What do you think?
Rate this book
Duped: Truth-Default Theory and the Social Science of Lying and Deception
A scrupulous account that overturns many commonplace notions about how we can best detect lies and falsehoods
From the advent of fake news to climate-science denial and Bernie Madoff’s appeal to investors, people can be astonishingly gullible. Some people appear authentic and sincere even when the facts discredit them, and many people fall victim to conspiracy theories and economic scams that should be dismissed as obviously ludicrous. This happens because of a near-universal human tendency to operate within a mindset that can be characterized as a “truth-default.” We uncritically accept most of the messages we receive as “honest.” We all are perceptually blind to deception. We are hardwired to be duped. The question is, can anything be done to militate against our vulnerability to deception without further eroding the trust in people and social institutions that we so desperately need in civil society?
Timothy R. Levine’s Truth-Default Theory and the Social Science of Lying and Deception recounts a decades-long program of empirical research that culminates in a new theory of deception—truth-default theory. This theory holds that the content of incoming communication is typically and uncritically accepted as true, and most of the time, this is good. Truth-default allows humans to function socially. Further, because most deception is enacted by a few prolific liars, the so called “truth-bias” is not really a bias after all. Passive belief makes us right most of the time, but the catch is that it also makes us vulnerable to occasional deceit.
Levine’s research on lie detection and truth-bias has produced many provocative new findings over the years. He has uncovered what makes some people more believable than others and has discovered several ways to improve lie-detection accuracy. In Duped , Levine details where these ideas came from, how they were tested, and how the findings combine to produce a coherent new understanding of human deception and deception detection.
From the advent of fake news to climate-science denial and Bernie Madoff’s appeal to investors, people can be astonishingly gullible. Some people appear authentic and sincere even when the facts discredit them, and many people fall victim to conspiracy theories and economic scams that should be dismissed as obviously ludicrous. This happens because of a near-universal human tendency to operate within a mindset that can be characterized as a “truth-default.” We uncritically accept most of the messages we receive as “honest.” We all are perceptually blind to deception. We are hardwired to be duped. The question is, can anything be done to militate against our vulnerability to deception without further eroding the trust in people and social institutions that we so desperately need in civil society?
Timothy R. Levine’s Truth-Default Theory and the Social Science of Lying and Deception recounts a decades-long program of empirical research that culminates in a new theory of deception—truth-default theory. This theory holds that the content of incoming communication is typically and uncritically accepted as true, and most of the time, this is good. Truth-default allows humans to function socially. Further, because most deception is enacted by a few prolific liars, the so called “truth-bias” is not really a bias after all. Passive belief makes us right most of the time, but the catch is that it also makes us vulnerable to occasional deceit.
Levine’s research on lie detection and truth-bias has produced many provocative new findings over the years. He has uncovered what makes some people more believable than others and has discovered several ways to improve lie-detection accuracy. In Duped , Levine details where these ideas came from, how they were tested, and how the findings combine to produce a coherent new understanding of human deception and deception detection.
384 pages, Hardcover
Published November 5, 2019
99 people are currently reading
3986 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
February 15, 2020
I enjoyed this book, but it went into too much academic detail, as Levine warned in his introduction. Still, scanning through the chapters, I found more than I got from Malcolm Gladwell's "Talking To Strangers", which was based mainly on this book.
For an overview of Truth-Default with more examples, read or listen to Gladwell, the story teller's take, but this one will take you as deep as you want to go.
For an overview of Truth-Default with more examples, read or listen to Gladwell, the story teller's take, but this one will take you as deep as you want to go.
December 24, 2019
Learn how deception detection happens (or doesn’t). Spoiler: it’s not because liars look like they’re lying.
Apart from a deep dive into 25+ years of research into deception detection, this book is also humble and candid in sharing the trials and travails of experimental design, the actual work of science, and the road to constructing a testable and replicable theory.
This is what great science writing looks like.
Apart from a deep dive into 25+ years of research into deception detection, this book is also humble and candid in sharing the trials and travails of experimental design, the actual work of science, and the road to constructing a testable and replicable theory.
This is what great science writing looks like.
January 1, 2021
Communicating is hard. Even when all parties are well-intentioned, even one-on-one and face-to-face within one's tribe, conveying and receiving our thoughts can be unreliable. The older I get the more I consider communicating the single biggest challenge we face as humans. Adding lies to the problem does not help—except in making the problem more interesting.
