|title=The truth about lies: What works in detecting high-stakes deception?|url=http://doi.org/10.1348/135532509X433151|journal=Legal and Criminological Psychology|volume=15|issue=1|pages=57–75|doi=10.1348/135532509x433151|issn=1355-3259|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Vrij|first1=Aldert|last2=Hartwig|first2=Maria|last3=Granhag|first3=Pär Anders|date=2019-01-04|title=Reading Lies: Nonverbal Communication and Deception|journal=Annual Review of Psychology|volume=70|issue=1|pages=295–317|doi=10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103135|pmid=30609913|s2cid=58562467|issn=0066-4308|doi-access=free}}</ref> Research has shown that there is often a disconnect between displayed emotions and felt emotions; in short, deception does not necessarily produce negative emotions and negative emotions do not necessarily signal deception.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hoque|first1=Mohammed Ehsan|last2=McDuff|first2=Daniel J.|last3=Picard|first3=Rosalind W.|date=July 2012|title=Exploring Temporal Patterns in Classifying Frustrated and Delighted Smiles|url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6185530|journal=IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing|volume=3|issue=3|pages=323–334|doi=10.1109/T-AFFC.2012.11|hdl=1721.1/79899|s2cid=1966996 |issn=1949-3045|hdl-access=free}}</ref> In addition, microexpressions do not occur often enough to be useful.<ref name=":02" /> In one of the few studies of microexpressions, researchers found that only 2% of emotional expressions coded could be considered microexpressions and they appeared equally for truth-tellers and liars.<ref name=":02" /><ref name=":12" /> Other studies have found that liars and truth-tellers exhibit different responses than expected:<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Burgoon|first=Judee K.|date=2018|title=Microexpressions Are Not the Best Way to Catch a Liar|journal=Frontiers in Psychology|volume=9|page=1672|doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01672|issn=1664-1078|pmc=6158306|pmid=30294288|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":3">Pentland, S. J., Burgoon, J. K., & Twyman, N. W. (2015). Face and Head Movement Analysis Using Automated Feature Extraction Software. ''Proceedings of the 48th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2015, Koloa, Hawaii)'' Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).</ref> in a concealed information test, Pentland and colleagues found that liars showed less contempt and more intense smiles than truthful people.<ref name=":3" /> This counters the fundamental idea behind microexpressions, which suggests that it is impossible for a liar to conceal their true nature, as evidence of their guilt "leaks" out through these expressions.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Porter|first1=Stephen|last2=ten Brinke|first2=Leanne|last3=Wallace|first3=Brendan|date=March 2012|title=Secrets and Lies: Involuntary Leakage in Deceptive Facial Expressions as a Function of Emotional Intensity|url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10919-011-0120-7|journal=Journal of Nonverbal Behavior|language=en|volume=36|issue=1|pages=23–37|doi=10.1007/s10919-011-0120-7|s2cid=28783661|issn=0191-5886|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Taken together, their findings suggest that micro-expressions do not occur frequently enough to be detectable, neither are they consistent enough to distinguish liars from truth-tellers.