Is the science of micro-expressions (behavior detecting by TSA agents) junk science?

In the United States, the DHS is pursuing a program that would use sensors to look at nonverbal behaviors, and thereby spot terrorists as they walk through a corridor. The US Department of Defense and intelligence agencies have expressed interest in similar ideas. A growing number of researchers are dubious not just about the projects themselves, but about the science on which they are based.

“Simply put, people (including professional lie catchers with extensive experience of assessing veracity) would achieve similar hit rates if they flipped a coin,” noted a 2007 report from a committee of credibility-assessment experts who reviewed research on portal screening.

“No scientific evidence exists to support the detection or inference of future behavior, including intent,” declares a 2008 report prepared by the JASON defesce advisory group. And the TSA had no business deploying SPOT across the nation’s airports “without first validating the scientific basis for identifying suspicious passengers in an airport environment”, stated a two-year review of the program released on 20 May by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the investigative arm of the US Congress.

In response to such concerns, the TSA has commissioned an independent study that it hopes will produce evidence to show that SPOT works, and the DHS is promising rigorous peer review of its technology program.

For critics, however, this is too little, too late.

Link: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100526/pdf/465412a.pdf