This link was posted on a web site of a woman who is a lie detection expert, "Eyes For Lies."

I thought this was interesting. I'm wondering if our diet could influence this gene...

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/.....ed-genetic-variation

Since almost all genes have epiginetic responses, I'm sure our diet can influence empathy. I'm willing to bet that plenty of non-food things will affect this gene's expression as well, such as how much a child is held in infancy.

Maybe playground bullies just need some good nutrition. But they probably hate nutritious food too.  On the other hand, maybe it started with poor nutrition for the parents. Interesting subject.

OXTR (SNP rs53576) is also related to optimism, self-esteem, and depression.

I am GG.

--

GG is "“prosocial,” defined by researchers as the ability to behave in a way that benefits another person.

(AA-tends to have a more autistic or antisocial nature. Which is a camp that many that know me in the physical world would place me in)

Quoted from C_sharp

I am GG.

--

GG is "“prosocial,” defined by researchers as the ability to behave in a way that benefits another person.

(AA-tends to have a more autistic or antisocial nature. Which is a camp that many that know me in the physical world would place me in)

Well, you certainly were a huge help to me when I was trying to get SWAMI up and going while in a fever-fogged state!! Many thanks for that too!

C_Sharp - you are in the same boat as Lola as far as I'm concerned. Always way beyond helpful, very knowledgeable, popping up to help when least expected - patient when we've asked the same thing in a different way...you just keep posting! I & many others always appreciated your willingness to help. Thanks a big bunch!!!  

so its the gene.....

I found it interesting that all the people named had their phone numbers posted along side?!

This type of thing would be great to have some tested for.. would make communicating easier..

I wonder what I am??

How, where to get tested?

Quoted from Goldie

How, where to get tested?

I used 23 & Me:

https://www.23andme.com

Fascinating stuff, isn't it!

Quoted Text

https://www.23andme.com        for genetic testing..

interesting info..
how much was it? are there other labs other people used? for how much,

what makes on lab better then the other?  

My two cents on this, as a mum of a boy with autism I'm pretty sure there is some genetic component to the disorder. Lack of empathy is one characteristic but not all autistics lack empathy, on the contrary they do ave empathy but expressing it is the difficult part.

I have not had my swami done as of yet.  My son had his dna done, and his mtDNA is HVR-1
Anyone know anything about it?

Quoted from Goldie

how much was it? are there other labs other people used? for how much,

what makes on lab better then the other?  

Advertised price is $99 actual price  with shipping and other fees $223

I would not consider finding out this gene to be worth $223.

But you also find out secretor status, Type A blood sub group, haplogroups, duffy, and lots of other things.

>what makes on lab better then the other?

The advantage of 23 & Me is that it is cheap.

They use chip technology (which many other use to) this allows a high volume of sample to be processed quickly.

It is possible in some situations to overwhelm or swamp the chips used for determining the genetic profile.

Some other vendors use a more labor intensive approach.

Even in comparison with other vendors relying on chip technology 23 & Me has a reputation of being less careful and less accurate. Primary problem seems to be the co-mingling of samples.

Quoted from trish44

My son had his dna done, and his mtDNA is HVR-1
Anyone know anything about it?

Really this means nothing.

Everyone has an HVR-1 region in their mtDNA.

When we want to determine a person's haplogroup we look first at the genetic data in the first hypervariable region (that is HVR-1) of the mitochondrial DNA.

For maternal haplogroups SNPs in HVR-1 are important and serve as the starting point for haplogroup determination.

Usually we then continue to look at some of the SNPs in the second hypervariable region (HVR-2). It is not always necessary to look at this region.

After looking at the data form the hypervariable regions one will also generally examine some of the SNPs in the coding region of the backbone of the mitochondrial DNA strand.

---

So the fact that someone looked at HVR-1 is just normal lab procedure. One needs to know what they found.

If the lab tells you the SNPs you can figure out haplogroups yourself, but usually they do the matching for you and tell you what your haplogroup is likely to be.

I don't even think that this study is worth anything more than a passing glance.  They used just 23 couples and drew conclusions based on someone's observation of those couples?  That's ridiculous.  There are far too many uncontrolled parameters to even begin to draw any conclusions about that.

