For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices. Análisis de la comunicación no verbal: los peligros de la pseudociencia en entornos de seguridad y justicia R E S U M E N Para los profesionales de la seguridad y la justicia (policías, abogados, jueces), los miles de artículos revisados por pares sobre comunicación no verbal representan fuentes importantes de conocimiento. Sin embargo, a pesar del alcance del trabajo científico realizado sobre este tema, los profesionales pueden recurrir a programas, métodos y enfoques que no reflejan el estado real de la ciencia. El objetivo de este artículo es examinar (i) los conceptos de comunicación no verbal transmitidos por estos programas, métodos y enfoques, pero también (ii) las consecuencias de su uso (por ejemplo, sobre la vida o la libertad de las personas). Para lograr estos objetivos, describimos el alcance de la investigación científica sobre la comunicación no verbal. Se examina un programa (SPOT: Evaluación de pasajeros mediante técnicas de observación), un método (BAI: Entrevista de análisis de conducta) y un enfoque (sinergología) que contradicen el estado de la ciencia. Finalmente, presentamos cinco hipótesis para explicar por qué algunas organizaciones en los campos de la seguridad y la justicia están recurriendo a la pseudociencia y a las técnicas pseudocientíficas. Concluimos el artículo invitando a estas organizaciones a trabajar con la comunidad académica internacional especializada en la investigación sobre comunicación no verbal y detección de mentiras (y verdad) para implementar prácticas basadas en la evidencia.

No abstract

No abstract

Most of the Linguiste who have recently studied insuit recognise (more or less explicitly) that it cannot be dealt with in a strictly semantic fashion, as pragmatic factors are central to the issue (see for instance Fisher, 1995; Siblot 1995; Lagorgette 2002, 2003; Rosier et Ernotte 2001, etc.). This study focuses on the sociopragmatic, interactional dimension of insults. Our reflection covers on the one hand a very social point of view aiming at spelling out the perception of insults by speakers of Quebec French; our corpus shows that utterances containing either form "insulter" and "insultant" refer more often to actions than to words. On the other hand, a more pragmatic point of view is developed, showing how insulting fomns function within conversational contexts. The absence of an answer when axiological forms are used in family interactions (the items belonging therefore to an interzone between ritual and personal insults) leads to reconsider the status of such exchanges. We propose that it would be theoretically productive to think of insults as a zone within a continuum going from mockery to reproach and accusation (Laforest 2002), which would enable one to understand the different meanings associated by speakers to the feeling of "being insulted". A further advantage would be that threats (as perceived) as a social act could be measured on a scale of intentions rather than on that of vulgarity.

No abstract