If you’re a Traitors fan screaming at the TV telling faithful contestants they’re stupid for trusting the enemy – scientists have news for you.
The process of how we judge trustworthiness in social situations is different to what was once thought, they say – and can be misleading.
Researchers at the University of Aberdeen say their findings could reveal why the traitors are proving so elusive.
In the game, the faithful players must try to eliminate the traitors, while the traitors try to evade detection and pick off the faithful. And all the while, every player is trying to convince the others they are “100% faithful”.
The study found that when somebody meets a group of people, they judge their trustworthiness by combining their facial features together into one “composite face”.
‘There’s just something about them I don’t trust’
Rather than meticulously examining each single individual face, we blend the trustworthiness impressions of all the faces to get the gist of the group, according to the research.
This process – termed “ensemble perception” – happens in about a quarter of a second, the researchers found.
It is thought to be useful as it allows people to quickly extract perceived social information.
Advertisement
But it can also take us down the wrong path in the blink of an eye (take note, faithfuls).
“Trustworthiness impressions of a group can potentially influence our behaviour towards that group,” researcher and postgraduate student Fiammetta Marini said.
“But it is important to remember that we are only talking about facial features. Maybe what it really shows is that we should focus on what people do as opposed to judgements about whether we like the look of them.
“This can explain why people may say things like ‘there’s just something about them I don’t trust’ or ‘I don’t trust any of them’.
“And yes – it may explain why the traitors are proving so elusive.”
Image: The Traitors contestant Harry. Pic: Studio Lambert/Mark Mainz/BBC
Traitor or trustworthy? Don’t be fooled by a ‘surprised’ face
We subconsciously judge if someone is trustworthy based on their facial characteristics, Ms Marini said – despite these markers not being accurate or reliable.
For example, high eyebrows that seem “surprised looking” and a U-shaped mouth are usually seen as trustworthy, while close-set eyes or lower eyebrows are not.
These impressions of trustworthiness are not accurate enough to be relied on as foundations for real-world decision-making, Ms Marini said.
She added: “Regardless – we make these split-second judgements and they have a big impact in our everyday lives. Even if these impressions are not always accurate they invariably shape our social behaviour.”
The study, published in the journal Cognition, found that split-second judgements could have implications for witness identification line-ups in police investigations.
The findings may also be applied to understanding how people judge the trustworthiness of members of a political party.
The Metropolitan Police is looking into reports that Prince Andrew asked an officer to help with an attempted smear campaign against the woman who accused him of sexual assault.
Andrewreportedlytried to get his personal protection officer to dig up dirt for a smear campaign against Virginia Giuffre back in 2011, according to the Mail on Sunday.
The Met Police said it was “actively looking into the claims made”.
The prince – who gave up his Duke of York title on Friday – has been approached for comment.
Meanwhile, it has been reported Prince William is planning to take a “ruthless approach” towards Andrew when he is king. The Sunday Times suggests William will ban his uncle from “all aspects of royal life” because of the ongoing risk to the Royal Family‘s reputation after a series of damaging revelations.
A US lawyer has predicted the scandal engulfing the royal “is not going away” and more stories will “leak out”.
Gloria Allred, who represents many of the victims of the late Jeffrey Epstein, believes Andrew will not be “let off the hook” over his links to the convicted paedophile.
“This is not going away. Even though he’s no longer a duke, and Sarah Ferguson is no longer a duchess, it’s not going away,” she told Sky News.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Andrew relinquished his Duke of York title and remaining honours on Friday evening, after a series of fresh stories linked to the late Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein. She died in April, aged 41, with her family saying she “lost her life to suicide”.
Andrew will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.
Asked whether the government had plans to legislate to remove Andrew’s titles, Energy Security Ed Miliband told Sky’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips programme that they would be “guided by the palace” and the Royal Family.
“I think it’s really important as a government minister that we allow the Royal Family to make its decisions on these questions,” he added.