I'm an EXTREMELY empathetic person, but if you put me in that situation with my soon-to-be-ex husband telling a sob story, I guarantee you that anyone watching me would think that I am the coldest bee-atch they've ever seen.  Absolutely absurd.

It seems like it is the standard now to do some sort of "research" on MINUTE numbers of people, using god-knows what as control, if there IS any control, and who-knows what parameters, then drawing a conclusion from it and printing it as a new discovery and as fact.

Drives me crazy.

Quoted from EquiPro

I don't even think that this study is worth anything more than a passing glance.  They used just 23 couples and drew conclusions based on someone's observation of those couples?  That's ridiculous.  There are far too many uncontrolled parameters to even begin to draw any conclusions about that.

I'm an EXTREMELY empathetic person, but if you put me in that situation with my soon-to-be-ex husband telling a sob story, I guarantee you that anyone watching me would think that I am the coldest bee-atch they've ever seen.  Absolutely absurd.

It seems like it is the standard now to do some sort of "research" on MINUTE numbers of people, using god-knows what as control, if there IS any control, and who-knows what parameters, then drawing a conclusion from it and printing it as a new discovery and as fact.

Drives me crazy.

Not to mention blaming unethical behavior on one's heredity. If people have it out for Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Gandhi, Confucius, Martin Luther King, et al, this is an academic-sounding way to attempt to invalidate their words.

"Love Thy Neighbour As Thyself"?  I can't - I haven't gotten my SWAMI yet! ??  

There are some people in the world who have no empathy, and they enjoy destroying other people's lives. It's a condition generally called "Sociopathy" by criminologists and psychiatrists. We shouldn't expect them to be able to obey the law? Because they're genetically programmed to break it and harm others without feeling any regret? Should our health insurance cover that? Oh, I forgot -- our taxes already pay that price...

Quoted from EquiPro

I don't even think that this study is worth anything more than a passing glance.  They used just 23 couples and drew conclusions based on someone's observation of those couples?  That's ridiculous.  There are far too many uncontrolled parameters to even begin to draw any conclusions about that.

I'm an EXTREMELY empathetic person, but if you put me in that situation with my soon-to-be-ex husband telling a sob story, I guarantee you that anyone watching me would think that I am the coldest bee-atch they've ever seen.  Absolutely absurd.

It seems like it is the standard now to do some sort of "research" on MINUTE numbers of people, using god-knows what as control, if there IS any control, and who-knows what parameters, then drawing a conclusion from it and printing it as a new discovery and as fact.

Drives me crazy.

Do you know anything about "truth wizards", how they've been scientifically tested or "personality identification at zero acquaintance?"

There is science to support it.

Before you jump to a conclusion, please read about a truth wizard I follow, "Eyes For Lies" who's been scientifically tested in a lab to detect lies.  

http://www.eyesforlies.com/index.htm

There are many people who still think Dr. D'Adamo's theories are hogwash, but that's because they are unaware of the science.

Sharing with the best of intentions.

Oh,I truly believe that there are people who, both through training and/ or through great innate intuitiveness, are able to tell if someone is lying.  Absolutely.

What I'm saying is that this study is utterly flawed, by design and execution, in it's ability to support any of it's findings and certainly can't be used, in any way, to support it's results, scientifically.

Equipro,

Have you read Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink?  I highly recommend it if you have the time.

Btw, the truth wizard, Eyes For Lies is a natural.  She was born with her abilities.  Her mother also has the ability, but her brother does not.

I've recently read that there is validity to the following genetic link to empathy: Sex.
The female sex (double X, vs. XY) would appear to correlate with the finding of higher empathy.
So it's about a chromosome and all the baggage that comes with it!  
Yet, far be it from me to say that it's pure determinism, that many of the world's great empaths have not been male.

Interesting subject.  My 93 year old mother has always possessed an innate ability to spot people who are either dishonest or not what they appear to be.  When I was younger, it used to really bother me because she was always telling me to watch out for this friend or that friend.  Usually I would learn after a period of time that she was correct.

