"The LAND OF IS..."

Article excerpted Credited Click-Link: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/let-their-words-do-the-talking/201011/poor-mans-polygraph-part-2
The Land of Is
Yes or No questions deserve "Yes" or "No" answers. When people choose not to answer "Yes" or "No," they go to the Land of Is. The Land of Is occupies the space between truth and deception. This murky area contains a labyrinth of half-truths, excuses, and suppositions. President Clinton's grand jury testimony in the Monica Lewinski investi¬gation inspired the concept of the Land of Is. The following is an excerpt from Clinton's grand jury testimony:
PROSECUTOR: Your statement is a completely false statement. Whether or not Mr. Bennett knew of your relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, the statement that there was no sex of any kind in any man¬ner, shape or form with President Clinton was an utterly false statement. Is that correct?
CLINTON: It depends upon what the meaning of the word is means. If is means is, and never has been, that's one thing, if it means, there is none, that was a completely true statement.
Clinton took the prosecutor to the Land of Is. The prosecutor asked Clinton a Yes or No question. Clinton for obvious reasons chose not to answer "Yes" or "No." Notwithstanding, an analysis of Clinton's statement suggests that he was truthful. If "is" means never has been, then "is" equals nothing or "is" = 0. If "is" means there is none then 0 = "is." The propo¬sition "is" = 0 and 0 = "is" is, indeed, a truthful statement. Clinton told the truth, but the truth about what?
The following exchange between a mother and daughter demonstrates The Land of Is technique.
Mom: Your teacher called this afternoon and told me that she suspected you of cheating on an exam. Do you cheat on your exams?
Daughter: I spend two hours a night studying. I study more than anybody I know. People who don't study are the people who have to cheat on exams. I study all the time. Don't accuse me of cheating!
Mom: I'm not accusing you of cheating.
Daughter: Yes, you are!
Mom asked her daughter a simple Yes or No question. Her daughter chose not to respond with a simple "Yes" or "No" answer but, instead, took her mother to the Land of Is by using Misdirection. The daughter changed the focus of the question from her cheating on exams to the amount of time she studies each day. The daughter ended her response with an accusation, which put Mom on the defensive. The topic was no longer about cheating but about Mom making unwarranted accusations. If the daughter cheated on her exams, she would rather talk about her mother making unwarranted accusations than the topic of her cheating on exams. Failure to answer Yes or No questions with "Yes" or "No" answers is a strong indicator of deception.
Mom could have prevented her daughter from going to the Land of Is by first recognizing that the technique was being used and then redirecting the conversation back to the initial topic of inquiry. For example:
Mom: Your teacher called this afternoon and told me that she suspected you of cheating on an exam. Do you cheat on your exams?
Daughter: I spend two hours a night studying. I study more than anybody I know. People who don't study are the people who have to cheat on exams. I study all the time. Don't accuse me of cheating!
Mom: I know you study hard and get good grades. That's not what I asked you. I asked you whether or not you cheat on your exams. Do you cheat on your exams?
Redirecting the conversation back to the initial question forced her daughter to answer the question, "Do you cheat on your exams?" Her daughter must answer "Yes" or "No" or take her mother back to the Land of Is. Failure to answer a Yes or No question with a "Yes" or "No" answer is not conclusive proof of deception, but the probability of deception does increase significantly. If her daughter did not cheat on her exams, answering "No" would not be difficult. The truth is simple. The truth is direct. The truth is not complicated.
The following exchange demonstrates how her daughter would have answered the question if she did not cheat on her exams.
Mom: Your teacher called this afternoon and told me that she suspected you of cheating on an exam. Do you cheat on exams?
Daughter: No. I don't cheat on exams but I know a lot of other kids who do cheat to get good grades.
The daughter answered the Yes or No question with a simple "No" response. Additionally, the daughter was not afraid to talk about other people who do cheat. Truthful people are not afraid to talk about the topic in question; whereas, liars usually want to distance themselves from topics that pose a threat. The book Psychological Narrative Analysis: A Professional Method to Detect Deception in Written and Oral Communications contains a comprehensive list of verbal cues that signal deception.
In another example, Dad suspects his son is using drugs. The best way for parents to find out whether or not their kids are drinking or using drugs is to ask them a direct question.
Dad: Are you using drugs?
Son: Taking drugs is really stupid. Besides, I don't have time to do drugs. I'm either at school or football practice.

Dad: I know you spend a lot of time at school and at football practice. That's not the question I asked. I asked you if you use drugs. Do you use drugs?