I'm really conflicted about this book. I picked it up as a followup to Malcolm Gladwell's Talking to Strangers, in large part because lying has been such a clusterfucking part of our 2016-2020 lives; one that will not magically cease in 2021 but we're all hoping for a big damper. I got a lot more than I bargained for and really feel like talking this whole book through with someone. Unfortunately for you, dear reader who can't converse with me in real time, what you're going to get is a monologue.
Levine gets a lot of it right; at least "right" by my standards as someone who is old and has lived among humans. Deception research to date has been asking the wrong questions: lies told by/to college students in a lab setting are not representative nor even interesting. Lies are only useful in the context of patterns, of relationships (of all types). He gets this; also gets that lying is rare, that there are no universal tells, no magic signal like "wiggling the nose three times means subject is lying". He gets (and proves) that there are good liars, slick con artists and the like, and there are awful flustery ones, and the huge majority of us somewhere in between. More interestingly, he makes a strong case that individual affect/demeanor skew an observer's interpretation of the person's honesty: this is what Gladwell focuses on in his book. Levine shows that—as the majority of us already know—lies are seldom caught in the act: that we need fact checkers.
Unfortunately, there's much that Levine doesn't address: the fact that, for a significant portion of the U.S. population, lies simply don't matter. That tens of millions of shitty citizens simply don't care about truth or facts. He doesn't address religion, nor how one can expect people to understand facts when they're told from childhood that an invisible sky-god is obsessively and unhealthily watching them and particularly what they do with their genitalia. (Then again, he teaches at U. Alabama. He probably can't even come close to that topic). He never once cites Fukuyama nor Harari, nor does he even mention game theory or Bayesian probability except indirectly and briefly. In fact his whole treatment of probability made me uncomfortable: he uses the word "average" often, and IMHO that word should never appear in a scientific publication. (Near the end of the book he admits that his statistics background is limited).
More unfortunately, he comes off as a dick. The first third of the book is devoted to addressing the state of deception research, which would be fine if he didn't get snarky and defensive. Not always, not even often, but enough for me to find unpleasant. He also lauds his own research as "groundbreaking", "transformative", with "huge implications". Let someone else say that, dude. He misspells Danny Kahneman's name (only once, but still). Absolutely worst of all, completely unforgivable in my book: he introduces a "Believability Quotient", relating to a subject's demeanor, then (in a footnote) asserts it as "proprietary", "copyrighted", and usable by others "only with prior written permission". That's not how science works: that's a greedy scam artist move. I have to admit that after that, I read the rest of the book with some scorn and much less interest, which is a shame because there were still good aspects to it.
I think Truth Default Theory has much going for it. I think Levine has valuable insights and research. I even liked many aspects of this book: I just can't recommend it to anyone. We'll need to be patient. If the science pans out, others will write (presumably less obnoxious) books about it. Or, even better, it will become a taken-for-granted part of our lives. And if the science doesn't pan out, we'll hear no more. That's how science works.
I'm really conflicted about this book. I picked it up as a followup to Malcolm Gladwell's Talking to Strangers, in large part because lying has been such a clusterfucking part of our 2016-2020 lives; one that will not magically cease in 2021 but we're all hoping for a big damper. I got a lot more than I bargained for and really feel like talking this whole book through with someone. Unfortunately for you, dear reader who can't converse with me in real time, what you're going to get is a monologue.
Levine gets a lot of it right; at least "right" by my standards as someone who is old and has lived among humans. Deception research to date has been asking the wrong questions: lies told by/to college students in a lab setting are not representative nor even interesting. Lies are only useful in the context of patterns, of relationships (of all types). He gets this; also gets that lying is rare, that there are no universal tells, no magic signal like "wiggling the nose three times means subject is lying". He gets (and proves) that there are good liars, slick con artists and the like, and there are awful flustery ones, and the huge majority of us somewhere in between. More interestingly, he makes a strong case that individual affect/demeanor skew an observer's interpretation of the person's honesty: this is what Gladwell focuses on in his book. Levine shows that—as the majority of us already know—lies are seldom caught in the act: that we need fact checkers.