I seem to have this ability, to some extent, but not to the level my mother has it.  I find that I can generally determine things about people  within a short period of time and often times my instincts are correct as well.  Sometimes it can be a burden to possess this ability because people assume you are being negative when in fact you are so attuned to body language, etc.  My husband has learned to rely upon my instincts about people but my children find this trait in me to be irritating just like I did with my mother.

I can see that my daughter has this trait as well and I assume, like my mother and me, it will become more developed with time and experience.

http://www.eyesforlies.com/index.htm


Interesting.. I think I HAVE NEVER looked at people to SEE if they tell the truth..

I think I never even thought of looking for clues, I am a trusting person.. what I see I believe to be so UNTIL proven otherwise..

I can see where that method of looking for CLUES might really be a good way to learn how to distinguish one type of person from the next..

BUT IF I looked at you with my eyes so, then you would feel violated as I can look directly at you and already some people might feel intimidated.. I can ask questions and not be intimidated by any answer, but others might feel intruded upon..

But interesting to think about this..  

There is a child with Autism that I saw recently .. he 'loves' ANGRY BIRDS.. the toy.. according to his mom.. but I saw him repeat 'angry birds' as words over and over when he thought that MOM was getting angry..

I think there needs to be fine tooned hearing when dealing with kids in general.. clues may tell us more.. if we listen and compare notes from situation to situation ..  

the same might work for adults.. listen better and hear better..  but does all that study not unnerve the other person???

Quoted from Patty H

Interesting subject.  My 93 year old mother has always possessed an innate ability to spot people who are either dishonest or not what they appear to be.  When I was younger, it used to really bother me because she was always telling me to watch out for this friend or that friend.  Usually I would learn after a period of time that she was correct.

I seem to have this ability, to some extent, but not to the level my mother has it.  I find that I can generally determine things about people  within a short period of time and often times my instincts are correct as well.  Sometimes it can be a burden to possess this ability because people assume you are being negative when in fact you are so attuned to body language, etc.  My husband has learned to rely upon my instincts about people but my children find this trait in me to be irritating just like I did with my mother.

I can see that my daughter has this trait as well and I assume, like my mother and me, it will become more developed with time and experience.

There are some interesting online tests to see if you can tell, just by looking at a photo, if someone is a criminal or not.  I know Eyes For Lies has posted links to these in the past.  I'll see if I can find one for you.  It might be interesting to see how well you score....

Patty H, here is a link to a story EFL did on profiling criminal faces.

http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2011/03/criminals-look-different-from-non.html

There is one she did on trying to determine which men were rapists that I'm still trying to find...

It looks like some of you have redefined "empathy" as TELEpathy or something. Would you like to start a thread on ESP or telepathy? That would be more appropriate than derailing the thread.

Quoted from san j

It looks like some of you have redefined "empathy" as TELEpathy or something. Would you like to start a thread on ESP or telepathy? That would be more appropriate than derailing the thread.

As far as I can see on this thread, no one has made any reference to telepathy or anything of the sort.

If you are referring to my comments about "Eyes For Lies," she is NOT a psychic and has never claimed to be one.  This is an ability she has since birth that has been tested by scientists in a laboratory.

Hi, KK.
People are posting about the ability to determine criminality by looking at a photo of someone's face.
Maybe a thread on whether or not so-called physiognomy-interpretation is genetically-enabled?

In any case, it's another track.

Quoted from san j

Hi, KK.
People are posting about the ability to determine criminality by looking at a photo of someone's face.
Maybe a thread on whether or not so-called physiognomy-interpretation is genetically-enabled?

In any case, it's another track.

Again, this is about an ability that has been scientifically tested in a laboratory.  It's not a psychic ability and has never claimed to be one.

I say this with the best of intentions. Please consider reading up on truth wizards aka "naturals" and how they have been scientifically tested in laboratories, by scientists.  Naturals are born with this ability, which to me says it is quite possibly related to genes.

The confusion of Lie-detection and empathy is a matter of faulty definition.

Empathy signifies the co-experiencing / identification of the feelings-emotions of another individual. For the work of, for instance, psychotherapists, it is seen as an essential trait. This is not necessarily in order to "profile" the patient, however.