“Prince Andrew has given up these titles by agreement with His Majesty the King and I think that’s, you know, that’s obviously the position.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:48
Prince Andrew urged ‘to come clean’
‘It’s not over’
Ms Giuffre alleged she was forced to have sex with Andrew when she was 17 – allegations he has always denied.
Ms Allred said: “The fact that Virginia is now deceased – may she rest in peace – doesn’t mean it’s over for Prince Andrew. It’s not over. More will come to leak out.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Reports of attempted smear campaign
It has now been reported that Andrew passed Ms Giuffre’s date of birth and social security number to his taxpayer-funded bodyguard in 2011, asking him to investigate.
He is said to have emailed the late Queen’s then-deputy press secretary and told him of his request to his protection officer, and also suggested Ms Giuffre had a criminal record, the Mail on Sunday reported.
A Met Police spokesperson told Sky News: “We are aware of media reporting and are looking into the claims made.”
The prince’s alleged attempt, on which the Met officer is not said to have acted, came in 2011, hours before the publication of the famous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Ms Giuffre in London, which he has claimed was doctored.
The Mail on Sunday said it obtained the email from disclosures held by the US congress.
“It would also seem she has a criminal record in the states,” Andrew said to the former press secretary, according to one email published by the newspaper. “I have given her DoB and social security number for investigation with XXX the on duty PPO.”
Ms Giuffre’s family responded, the newspaper said, saying she did not have a criminal record.
In her book, titled Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir Of Surviving Abuse And Fighting For Justice, she wrote, according to The Telegraph: “As devastating as this interview was for Prince Andrew, for my legal team it was like an injection of jet fuel.
“Its contents would not only help us build an ironclad case against the prince but also open the door to potentially subpoenaing his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, and their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.”
Image: The Duke of York and the Prince of Wales at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral last month. Pic: PA
Andrew, who remains a prince and continues to live in the Crown Estate property Royal Lodge, said on Friday that the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family”.
He insisted he was putting his “family and country first” and would stop using “my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me”.
Ms Allred told Sky News she felt Andrew’s statement on Friday, describing the scandal as a “distraction”, was an “insult” to Epstein’s victims.
“What it’s saying [the statement] is it’s continued bad PR for the monarchy,” she said.
“All right, I’m happy about this small consequence that he has to pay… no longer a duke, but look, he’s living a privileged life while many victims are still suffering from the harm that was done by many people involved with Jeffrey Epstein.”
Ms Giuffre’s family has urged the King to go further and take away Andrew’s prince title.
Pete Aitken says his daughter Hannah would still be alive if she hadn’t been sent to a series of “failing” mental health hospitals, which made her increasingly unwell.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
Hannah Aitken was 22 when she took her own life two years ago. Her death has left her family in turmoil.
“I think about Hannah every hour of every day, more than once, every hour, every day,” her dad Pete said.
Throughout the family home are photos, candles and purple flowers, Hannah’s favourite colour. Her parents have planted a tree in the garden where her beloved trampoline once stood.
Image: Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah died by suicide in 2023
Hannah had autism and ADHD and struggled with her mental health. In 2017, she was sent to Huntercombe Hospital-Stafford. It was in special measures when she arrived.
Pete says the unit made Hannah worse. “I don’t believe that they gave her any care or treatment there that helped her.”
Over a period of four years, Hannah was sent to six different mental health hospitals. The majority were publicly funded and privately run.
Three were rated by the care regulator, the CQC, either ‘inadequate or ‘requires improvement’. Two of the units were closed down while Hannah was a patient.
“That to me is an indication of how bad the system is, and how bad the care that she received was,” Pete said.
“All they could do was… like prison keep her safe, but not give her any quality of life. They took all that away from her.”
Image: ‘I don’t believe that they gave her any care’, Pete says
Hannah emailed Sky News in 2023 following one of our reports to share her story.
She wrote: “I will never forget what I was put through… I put up with so much and it’s only now I realised it wasn’t right, for years I blamed myself.”
Hannah never fully recovered from her hospital admissions. In September 2023, she took a fatal dose of poison, which she had bought online.
Her family are now campaigning for a change in the law governing poisons.