Unfortunately, there's much that Levine doesn't address: the fact that, for a significant portion of the U.S. population, lies simply don't matter. That tens of millions of shitty citizens simply don't care about truth or facts. He doesn't address religion, nor how one can expect people to understand facts when they're told from childhood that an invisible sky-god is obsessively and unhealthily watching them and particularly what they do with their genitalia. (Then again, he teaches at U. Alabama. He probably can't even come close to that topic). He never once cites Fukuyama nor Harari, nor does he even mention game theory or Bayesian probability except indirectly and briefly. In fact his whole treatment of probability made me uncomfortable: he uses the word "average" often, and IMHO that word should never appear in a scientific publication. (Near the end of the book he admits that his statistics background is limited).
More unfortunately, he comes off as a dick. The first third of the book is devoted to addressing the state of deception research, which would be fine if he didn't get snarky and defensive. Not always, not even often, but enough for me to find unpleasant. He also lauds his own research as "groundbreaking", "transformative", with "huge implications". Let someone else say that, dude. He misspells Danny Kahneman's name (only once, but still). Absolutely worst of all, completely unforgivable in my book: he introduces a "Believability Quotient", relating to a subject's demeanor, then (in a footnote) asserts it as "proprietary", "copyrighted", and usable by others "only with prior written permission". That's not how science works: that's a greedy scam artist move. I have to admit that after that, I read the rest of the book with some scorn and much less interest, which is a shame because there were still good aspects to it.
I think Truth Default Theory has much going for it. I think Levine has valuable insights and research. I even liked many aspects of this book: I just can't recommend it to anyone. We'll need to be patient. If the science pans out, others will write (presumably less obnoxious) books about it. Or, even better, it will become a taken-for-granted part of our lives. And if the science doesn't pan out, we'll hear no more. That's how science works.
February 23, 2020
It was good. Learned some key knowledge on lying.
All together, though, it was pretty underwhelming
2/5
All together, though, it was pretty underwhelming
2/5
December 28, 2020
Did not enjoy. The first three chapters were like death getting through. The pre-qualification was enduring. The book should have been written about how to conduct an experiment. Had to stop
March 29, 2024
Insightful and invaluable rigorous research from the world’s leading expert in deception in an accessible book.
April 2, 2021
An interesting concept (and seems both logical and well backed by research) but I would have enjoyed more about the human psychology of why people lie and less detail about the tremendous multitude of research projects that have been done over the years. This one definitely falls more in the category of scientific reading.
August 2, 2020
Five stars for clarity, quality of information, and for Levine's methodical march through the social science. That methodical march will turn readers off if they were expecting pop psychology.
February 17, 2022
Incredibly insightful and useful book on deception - marked as a 3 because it was often extremely repetitive and could’ve been shrunk down by several chapters
November 29, 2020
Much too scientific and scholarly than what I was expecting (or wanted to be reading). For so many words that one has to endure through, I'm disappointed I didn't learn much more other than humans' predisposition is that we tend to believe what we hear and see as the truth, i.e. "truth-default", and that this is typically a subconscious act. Some of the other theories (sub or related) seem rather common sense... like we are much better at detecting truth than detecting lies, and that transparency and other demeanour of the message sender can have an impact on how accurate one judges something as being true or not (or maybe they just seem to go hand-in-hand with TDT that it almost didn't seem like a finding when presented). One thing that the book highlights is when people are asked about how they detect if someone is lying, the typical answers surround cue/behavioural indications such as avoidance of gaze, uncertainty of voice etc., which in fact does not line up with how people actually detect lies in real life, as most of the lies are detected after the fact, and situational familiarity and contextualized communication play a much larger part. I appreciate the author pointing that out as I think that's a much overlooked empirical fact that only becomes obvious once laid out.
I'm definitely not used to reading academic research papers, hence the first 5 chapters were brutal to make sense of. I'm interested in the in-person experiments and findings but unfortunately the book doesn't go in depth with examples of how conversations in the experiments were actually carried out. Yes there were ten questions and subjects were instructed randomly to be honest and to lie on 5 of them, respectively. What are those questions? Just curious, as I'm interested to understand what the authors believe are questions that would be most suitable to the experiment. (Not that it'd matter to the conclusions but still, that'd be a little something that readers can use to get more involved in the research.)
I'm definitely not used to reading academic research papers, hence the first 5 chapters were brutal to make sense of. I'm interested in the in-person experiments and findings but unfortunately the book doesn't go in depth with examples of how conversations in the experiments were actually carried out. Yes there were ten questions and subjects were instructed randomly to be honest and to lie on 5 of them, respectively. What are those questions? Just curious, as I'm interested to understand what the authors believe are questions that would be most suitable to the experiment. (Not that it'd matter to the conclusions but still, that'd be a little something that readers can use to get more involved in the research.)
