In real or fictional criminal interrogation scenes, you've probably seen the approach where police barge in and confront the suspect with the evidence, trying to get them to crack and give a confession. In this talk, Maria Hartwig and Christian Cory explain why that doesn’t work well, and why a strategic use of evidence (SUE) approach, involving planning out the reveal of evidence, gets much better results. Maria is a well known researcher and trainer of criminal interviewing, and Christian is a 26 year law enforcement veteran. I talk to them about their and others' attempts to promote more science-based approaches to interviewing and interrogation. They are Co-Directors at the Aletheia Project (project-aletheia.org), which brings together researchers and law enforcement practitioners to improve interview techniques. We talk about their view that "old school" interrogations are built around a misguided "confession obsession," why bad ideas and exaggerated claims about nonverbel behavior and lie detection are so persistent and popular, and the downsides of lying to suspects about evidence. We talk about what the science really says about micro-expressions, and we explore why people seem so drawn to false, exaggerated ideas about reading behavior.

Zack Davies was a standout contestant on the popular reality TV show The Traitors (UK, season 2). The Traitors is what is called a social deduction game, similar to the games Werewolf and Mafia. In this talk we examine psychological factors and behavioral clues that can shape players' perceptions and decisions in this game. We discuss how friendships and rivalries can negatively affect people’s judgment. We talk about behavioral clues; for example, why it is that unusually expressive, exuberant behavior is a clue that someone is a Faithful (i.e., a “good guy”). We talk about social deduction game strategy, deception, group psychology, unconscious bias, and how to make tough judgments when there’s little actual information or evidence to go on. Zack shares behind-the-scenes stories from the show, including the intense stress of life in the castle, and a panic attack that never made it on TV. Whether you're a fan of The Traitors or just interested in human behavior, you’ll probably find a lot to like in this episode.

Zack Davies was a standout contestant on the popular reality TV show The Traitors (UK, season 2). The Traitors is what is called a social deduction game, similar to the games Werewolf and Mafia. In this talk we examine psychological factors and behavioral clues that can shape players' perceptions and decisions in this game. We discuss how friendships and rivalries can negatively affect people’s judgment. We talk about behavioral clues; for example, why it is that unusually expressive, exuberant behavior is a clue that someone is a Faithful (i.e., a “good guy”). We talk about social deduction game strategy, deception, group psychology, unconscious bias, and how to make tough judgments when there’s little actual information or evidence to go on. Zack shares behind-the-scenes stories from the show, including the intense stress of life in the castle, and a panic attack that never made it on TV. Whether you're a fan of The Traitors or just interested in human behavior, you’ll probably find a lot to like in this episode.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How do digital/open-source investigators uncover hidden truths and expose lies? World-renowned digital sleuth Craig Silverman shares important lessons he's learned from years spent exposing scammers, fake-news operators, fraud networks, and online deception. We discuss: the techniques investigators use to track anonymous people through seemingly insignificant clues; why stepping away from a case can be more productive than obsessively chasing leads; and how confirmation bias can derail even experienced investigators. Craig recounts the story of how he identified the anonymous creator behind the influential fake-news site True Pundit, along with other investigations that uncovered sophisticated fraud schemes that made millions of dollars. We also explore the modern explosion of misinformation, fake credibility, and AI-generated deception, and why investigative skills are becoming an increasingly valuable skill—not just for journalists, but for anyone trying to make sense of today's confusing information landscape.

How much can we really learn from people's words and behavior—and where do we risk fooling ourselves? In this talk, former Secret Service agent and polygraph examiner Brad Beeler explores the practical realities of interrogations, deception detection, statement analysis, and reading people in high-stakes situations. We discuss why confirmation bias is such a threat to good investigations, why many popular body-language claims are overstated, and how investigators might make use of subtle behavioral clues without becoming wrongly overconfident in them. Brad shares stories from criminal investigations, explains how experienced interviewers think about truth and deception, and offers a polygraph examiner’s take on the controversial subject of polygraphs. We also talk about the importance of rapport-building and listening to what people are actually trying to communicate.