Image: Family photos of Hannah Aitken, who died in 2023
Her dad said: “One gram of this poison is lethal. We found out from Hannah’s inquest she ordered a kilogramme of 99.6% purity.
“There is a legitimate use for it, but we understand that the concentration for that is something like less than 1%.”
Hannah’s death once again raises questions about why the NHSoutsources mental health services to failing private providers.
An NHS England spokesperson said: “Our thoughts are with Hannah’s family at this incredibly difficult time.
“The NHS has repeatedly made clear that all services must provide safe, high-quality care, irrespective of whether they are NHS or independent sector-led, and we continue to work closely with the CQC to monitor, identify and take appropriate action where it is needed.”
Elli Investments Group, the owners of The Huntercombe Group until 2021, has said they regret that these hospitals, which were independently managed, failed to meet expectations
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK
Prince William is planning to take a “ruthless approach” towards Prince Andrew when he is king, according to reports, as a US lawyer predicts the scandal engulfing the royal “is not going away” and more stories will “leak out”.
The Sunday Times suggests William will ban his uncle from “all aspects of royal life” because of the ongoing risk to the Royal Family‘s reputation after a series of damaging revelations.
It comes amid reports that Andrewtried to get the Metropolitan Police to dig up dirt for a smear campaign against his sexual assault accuser Virginia Giuffre back in 2011.
Gloria Allred, who represents many of the victims of the late convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, believes he will not be “let off the hook”.
“This is not going away. Even though he’s no longer a duke, and Sarah Ferguson is no longer a duchess, it’s not going away,” the US lawyer told Sky News.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Andrew relinquished his Duke of York title and remaining honours on Friday evening, after a series of fresh stories linked to the late Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein. She died in April, aged 41, with her family saying said she “lost her life to suicide”.
She alleged she was forced to have sex with Andrew when she was 17, allegations he has always denied.
“The fact that Virginia is now deceased – may she rest in peace – doesn’t mean it’s over for Prince Andrew. It’s not over. More will come to leak out,” Ms Allred added.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Reports of attempted smear campaign
It has now been reported that Andrew passed Ms Giuffre’s date of birth and social security number to his taxpayer-funded bodyguard in 2011, asking him to investigate.
He is said to have emailed the late Queen’s then-deputy press secretary and told him of his request to his protection officer, and also suggested Ms Giuffre had a criminal record, according to the Mail on Sunday.
Sky News has contacted the Met for comment. A spokesperson for the force told the PA news agency: “We are aware of media reporting and are looking into the claims made.”
The prince’s alleged attempt, on which the Met officer is not said to have acted, came in 2011, hours before the publication of the famous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Ms Giuffre in London, which he has claimed was doctored.
The Mail on Sunday said it obtained the email from disclosures held by the US congress.
“It would also seem she has a criminal record in the states,” Andrew said to the former press secretary, according to one email published by the newspaper. “I have given her DoB and social security number for investigation with XXX the on duty PPO.”
Ms Giuffre’s family responded, saying she did not have a criminal record, the newspaper said.
In her book, titled Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir Of Surviving Abuse And Fighting For Justice, she wrote, according to The Telegraph: “As devastating as this interview was for Prince Andrew, for my legal team it was like an injection of jet fuel.
“Its contents would not only help us build an ironclad case against the prince but also open the door to potentially subpoenaing his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, and their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.”
Image: The Duke of York and the Prince of Wales at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral last month. Pic: PA
Andrew, who remains a prince and continues to live in the Crown Estate property Royal Lodge, said on Friday that the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family”.
He insisted he was putting his “family and country first” and would stop using “my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me”.
Ms Allred told Sky News she felt Andrew’s statement on Friday, describing the scandal as a “distraction”, was an “insult” to Epstein’s victims.
“What it’s saying [the statement] is it’s continued bad PR for the monarchy,” she said.
“All right, I’m happy about this small consequence that he has to pay… no longer a duke, but look, he’s living a privileged life while many victims are still suffering from the harm that was done by many people involved with Jeffrey Epstein.”