November 13, 2022
DNF i quickly realized that as a person raised in a family/culture of prolific liars i was really not the target audience for this book. first, way way way too bogged down in detailing statistics. the reason i’m reading this book is to hear what you thought, man, not exhaustive detail in HOW you thought it. second, i quickly became bored by how basic the 4 questions were. for me, the first three felt not worth my time “investigating” and the 4th (easily the most interesting and the reason i picked up the book) either was not covered in much detail or was covered after i gave up in chapter 5.
i also didn’t love the idea of lab-lies being reliable enough to use to examine real life lies, as most liars are lying about personal things on the fly, not just telling random lies for fun. i should have read some reviews about how hard-science this book purported to be and known i would not consider it a reliable source of info.
i’ve met a couple pathological liars you could maybe use in a lab, and while they varied in skill the longer you talk to them the more obvious it is that they’re not being honest with you. i’m a pretty good liar in person but i’m not sure i could perform well as a liar in the lab. all the best liars have a personal investment in you believing them.
so this book kind of was useless to me, as i was seeking to understand why people choose to lie to me so much as well as why i have such difficulty believing anything anyone tells me is true, and…this is not a book that will answer that. i skipped ahead to chapter 15 when i was giving up and i just…the conclusions he reached in all his research are so far from my own lived experience that i have to question whether the research was done on this planet. i think this book exists to try to justify why he got so much grant money to pretend something useful came of it. but to conclude that people just don’t lie very much, LOL! no!
i also didn’t love the idea of lab-lies being reliable enough to use to examine real life lies, as most liars are lying about personal things on the fly, not just telling random lies for fun. i should have read some reviews about how hard-science this book purported to be and known i would not consider it a reliable source of info.
i’ve met a couple pathological liars you could maybe use in a lab, and while they varied in skill the longer you talk to them the more obvious it is that they’re not being honest with you. i’m a pretty good liar in person but i’m not sure i could perform well as a liar in the lab. all the best liars have a personal investment in you believing them.
so this book kind of was useless to me, as i was seeking to understand why people choose to lie to me so much as well as why i have such difficulty believing anything anyone tells me is true, and…this is not a book that will answer that. i skipped ahead to chapter 15 when i was giving up and i just…the conclusions he reached in all his research are so far from my own lived experience that i have to question whether the research was done on this planet. i think this book exists to try to justify why he got so much grant money to pretend something useful came of it. but to conclude that people just don’t lie very much, LOL! no!
June 12, 2021
Unless you’re someone where deception detection is a major part of your career or life (such as a detective, HR manager, school faculty etc), this book may not be for everyone. Personally, deception detection has absolutely nothing to do with my career or life, and this is one of the best books I’ve read about the subject. Part of my interest in this subject is because I’m baffled at how many people believe so-called body language experts, but there’s also a major issue with our criminal justice system when it comes to lie detecting. Timothy R. Levine managed to sell me on the fact that he��s one of the top deception researchers, and it’s crazy because I’ve never heard of him. But what makes this book so good?
Levine starts the book by explaining how this research topic piqued his interest, which was some CIA agents wrote a book about lie detection, but they weren’t even good at it. The author then goes through some of the most cited deception research from notable psychologists like Paul Eckman, and Levine explains the flaws in these studies and methods thoroughly. What I love about Levine is that he’s a huge advocate for proper scientific research and falsifiability. In this book, you’ll learn about the countless study Levine and his partners have conducted on deception detection, and you’ll also learn about some of the nuances we never think about when it comes to assessing whether or not someone is lying. Again, this book is really research heavy, but if this is a subject relevant to your life or you’re interested in it, it’s probably one of the best books out there on the topic.
Levine starts the book by explaining how this research topic piqued his interest, which was some CIA agents wrote a book about lie detection, but they weren’t even good at it. The author then goes through some of the most cited deception research from notable psychologists like Paul Eckman, and Levine explains the flaws in these studies and methods thoroughly. What I love about Levine is that he’s a huge advocate for proper scientific research and falsifiability. In this book, you’ll learn about the countless study Levine and his partners have conducted on deception detection, and you’ll also learn about some of the nuances we never think about when it comes to assessing whether or not someone is lying. Again, this book is really research heavy, but if this is a subject relevant to your life or you’re interested in it, it’s probably one of the best books out there on the topic.