What if some job applicants aren’t actually trying to get jobs — but are instead trying to infiltrate companies? Dani Tepedjiyska, who works with the recruitment firm Michael Page, describes a strange and growing world of fake resumes, organized applicant networks, AI-assisted interviews, and suspicious staffing firms that may be helping fraudulent actors gain access to banks and other financial institutions. We talk about the real-world signs she’s seen while interviewing deceptive candidates — from people secretly receiving answers during interviews to applicants who suddenly crack under simple follow-up questions. We also explore how AI tools are making this kind of fraud much easier, why remote work creates new vulnerabilities, and how some infiltrators may be playing a very long game. Along the way, Dani shares practical insights for job seekers about how recruiters analyze applicant resumes and behavior, and tips on optimal LinkedIn strategies.

Many people think police interrogations often involve reading body language and catching “tells” of deception. Interrogation trainer Mark Anderson explains how much of what’s taught about using nonverbal behavior in high-stakes interviews is based on myth, not science—and how a faulty focus on “reading people” can actually damage interviews. We dig into why stress behaviors don’t signal guilt, how confirmation bias warps investigations, and why “reading people” is far less useful than most believe. Instead, Mark lays out what actually works: deep listening, better questioning, managing conversations, and building real rapport—even with people who’ve done serious harm. Along the way, he shares stories from his career that show how empathy and curiosity can unlock information in surprising ways. If you’re interested in psychology, communication, or the reality behind interrogations, this episode might challenge some of your basic assumptions.

Visa officers make life-changing decisions in minutes—often after just a brief conversation through a glass window. I talk with former U.S. visa officer Travis Feuerbacher (ZFvisa.com) about what really goes into those rapid judgments. How much do behavior and “gut feelings” actually matter? Can anyone reliably read honesty or deception under that kind of pressure? And what happens when cultural differences, personality differences, or just plain anxiety get mistaken for something more suspicious? We explore the hidden psychology behind visa interviews, the limits of reading people in high-stakes situations, and why the system can force snap judgments—whether they’re fair or not. Travis also talks about a time he caught an applicant trying to deceive him. 

What if much of human behavior—from everyday interactions to politics and culture—is driven by hidden “status games” we’re all playing without realizing it? In this talk with Cards Against Humanity co-creator and evolutionary psychologist David Pinsof, we explore his provocative idea that status-seeking is a fundamental human motive—but one wrapped in a paradox: we all want status, yet seeking it too openly makes us lose it, forcing us to pursue it in subtle, strategic, and often unconscious ways. We also talk about another interesting idea of David’s on the nature of humor: it’s possible that David may have solved the long-standing mystery of what humor is and why we laugh. Along the way, we talk about our capacity for self-deception, how his ideas might relate to mental illness, the Cards Against Humanity origin story, and more.

Did MK Ultra actually accomplish anything impressive in brainwashing- and mind-control-related areas? Did the US government, as some people claim, create "Manchurian candidates," who would kill on command? In this episode, I talk with Stephen Kinzer, author of “Poisoner in Chief,” a book about the head of MK Ultra, Sidney Gottlieb. We discuss the strange, disturbing reality of MK Ultra—and the many exaggerations made about it over the years. While pop culture and deceptive gurus (like Chase Hughes) spread tales of the program achieving amazing and scary psychological control, Kinzer describes a disorganized and amateurish series of experiments that harmed many people but failed to demonstrate anything impressive. We explore why MK Ultra has become a perfect canvas for all sorts of paranoid ideas and wild speculations, and why the lack of evidence of anything approaching actual mind control hasn’t stopped people from confidently claiming otherwise. If you’ve ever wondered what’s real—and what’s myth—about MK Ultra, you'll probably appreciate this talk.
Topics discussed: the myths versus the realities of the MK Ultra program; what makes MK Ultra such a perfect case for people to imagine and believe all sorts of things; what Operation Mockingbird was and its relation to MK Ultra; the hypnotist George Estabrooks and his wild claims of mind control; the idea that Sirhan Sirhan was brainwashed to kill RFK; the likelihood of large plots succeeding in the modern age; the more realistic and banal ways that governments try to “control people’s minds” by persuading and shifting opinions in the modern age; and more.