If you’ve watched the recent BBC series The Traitors, you may remember Rachel talking about her “FBI training” and her ability to spot when people are lying by reading micro-expressions. It made for great television, but it also sparked a lot of questions. How real is this? Is it something only elite professionals can do? And what does it actually mean for people working alone, often in unpredictable or high-risk situations?

This is an area I’ve been talking about and weaving into personal safety training for many years. Not as a party trick, and certainly not as a way to “catch people out”, but as a way of helping people understand why they sometimes feel uneasy in certain interactions and why that feeling matters.

Much of the public conversation around micro-expressions comes from the work of psychologist Dr Paul Ekman, whose research into facial expressions helped demonstrate that certain emotional expressions are universal and often leak out involuntarily, sometimes for just a fraction of a second. His work famously inspired the TV series Lie to Me, which dramatised the idea that trained observers could spot deception by noticing tiny changes in facial movement. In reality, the science is far more nuanced, and far more useful, than the TV version suggests.

For lone workers, the relevance isn’t really about detecting lies. It’s about understanding risk signals. When someone says “I don’t know why, but something didn’t feel right”, they are often describing a subconscious response to changes in tone, posture, facial expression, proximity, or behaviour. Most people already pick up on these cues instinctively. What training can do is give language, validation, and permission to act on those instincts, rather than dismissing them because they can’t be logically explained.

What was interesting in The Traitors was that Rachel appeared to use the idea of micro-expression training almost as a form of authority or leverage, something she could talk about, rather than something she was actively applying with scientific precision. She later referenced having completed a short online course, something that, in fairness, anyone can do. Even Dr Ekman’s own materials are openly available online. But this highlights an important point: this isn’t secret knowledge, and it certainly isn’t a superpower.

And that’s exactly why it matters for personal safety.

In lone-working roles, risk rarely arrives announced. It builds subtly, a shift in mood, an inconsistency in behaviour, a sudden change in emotional tone. Workers don’t need to “analyse faces” to be safe. They need to trust that their discomfort is information, not weakness. Training should never suggest that people can predict harm or accurately read intentions, but it can help them recognise early warning signs, respond proportionately, and disengage sooner.

This is why, in my training, micro-expressions and behavioural cues are always framed carefully. They are not about interrogation or manipulation. They are about awareness, boundaries, and decision-making. They sit alongside practical skills like dynamic risk assessment, exit planning, and understanding escalation, not instead of them.

If you’re curious, Paul Ekman’s work is widely available, including background on facial expressions and emotional leakage, and even the material that inspired Lie to Me:
👉 https://www.paulekman.com/projects/lie-to-me/

But the takeaway for lone workers is simple:
You don’t need FBI training to stay safer. You already notice more than you think. Good personal safety training helps you understand why you notice it and gives you the confidence to act when something doesn’t feel right.

And that’s not television drama. That’s everyday risk management.