January 12, 2021
The book was something that was referred to in a few other books that I read and I was really interested in understanding and learning about the topic, but in the 13 chapters that I read, there was no explanation about what, how and why people are bad at catching lies and what can be done to become better.
This is more of a book on how to create and conduct a better research and how to use statistics better to analyse the results. All 13 chapters (I gave up reading the book after that) spoke about the studies that were done and how the research was designed, conducted and analysed. It seemed more like a textbook than a book.
I would prefer to wait for the author to come up with another edition where he just talks about the theory and its implications on individuals and society and how (if possible) to be better at detecting deception.
If you just want to know about TDT, I would suggest reading a summary on Wikipedia.
This is more of a book on how to create and conduct a better research and how to use statistics better to analyse the results. All 13 chapters (I gave up reading the book after that) spoke about the studies that were done and how the research was designed, conducted and analysed. It seemed more like a textbook than a book.
I would prefer to wait for the author to come up with another edition where he just talks about the theory and its implications on individuals and society and how (if possible) to be better at detecting deception.
If you just want to know about TDT, I would suggest reading a summary on Wikipedia.
August 11, 2022
The wading is over! Truth Default Theory is finally in my mental library... kind of..
Read Malcolm Gladwell's Talking to Strangers, if Levine's book is too dense for you.
This is not light reading. It is dense, but mainly due to writing style/presentation.
At the beginning of the book, I was under the mis-presumption a question would be answered, but that was my fault in understanding the fact of how this is a theory, not a definition of any kind. The author even tries to dissuade the ill-use of the term theory, but does a bang-up job; such a topic could be a good illustrated kids book (idea!). The book reveals no answer for concurring deceit, but more so gives a general "way" to think about truths and lies, if such concerns are a priority.
Very interesting, but a little on the heavy side.
Again, Malcolm Gladwell elaborates on Levine's theory in Talking to Strangers in a way that laymen will gainfully interpret. Such is Gladwell's style.
Read Malcolm Gladwell's Talking to Strangers, if Levine's book is too dense for you.
This is not light reading. It is dense, but mainly due to writing style/presentation.
At the beginning of the book, I was under the mis-presumption a question would be answered, but that was my fault in understanding the fact of how this is a theory, not a definition of any kind. The author even tries to dissuade the ill-use of the term theory, but does a bang-up job; such a topic could be a good illustrated kids book (idea!). The book reveals no answer for concurring deceit, but more so gives a general "way" to think about truths and lies, if such concerns are a priority.
Very interesting, but a little on the heavy side.
Again, Malcolm Gladwell elaborates on Levine's theory in Talking to Strangers in a way that laymen will gainfully interpret. Such is Gladwell's style.
January 22, 2025
I am part way through this book. The theory he is advocating seems to be that people tend to trust others because most people are honest most of the time and it makes sence to trust. Other lessons are that it is difficult to tell when somebody is lying (other than looking at the actual evidence). People who claim to be able to just tell if someone is lying are generally wrong.
So far, however, the book has been exceptionally boring. I am not sure if I will finish it. It has spent a long time discussing previous studies and theories of lying, before beginning to talk about his own. If I finish, hopefully it will give some wisdom on why people can be duped so badly. I am very interested in why so many people believe Donald Trump so much. I have some ideas but I was hoping to find out what the book said, if it says anything about it.
So far, however, the book has been exceptionally boring. I am not sure if I will finish it. It has spent a long time discussing previous studies and theories of lying, before beginning to talk about his own. If I finish, hopefully it will give some wisdom on why people can be duped so badly. I am very interested in why so many people believe Donald Trump so much. I have some ideas but I was hoping to find out what the book said, if it says anything about it.
May 5, 2020
If you’re reading this book for academic purposes, it’s probably excellent. (I say “probably” because I’m not a social scientist, much less an expert in deception detection.) The book is very dense, very scientific, and full of statistics and data.
If you’re reading this book to become better at detecting lies, you’ll be disappointed. This book illustrates in detail the tests/experiments the author designed to discover meaning behind deception detection, but this book is not a “how-to” in detecting lies.
If you’re reading this book to become better at detecting lies, you’ll be disappointed. This book illustrates in detail the tests/experiments the author designed to discover meaning behind deception detection, but this book is not a “how-to” in detecting lies.
