Three representative studies were selected for analysis because they involved professionals, such as police officers, who might be expected to be particularly experienced in detecting deception. One consistent finding of the studies was that in face-to-face interactions, even professionals with relevant experience in detecting deception, such as detectives, were not reliable in such detections. The levels of accuracy in detecting deception were the same as or only marginally better than chance. One reason for such poor performance in detecting deception was that there were not apparently any reliable indicators of lying, at least among the large array of factors that had been studied thus far. The studies reviewed suggested that if any consistent patterns were found, they might be complex, with such factors as the difficulty of the lie and the personality of the liar determining the cues to lying. The most important implication from the research was that personal impressions as to whether someone was telling the truth should be viewed with caution. The best strategy was to focus on what the individual is actually saying and determine whether the statements contained significant internal contradictions or whether the statements matched closely with evidence gained from other sources. 16 notes