Do you reveal an absence of persistence with what individuals say or do?

Yet, every suspect was instructed to tell the interviewer they hadn't stolen the money. The participants only identified the liars 43 percent of the time, and the honest people 48 percent of the time. The researchers assessed the unconscious and automatic responses to the suspect by making use of their inherent behavioral reaction time. They found that often, the participants would unconsciously connect the words deceitful and dishonest with suspects who were guilty, while associating the words honest and valid with the suspects who told the truth. This means we have an intuitive notion of whether we're being lied to. The question then becomes, why aren't we good at knowing when someone feeds us lies? Our conscious responses mess with our instinctual associations. So, rather than depend on the gut, people would rather focus on the behaviors stereotypically and sometimes erroneously associated with lying. No Universal Sign for Lies To catch a liar, first understand that these behaviors researched are nothing more than cues that might mean deceit is in play. You might find yourself crafting the questions you ask in the research on what he wants to hear and even crafting the product the way he wants, not necessarily the way you should. You are not letting the data do the talking, you are talking for it. Do you see the dilemma? Confirmation bias is inescapable, and it is a part of lives in capacities big and small. But there are ways in which we can sidestep it. To make more informed choices, and to limit our biases, we can ask neutral questions or play devil's advocate. By arguing a point from another extreme, or by asking questions that aren't leading, you will find a more balanced opinion. Looking at two sides of a story is important because it provides perspective. Who you perceive as bossy might be perceived by another as a leader. To actively disengage with your patterns, put yourself in someone else's shoes.

Providing simple, salient, and comparative information helps. Timing also matters. For example, people tend to respond more strongly to positive information that comes as an unexpected surprise. To illustrate the point, consider a simple online experiment examining how to increase productivity. Three groups of data entry workers were offered a low wage rate, a high wage rate, or a low wage rate that was followed by the high wage rate after the workers had accepted the low offer. This pleasant surprise led to an increase in productivity of 20 percent compared to the other two groups, including the high wage rate group where incentives were identical. The introduction of a specific target might have helped the United Kingdom meet its goal of increasing the share of women on corporate boards to 25 percent. Other organizations, such as the 30% Club, suggest that high but achievable aspirations can be powerful nudges. Much research in the realm of negotiations, for example, suggests that aspiration setting matters. Similar to setting personal goals, corporate targets may mobilize resources and focus attention. Rather than looking at the usual lying signs, notice the subtler behaviors that might indicate dishonesty. If you need to, you can make it even harder for them to lie by adding pressure, asking the speaker to tell you the story again, but backward. Above all, and this bears repeating, trust your gut. It will save you needless pain and trouble. Your gut will not and can never steer you wrong if you do not let your head get in the way. Flirting is such an amazing thing, especially when you're the object of attention, and the other person is just as into you as you are into them. The trouble is figuring out if they're just nice, or if really something go on that you could both explore. Maybe you're the one person who can never tell when someone is hitting on them or flirting with them. Or, you might have a problem distinguishing when someone is nice from when they're flirty. Either way, it's okay.

Imagine life from another point of view, break the information bubble that you hold so dear. Outside of it exists an entire world. Don't be afraid to dip your toes in it, you might just learn something new. Thorndike made an interesting observation through experiments he conducted among servicemen. The results showed that the service members who were taller and more attractive were rated as more intelligent and better soldiers, which led him to conclude that when people see one outstanding trait in a person, they form a positive opinion about the person's whole personality without any real knowledge of the same. More than two decades later, another experiment conducted by a Polish-born psychologist, Solomon Asch, verified this theory. He found that people form opinions about others based on the initial information they receive about them. These first impressions are so deeply entrenched in their minds that any subsequent impressions don't have as strong an impact. He tested this hypothesis by giving participants two lists of the same adjectives with the order reversed. The first list had adjectives listed from positive to negative, while the second list had adjectives listed from negative to positive. Because of this, they are not uncontroversial. As we have seen, setting targets in zero-sum contexts--making 30 percent of the executive suite women when the overall number of executive-suite positions isn't increased--can invite backlash from men. Others argue that women will be hurt by any real or perceived protected status. Yet others raise more general concerns: performance targets can increase stress, lead to fudged data, and undermine trust. While more research is needed to tease these various concerns apart and evaluate the impact of diversity targets, many organizations continue to announce them. Examples span all sectors and include the Bank of England, Bayer, BMW, Daimler Chrysler, Deloitte, Deutsche Telekom, KPMG, Lloyds Bank, Louis Vuitton, Merck, and Qantas, among others, with targets typically focusing on adding women to senior management or corporate boards and numbers as ambitious as 45 percent. Recent insights on goal setting suggest that organizations currently introducing long-term targets might well be advised to set smaller, interim goals. Setting sub-goals has been found to have positive effects by increasing a sense of accomplishment, interest in a task, and persistence in achieving it. Related work has shown that setting smaller, achievable goals has helped people save more effectively and pay off their debts. They worked particularly well when people had a single savings goal instead of pursuing multiple goals simultaneously.

After this article, you'll never have to wonder again. Let's Play Spot the Flirt Sign #1: They're different around you. Some people are overt flirters. They're into you, and you'll know it -- or at least, everyone else who isn't clueless will know. Other people simply change the way they act around you and hope you notice. Pay attention to whether they laugh louder, get the quiet, joke, and talk a lot more, or become a bumbling, nervous wreck. Sign #2: They connect with your eyes and hold them. You can tell by looking at their eyes whether they're flirting with you. There are studies that show when someone holds your gaze for long periods, it either results in feelings of affection, or it means the affection is already there. He discovered that people's ratings depended on the order in which they read the adjectives. As it turned out, the adjectives that were presented first had more influence on the rating than the adjectives that were presented later. If the positive traits were listed first, the person was viewed favorably, and if the negative traits were listed first, the person was rated less favorably. Judging by these two experiments, the halo effect is quite aptly known as the physical attractiveness stereotype and the what is beautiful is also good principle. This way of thinking isn't just limited to looks, it can also spill over to include other traits. For example, because we view celebrities to be popular, talented, and well-liked, we also assume that they are kind, generous, and interesting. While in certain cases this can be true (who doesn't love Tom Hanks? Religious interpretation of a halo is a ring of light that bestows light on the saint, bathing them in pure, heavenly good, and our literal interpretation of it is quite similar. When we view someone through the lens of the halo, our impression of them overshadows who they are in their entirety. The fact that attractiveness plays a role in us forming first impressions comes at a price.

One simple illustration of the effectiveness of sub-goals was provided by Dan Ariely, author of the illuminating article Predictably Irrational, and Klaus Wertenbroch. They asked one set of students to proofread three essays in three weeks, another group to proofread one essay each week over the course of three weeks, and a final group to set their own schedule. The group with sub-goals--one essay each week over the three week period--outperformed the groups with one final goal only, both in terms of timeliness and in terms of accuracy. Not only did they get more of the work done, but the quality of their work was better. Furthermore, when given the option, students generally imposed sub-goals on themselves. Public accountability matters. Holding organizations accountable by asking them to explain when they have not complied is another lever that helps people follow through on their good intentions. In fact, the literature on accountability suggests that people charged with evaluating others are less likely to rely on stereotypes if they have to explain their choices. In one experiment conducted in Israel, female students at a teachers' college were asked to evaluate an essay written by an eighth grader on an interesting event that happened to me. Everyone received the same essay, and everyone was informed that such evaluations were an essential part of a teacher's job. If they're making eye contact with you, and they're not looking anywhere else, then it's likely that they think you're attractive. Sign #3: They're constantly glancing at you. Some people don't hold eye contact. They glance at you. The difference between a regular glance and a flirty one is if they glance a lot and catch your eye often. Sign #4: There's a smile that's for you alone - no one else. If someone is flirting with you, they'll look at you with different eyes than they do others. You'll find those twin pools glinting with a heartwarming softness. If they were smiling before you locked eyes, the smile grows in brightness or intensity. Sign #5: They make a habit of teasing you.