If the word "empathy" has taken on some Brave New World meaning, I wouldn't be surprised, however, and ... what a shame - The heart is impoverished.

So carry on with the empiricizing of the human spirit if you wish. This is where the NF (mbti/Keirsey) gets off this train.  

Quoted from san j

This is where the NF (mbti/Keirsey) gets off this train.  

Buh-bye.  I find this thread quite interesting, myself, and I like the direction it's going, even if it's not strictly related to the classical definition of empathy.  Reading body language is a fascinating topic.

Quoted from KimonoKat

Patty H, here is a link to a story EFL did on profiling criminal faces.

http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2011/03/criminals-look-different-from-non.html

There is one she did on trying to determine which men were rapists that I'm still trying to find...

KK, I will definitely check this out - too busy to do it now    I have been thinking about my mother's strong ability to determine if a person is worthy of trust and I am thinking it is less about body language and more about conversation.  I think my understanding of human nature is probably the same.  This makes your link all that more interesting to me because maybe my mother and I are picking up on non-verbal body language as well and never really thought about it.  I'll let you know my results when I have a chance to go through the website in some detail.  Whatever it is that my mother has, it is quite uncanny and definitely can be a blessing or a curse.  Unfortunately she was not able to discern this information in her own marriage, so that is interesting as well.

I couldn't find the test, just adverts for the course.

Quoted from TJ

I couldn't find the test, just adverts for the course.

If you go to the link in EFL story, it takes you to the story she's talking about. Scroll down to the end and you will see the faces.

Here it is directly.

http://www.psychologytoday.com.....fferent-noncriminals

Thanks!

Quoted from KimonoKat

If you go to the link in EFL story, it takes you to the story she's talking about. Scroll down to the end and you will see the faces.

Here it is directly.

http://www.psychologytoday.com.....fferent-noncriminals

I started to look at the faces and make my own decisions, but I found myself feeling really frightened and I couldn't go on.  

Never mind all that was said.. the articles and all the links make me nuts.. to much to go to.. give me something I can put a grip on and then discuss.. if I have to go all over the place I lose the original text.. it goes all over the place..

BUT .. I can see where actually considering a person including myself as on object to be studied is interesting.. I can see where in some situations I can be animated, interested while in others I can be outright boring, and sort of short on brain cells.  A lot has to do with how I feel .. safe to be myself, or dependent on what others might think.  I am glad to be my self, but sensitive to the influence of others who think they are better or smarter or whatever.. Life has made me gun shy.. a stupid way to feel no doubt, but it feels more and more like it being the way of life (age as on excuse).   Age is not the factor but lack or diminished opportunity and the like, other people being boring as they have nothing to say and no longer care to have a discussion.  Life seems to go that way.  after a while only politics is important, as it argues this or that point, but when one accepts the fact that we have little to say about any of life.. then conversation can shut off quickly.

Looking at people as objects to see if what one 'feels' is real, is interesting.. I am in the process of meeting someone I have mixed feelings about (tainted by news media or whatever) and I am waiting to see how I will react / if the person is for real.. time will tell.  But interestingly I am looking to SEE signs of this or that (flaws or honesty), which generally I don't really spend much time on doing..  taking people at face value.. but sadly experiences over a life time might make me more cautious, listless, degrading, plain bored or afraid..  All not good things.. and yet IF i wanted to change that, I would have no idea on how to do it.. how to change is difficult..

I find the fight with food is discouraging .. so discouraging that over time it is tainting all else in life.. not shallow, but a thread throughout.. fear based, stupid based, looking for a vitamin that might work.. or maybe take 5HTP for a while.. that I think helps with inner security, the hormones seem to create backbone where it is missing ... seems maybe I really do have need for it comes this time of year.. did the same last year, and it helped...  

I think where a doctor said that 80% of jails could be emptied if everyone ate according to his allergies, the same might be true if the hormones could be in better sync / or easier tested.. it would be great to see how many feel 'uneasy' just because their hormones are not right.

On the other hand - homeliness or faces/body symmetry is most important.. I think plastic surgery should be made available to all who might need it- much (unhappiness) could be avoided..  

I guess 10 right.  I guess 3 to be criminals who weren't, and missed 6 who were.  Very interesting!

If you tried it, what features seemed to distinguish the criminals?  I found that the lip shape and around the eyes were the most telling.

Quoted from TJ

If you tried it, what features seemed to distinguish the criminals?  I found that the lip shape and around the eyes were the most telling.

I recommend reading the comments in the EFL story to see other people's experience in taking the test. Here is a direct link:

http://js-kit.com/api/static/p.....From%20Non-Criminals

The comments are in reverse order (oldest at the bottom/last) and I also recommend paying attention to EFL comments.

I have a good bit of empathy. It is important to know that empathy is not sympathy.

Empathy means you can put yourself in someone elses shoes, but you may not sympathize with them necessarily.  Some people bring about their own troubles.  Others are born into very bad conditions that are out of their control.

I can empathize with criminals like jeffery dahmer.  He knew he was sick and wanted to be stopped.  Yet he would kill.  To sympathize with him would not be good.  The man would never be able to live a good life and would never "get better." It is unfortunate.  Perhaps he may have had a true conversion had he not been killed.  It is tough to know.  

That is just an example i'm not trying to start a thread about jeffery dahmer.  Maybe he should have eaten right for his type (no pun intended). It may have had an effect on his mental state.  

Quoted from Easy E

Maybe he should have eaten right for his type (no pun intended). It may have had an effect on his mental state.  

If he was type O...

I saw arrogance in many of these faces...a smug look...but I often picked non criminal faces as
criminal.  Got about 8 correct.  Not a great score.  Couldn't find one consistent criteria to be able to base my judgment and determine it was the face of a criminal vs someone who was simply not
looking pleasant.  It was also an uncomfortable feeling to be judging people based only on their
faces.  Not seeing body language, not talking to them.

I found this to be way more difficult than it seemed it would be.

I guessed six totally incorrectly.  Either I thought they were criminals and they were not or I thought they were not criminals and they were.  I did not do well with what types of crime the criminals committed, but I did guess that they were criminals.  I found looking at photos more difficult than assessing someone in person.  I tend to look at body language and a person's eyes.

There were four rapists, which gives the men a 4-points lead from the start, according to the article!

I guessed a total of 11 correctly.

But is having a sixth sense for intuiting criminals actually empathy?  I'm a  very empathetic person...
I seem to know and feel what others want and need....I guess the opposite of an empathetic person
might be a narcissist...a person who never sees beyond themselves...But in all reality, picking out criminals by their facial expressions...as Patty said, "I guessed"....I guessed too although it was
rather random as I kept trying to figure out what a criminal face actually looked like...and did worse than Patty did. Does a criminal's face always look sinister?

Many of those men's faces had a hardened look....And yet, a sociopath, a might very well have an angelic face, be utterly charming with twinkly eyes and still be a rapist. Con artists are charming and would think nothing of ripping someone off..I still don't know how to say "yes" or "no" and point my finger at a true criminal just by my first impression of looking at their photograph.

Quoted from Chloe

But is having a sixth sense for intuiting criminals actually empathy?  I'm a  very empathetic person...
I seem to know and feel what others want and need....I guess the opposite of an empathetic person
might be a narcissist...a person who never sees beyond themselves...But in all reality, picking out criminals by their facial expressions...as Patty said, "I guessed"....I guessed too although it was
rather random as I kept trying to figure out what a criminal face actually looked like...and did worse than Patty did. Does a criminal's face always look sinister?

Many of those men's faces had a hardened look....And yet, a sociopath, a might very well have an angelic face, be utterly charming with twinkly eyes and still be a rapist. Con artists are charming and would think nothing of ripping someone off..I still don't know how to say "yes" or "no" and point my finger at a true criminal just by my first impression of looking at their photograph.

I recommend reading more at the EFL web site to get a better understanding of her skills set, and what it is she "sees" in a photograph, or what clues she picks up by watching someone speak.  If you check in and read the comments, you will also see how others have learned from her when she shares her skill.

Quoted from Patty H

I guessed a total of 11 correctly.

11 out of 32 faces? Or identified 11 of the criminals?

Quoted from KimonoKat

11 out of 32 faces? Or identified 11 of the criminals?

KK, I went back over my results and actually did much better than I thought.  Here is the breakdown.

I correctly picked 12 of the college students.

I correctly picked 4 of the criminals and their exact crime, so in total I got 16 correct, not 11 as I stated in an earlier post.  I picked one assailant correctly, I picked one rapist correctly and I picked two drug dealers correctly.

I correctly picked another 8 criminals but got their crime wrong. For instance I said they were a rapist but they were an arsonist, but still I guessed 8 more of them as a criminal.

So if you are only looking at college student vs. criminal and not what crime they committed, I got a total of 24 correct.  WOW!!!

I guessed totally wrong on 8 - in other words, either they were college students and I guessed they were a criminal or they were a criminal and I guessed they were a college student.

My method was to pick the college students first.  My son is a college student so I visualized him hanging out with them or bringing them home for a meal.

Patty, I should try this again the way you did it....looking for the good guys first and eliminating them
as criminals.  I totally forgot who I picked as good guys/bad guys anyway.  WIll give it another try.

I'm horrible at those photos. I remember somebody once posted a link to one photo of a criminal in a specific case, and all I noticed was that he was young and fairly good looking and I just felt sorrow at such a waste of life- not only the victim but the perpetrator's life was now ruined as well. Yet others commenting on the same photo called him "creepy" or just got some kind of bad feeling about him based on the look in his eyes. I'd completely missed it.

Quoted from ruthiegirl

I'm horrible at those photos. I remember somebody once posted a link to one photo of a criminal in a specific case, and all I noticed was that he was young and fairly good looking and I just felt sorrow at such a waste of life- not only the victim but the perpetrator's life was now ruined as well. Yet others commenting on the same photo called him "creepy" or just got some kind of bad feeling about him based on the look in his eyes. I'd completely missed it.

Ted bundy was very handsome and charismatic, which was why he was so successful as a serial killer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

http://www.google.com/search?q.....biw=1024&bih=512

Impressive, Patty.

Here is what one of the scientists has to say about truth wizards...


"They [wizards] seem to have templates of people that they use to make sense of the behavioral deviations they observe." says [Dr. Maureen] O'Sullivan. So it is not a set of disembodied cues, but embedded behaviors that are consistent with each other as well as with the kind of person exhibiting them... (From E&T Magazine)

ruthiegirl, although facial recognition and zero acquaintance is a much harder skill to master, Dr. Paul Ekman (who did the study with Dr. Sullivan to identify the "wizards") teaches how to detect liars...

http://www.paulekman.com/

More interesting articles in making predictions about people based on looking at their face.


Predicting a person's propensity for anger by looking at faces... EFL story...

http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2011/03/predicting-persons-propensity-for-anger.html

Direct link to research abstract....

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/20/10/1194

***

Personality: All in your face?   EFL story...

http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2008/02/personality-all-on-your-face-cnn.html

Direct link to CNN article...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/02/22/hfh.personology/index.html

Quoted from KimonoKat

Impressive, Patty.

Here is what one of the scientists has to say about truth wizards...


"They [wizards] seem to have templates of people that they use to make sense of the behavioral deviations they observe." says [Dr. Maureen] O'Sullivan. So it is not a set of disembodied cues, but embedded behaviors that are consistent with each other as well as with the kind of person exhibiting them... (From E&T Magazine)

ruthiegirl, although facial recognition and zero acquaintance is a much harder skill to master, Dr. Paul Ekman (who did the study with Dr. Sullivan to identify the "wizards") teaches how to detect liars...

http://www.paulekman.com/

Maybe I have a future in law enforcement  

Quoted from KimonoKat

Impressive, Patty.

Here is what one of the scientists has to say about truth wizards...


"They [wizards] seem to have templates of people that they use to make sense of the behavioral deviations they observe." says [Dr. Maureen] O'Sullivan. So it is not a set of disembodied cues, but embedded behaviors that are consistent with each other as well as with the kind of person exhibiting them... (From E&T Magazine)

ruthiegirl, although facial recognition and zero acquaintance is a much harder skill to master, Dr. Paul Ekman (who did the study with Dr. Sullivan to identify the "wizards") teaches how to detect liars...

http://www.paulekman.com/

PS:  I bet I could have done even better if I had talked to them or seen a video of them talking to someone else.  I think most of us would do better under those circumstances, don't you. KK?

Quoted from Patty H

PS:  I bet I could have done even better if I had talked to them or seen a video of them talking to someone else.  I think most of us would do better under those circumstances, don't you. KK?

Better? I would think so, but I'll have to ponder that.

The thing is, there is still a lot of science to support profiling at zero acquaintance.  Not that this could (or would) be used in a court of law, but fascinating none the less.

Would not EMPHATY mean identify with?  I do not as I am not a criminal.. I am trusting.. I think that a good thing, but it does allow for making the same interpretation error over and over..

I grew up with mom having her back* to me because of her work,...  I think I never learned to depend on looks, rather on the voice..  I still don't naturally look people in the eyes.. I find it disquieting to stare at the eyes.. my facial expressions are not reflecting of what I feel unless I am happy when laughter comes easier.. my facial muscles are not ready friendly, even though I feel perfectly friendly..  

I also have no need* for others to look at me when I talk.  I used to have issues with others finding it disquieting when I would talk on the fly while walking away.. some where offended, eventually I learned that some really needed to be looked at.. others where intimidated by my looking at them, .. I also found that my 'look' felt like a stare to some..depending on how secure they felt.  

I wonder what I would 'look' like in pictures.. I do know that my own pictures have changed over the years, when I was 20 I was innocent, the smile showed it,, then as age is creeping up it is a different smile. interpreting my own face would really be interesting**.. it might explain me to me.. ha ha  

** I think I feel differently / less shure of my self and it relects..  

Quoted from KimonoKat

Better? I would think so, but I'll have to ponder that.

The thing is, there is still a lot of science to support profiling at zero acquaintance.  Not that this could (or would) be used in a court of law, but fascinating none the less.

Yes it is interesting that some people have this ability without ever meeting or hearing the person talk.  I was interested in her story on the guy who killed his wife but went on TV and said he did not.  She was able to discern his body language and responses to questions and determine that he was lying.  That is what I am referring to when I say most of us would do better.

Quoted from Goldie

Would not EMPHATY mean identify with?  

Yes, you're correct...Empathy literally means to understand and share the feelings of another...but for me personally, I can feel empathy for those who are suffering or in need of my attention, but am just not able to identify with sociopathic tendencies of a person and certainly not without seeing
body language or hearing someone speak to me...  I have no point of reference to a sociopath...no association with even looking at a criminal... It seems so foreign to me.  Perhaps I'm just a trusting person.  Yet, I have sensory perceptions regarding meeting someone. I can feel negative energy surrounding someone...I can sense arrogance in the way someone delivers their message. I can tell if a salesman is lying to me...() and I can sort of judge how a person makes me feel from first impressions.....I can"read between the lines"
so to speak and judge whether sarcasm is just being light and playful or does this person carry
some sort of grudge or harsh feelings towards me.  

I've never met (that I know of) a real criminal.  OK, the 20 year old kid who lives across the street
from me was arrested this past summer and pulled over by a local cop who searched and found a pound of marijuana sitting right there on his front seat. His car reeked of pot....He was stoned...
His windows were all blackened....illegal where we live. This guy isn't what I'd call a criminal...I know him.  He was the type of kid who was always ringing doorbells, asking if he could mow
lawns, shovel walkways after a snow storm.  He saved his money and bought himself a snow
blower.  He was enterprising.....OK, maybe a bit too enterprising.  Started selling pot to high
school students.  If not caught, would he have become a big time drug dealer?  Potentially he
didn't look like it....but to be 20 years old, not have a job and make money selling pot...who
knows?

But what's the difference between someone who starts out clever and enterprising and just
goes over the top?  I'm talking about a 20 year old blonde haired blue eyed good looking
young adult who just figured out it takes less physical effort to sell pot than to mow a lawn..

He's a criminal?  Most of the guys' photos we saw were young....and I'm sure like my neighbor
started out with one act of illegal behavior.  Rapists I'd put in a completely different category...
but still, how would one identify with the potentiality for anyone to commit a crime....find
it lucrative.....shoplifting.....leading to breaking into homes....then buying a gun.  A life of
crime is often learned....from a peer group....gangs, whatever.

Still, as much as I believe I have empathy that borders on sympathy....I do not have empathy
for a criminal.

And then there is another thing....Our projections about criminals based on where they live...
how they dress, how tough they appear....If I had to walk through a blighted area where gangs
of guys hung out on the street, just looking tough and scary, I'd be believing they all had the
potential for criminal behavior.  Sometimes guys on motorcycles look like tough guys to me.
Are any of them criminals?  And how to pick out those who might be from the most who aren't?

Looks are deceiving....I never judge a book by its cover.

Chole,

Having the empathy gene doesn't mean (imho) you extend that empathy to dishonest individuals, criminals.

Those are the ones that are often lacking a conscience.

Sharing my interest in lie detection (via the Eyes for Lies website) with the best of intentions.

KK..I'm confused.  Are we saying that those who did well on this lie detection test potentially
have the empathy gene?  Just trying to understand how the gene might relate to doing well on
this test..... I totally know that you're sharing your interests with the best of your
intentions and I was really just answering based on what I thought this gene meant...

Was doing well on this test more of an intuitive issue?  Even though I read how some people
arrived at their conclusions....It seems like an education unto itself...being able to discern
good people from bad intent people....something that might be taught in a psychology or anthropology class..

Quoted from Chloe

Are we saying that those who did well on this lie detection test potentially
have the empathy gene?

No correlation was presented between those that score high on the lie detection test and their levels of empathy or oxytocin.

People just chose to talk about lie detection in this thread, it is not related to the original topic. (Which included whether a person was trustworthy, but not whether they could recognize criminal history from looking at images of faces.)

For those interested in the original study that formed the initial basis of the thread, here is a TED talk:

http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_zak_trust_morality_and_oxytocin.html

Quoted from C_sharp

No correlation was presented between those that score high on the lie detection test and their levels of empathy or oxytocin.

People just chose to talk about lie detection in this thread, it is not related to the original topic. (Which included whether a person was trustworthy, but not whether they could recognize criminal history from looking at images of faces.)

For those interested in the original study that formed the initial basis of the thread, here is a TED talk:

http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_zak_trust_morality_and_oxytocin.html

Thank you SO much for clearing this up for me.  I couldn't see a correlation to the original
topic and continued to try to see that there might be.......which confused me totally...

For a fascinating read, pick up "People of the Lie," by M. Scott Peck.  You may know him as the author of "The Road Less Traveled," a more popular and widely known book which is also fantastic.

Scott Peck was a psychiatrist with decades of experience as a practitioner of psychotherapy (died in 2005 I believe).  Look him up on wikipedia for more info.  

In "People of the Lie," he talks about individuals who have come in to see him for psychotherapy who he would eventually characterize as "evil."  This is a very profound statement for Peck as he is very humanistic and believes that everyone has the capacity to change for the better when given the help they need...except for "evil people."  These people have no ability to be introspective or recognize that they have pieces of themselves that need improvement.  When this is suggested to them (in any form, not just in therapy, i.e. a casual conversation), they become extremely defensive and respond with intense malice.  They are extremely narcissistic, feel absolutely no sympathy or empathy, and will cause a mile of loss in anther's life if it means an inch of gain in theirs'.  Sometimes, they seem to enjoy causing pain and distress in others' lives.  They have almost no capacity for growth and/or maturity, and seek to hinder others in their growth/maturation processes as much as they possibly can.  

They, above all else, do whatever they must to keep up an image as a likeable, "good" person...Peck states that this is the only reason that these people even come in for psychotherapy in the first place; because engaging in psychotherapy is the socially acceptable thing to do in their situation, and not doing so would tarnish their image, i.e., if their child is acting out and an authority recommends family therapy...disobeying this recommendation would be seen as "bad parenting" by their peers, so they go to uphold their image.

So much more to it than what I wrote here, it really is an amazing read.  The last quarter or so of the book talks about evil in establishments/corporations/organizations.

Also read the Road Less Traveled!