September 4, 2022
This book is not for everyone. There are some very good bits of information on how people actually work. I think the theory is sound based on what I learned. And I will be on the lookout for future iterations as the model becomes more refined. A lot of the work is devoted to talking about how studies in social sciences are not done well. I'm sure the author is not invited to parties with all the colleagues in the field. This book really needs a treatment by Malcolm Gladwell for digestibility because it currently has a lot of statistics and their related values.
April 27, 2023
Do not be deceived by Malcolm Gladwell’s love for this book, it is purely academic. But if you enjoy reading about theory and a rigorous research program focused on testing theoretical ideas, then you will love this book. I truly adored this book and Levine’s central premise regarding the truth default. This book has shaken up the field of research on deception, challenging dominant theories to truly help people understand communication and deception’s role in competent communication. Not only is the content interesting, but Levine’s writing is engaging and accessible.
December 31, 2020
Levine has some very interesting ideas, and I think he's definitely on to something, but as a member of the unwashed masses, I wish he had left some of the academic infighting out of it. I also think he clung to the old "tell 'em what you're gonna tell them, tell them, and then tell 'em what you told them" formula a little too rigorously, which made for some long-winded prose. Nevertheless, I appreciate his insights and am glad I read his book.
May 27, 2023
This book had enormous potential — and some chapters, like 7 through 9 or so — were genuinely good. But whoever edited this book utterly failed both the author and the reader. It’s barely readable, and certainly should not have been packaged and marketed as a general-audience science book. This reads like a book-length peer-reviewed-journal article, but with added fluff.
I wish I could recommend it — the subject matter is interesting, and the author is top of his field. But I think the far better recommendation would be to simply look up the author and the trust-default theory on the internet. It’s unlikely you’ll find this book worthwhile unless you conduct research in this space (and even then you probably should just read the underlying research).
I wish I could recommend it — the subject matter is interesting, and the author is top of his field. But I think the far better recommendation would be to simply look up the author and the trust-default theory on the internet. It’s unlikely you’ll find this book worthwhile unless you conduct research in this space (and even then you probably should just read the underlying research).
November 11, 2023
This was in my top 3 reads of the year. Levine clearly and concisely explained his Truth-Default Theory, the story behind it, and the competing theories.
The basic takeaways are that most people tell the truth most of the time and most deceptions are discovered after the fact, not while they are being deployed.
I recommend this book for anyone interested in lie detection. I'm looking forward to seeing how this theory develops and what criticisms are brought up.
The basic takeaways are that most people tell the truth most of the time and most deceptions are discovered after the fact, not while they are being deployed.
I recommend this book for anyone interested in lie detection. I'm looking forward to seeing how this theory develops and what criticisms are brought up.
May 20, 2023
Resembles more of an academic paper than anything remotely readable.
Main takeaways; existing data is bad due to poor research methodologies, humans are terrible at knowing when someone is lying, humans are only able to detect a lie 55% of the time, lying "tells" show up in 'clouds' i.e. sets of behaviours as opposed to single isolated behaviours.
Bad book, don't read it.
Main takeaways; existing data is bad due to poor research methodologies, humans are terrible at knowing when someone is lying, humans are only able to detect a lie 55% of the time, lying "tells" show up in 'clouds' i.e. sets of behaviours as opposed to single isolated behaviours.
Bad book, don't read it.
September 19, 2025
An excellent book outlining the academic path of deception research over the last 70 years, the flaws of previous theories, and the presentation of a new theory of deception. Duped was rigorous; I found it to be well written but not for the faint of heart either. However, the ideas presented about truth-default theory were insightful and intuitively resonated with me as correct.
July 29, 2020
Meh. Way too academic/in the weeds with most of this. And disappointing in what I learned (or more appropriately, didn’t learn). Who knew that a subsequent confession by a deceiver improves lie detection?! Thanks Professor Levine for your amazing insight in proposition 12!
July 25, 2021
I MASSIVELY enjoyed this book and now that I am making a career pivot to related topics may try to get in touch with the author to see where they are on the in-group / out-group replication. He and I share a surname now, in fact, but is of no relation to my spouse's family that I know of.
December 28, 2024
As you’d expect out of someone working in Academia, he throws out political bombs at politicians he doesn’t like. Another TDS victim calling Trump a liar without further citing of specific lies or even why it was necessary in the context of that chapter.
August 22, 2020
Good science but too dense to hold my attention.
October 21, 2020
Great content
Read
August 15, 2022Don’t do this as an audiobook.
August 25, 2022
Didn't finish it, too academic for my liking.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews