Instant Genius - Body language myths, with Prof Geoff Beattie

Episode Date: May 14, 2023

Want to get better at interpreting body language? Well, most books on the topic are unlikely to help you. At least, that’s the argument of Geoff Beattie, professor of psychology at Edge Hill University. He claims that most stereotypes of non-verbal communication, be it defensive arm-crossing or nervous hair twiddling, are vastly misunderstood. In this episode, Beattie unpacks these body language myths – and also explains science worth paying attention to. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

No one goes to Hank's for his spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza. Lately, though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks Copilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs to help him see if he can afford it. Co-pilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work.

Now, Hank has a line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365Copilot.com slash work. When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed sponsored jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75

sponsored job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs. This podcast is sponsored by name, audio and focal. Streaming has made music more accessible than ever, but true listening is about more than ease. It's about quality. British audio experts name audio, alongside French acoustic specialist focal, combine handcrafted tradition with cutting-edge innovation and high-end materials, delivering digital precision with analogue warmth.

So you can experience exceptional sound at home. Music just as the artist intended. visit name audio.com to learn more. Hello and welcome to Instant Genius, the bite-sized masterclass in podcast form. I'm Thomas Ling, digital editor at BBC Science Focus magazine. Do you want to get better at interpreting body language? Well, most online articles on the topic are not going to help you. That's the argument of my guest today, Jeff Beattie, professor of psychology at Edgehill University.

He claims that most stereotypes of non-verbal communication, be it defensive arm crossing or nervous hair twiddling, are vastly misunderstood. In this episode, BT explains the body language myths to ignore and also the science worth paying attention to. Hi Jeff, welcome to the show. Thank you for having me. So, the business of body language is huge with hundreds and hundreds of body language guidelines. books available to buy. But I guess the big question is, how scientific is the study of body language? Well, there is a science of body language, but as soon as I hear the word body language, it kind of panics me a bit because I suspect you're not, there isn't a science of the kind of body language you

see in the books, and that seems to be almost a separate endeavour. If you look at the psychological literature, there's a massive amount on what's called nonverbal communication. People never call it body language in the science. And we know quite a lot of scientific information about how the body works and how we decode it and what signals we send. But when it comes to body language, I think that's a different thing. I think that people want to know how to read other people. They want to know how to influence other people. And I sometimes think these books are competing with each other to see who can make the most extravagant claims. So in terms of when you read some of these books, there is very little scientific evidence for many of the things they say. And in, in fact,

In fact, it's even worse than that, because I think they start from the wrong assumptions. Because when you pick up a body language book, the first thing you see is photographs of people in action. And the point is, they're not in action, they're not moving, they're not doing anything, and they're not talking. It's people in stationary poses. And unfortunately, in real life, people don't stand like statues. They move and they talk. And if you want to interpret non-verbal communication or body language correctly, you have to pay some attention to all of those connections. So there are many kind of things I see in body language books.

I just think there is no scientific evidence for that whatsoever. Yeah, a lot of these books and research seem to disagree about even the most basic things, such as how many facial expressions humans have. Is this something that you found? I think they're trying to outdo each other. I mean, there was a very famous book called Kinesics and Context on in the 1970s by someone called Ray Burnwistle, who was an academic, who reckoned and there was about 20,000 different facial expressions. But in a book called the definitive book in body language, that number goes up to 250,000.

No, I mean, that's just a weird, extraordinary number. You know, the idea that we could differentiate 250,000 different facial expressions, the latest scientific people I've seen, which is trying to look at decoding, suggests there might be 21. I mean, we sometimes talk about six basic emotions, but 21's quite a big number, but a quarter of a million, that's crazy. And of course, and the idea is, I suppose, the book's saying, look, if you want to understand this incredibly complex speed,

with a quarter of a million different expressions, you need to read this book. I would challenge anyone to describe those quarter of a million different expressions, let alone name them. So what were some of the key factors that a lot of these books ignore? I think you mentioned a few, but it would be great if you could delve into that a little bit more. Well, the thesis behind the books is that you can learn to read people better because the idea is that body language reveals the true self,

and reveals who you really fancy or your emotional state and reveals everything. But at the same time, it tells you how to then manipulate body language for maximum effect. And I always find it quite difficult putting those two things together because if they're so easy to manipulate to act, then they might not be so revealing in the first place. And of course, they want to make it easy.

So they show you stationary posture. So, I mean, if you go to some of the classics, I mean, there's the crotch display, and this is for men, quotes, on the prowl. The idea is you stand with your legs open, your hands in your belt, your crotch, thrust slag me forward, and that's sending you out a powerful signal. And of course, it's quite an easy one to display. I would imagine it's quite difficult to display and look like a human being whilst doing it. But the idea is that that's meant to be one signal that

shows that you're looking for something, you know, and people are supposed to respond appropriately. So that's an easy one. Or steeple, you know, powerful men are meant to lean back in their chair and point their elbows out in an aggressive way. And that's a signal of power and dominance. So that's another one. Or women are meant to twiddle with their hair when they find someone attractive. Although sometimes they stroke their hair, not when they're flirting, but when they're nervous according to the same books. So there are lots of kind of signals about things that you can read and you should do.

I mean, there's one that's quite a common one, which is sometimes called postural echo or postural congrats. The idea is that when people mimic each other's posture, it's meant to show, it's meant to be a really, really powerful signal. Now, the weird thing about this is there is some scientific research behind that, but it's not as compelling as you might find. And again, it has the same, the body language books have the same problem, which is if you watch people in interaction, they sometimes mirror each other's posture. But then they go out of postural congruance and then back in. And of course, well, what's just happened? Were they in agreement for a while and has that agreement broken? Has this bond broken?

Or were they in agreement in the first place? So it's just a bit more complex in these books described. But as someone who scientifically studies this, I argue that there is massive information there if you just know where to look and what to look for. and you don't start with a mind that's kind of been, I'm trying to think of the right word here, polluted by these folks, really, because if you start off looking for the steeple or the crotch displayer

or just postural congruance, you may be getting it very badly wrong, and even worse, if you start mimicking these things and try to get the effect you're looking for, it just can be a big disaster. But of course, I'm sure we've all been in social situations where you see sometimes I catch people. The point about postural congruence in the real world is it's almost instantaneous.

When you see it really, it's really instantaneous. But I love the idea that there's a whole set of people out there in the world who think it's a powerful signal to send. They want to bond with someone. And you see them trying to copy it. But there's a delay in their action. And I think sometimes that's one of the biggest telltale signs of all. That's a sign that someone's read the book. It's not a sign of anything else.

Yeah, that's really interesting what you're saying there about there's quite a lot of non-verbal information out there to glean from if you wanted to and if you're trained to do it. What about that common adage that only a few percentage of all our communication is verbal and the rest is non-verbal? Is that a great big myth in itself? Unfortunately, it's a bit of a myth, really. It's based on research that was done quite a while ago by someone called Albert Moraine, an American psychologist. And what he did was he took individual words and had them delivered in different tones of voices. And then some of them, he showed them with facial expression. It wasn't even a video recording.

It was a picture of the facial expression. And he reckoned that the verbal content was about 7% of the total message, the nonverbal, the tone and the facial expression about 93%. And then a very well-known social psychologist from the University of Oxford called Michael Argyll did a similar study this time using video where he had people deliver. a message and they were delivered in other, so they were friendly or on friendly messages or superior or inferior delivered in different non-verbal styles. He found that again the non-verbal, the tone, the facial expression, etc., outweighed the verbal bar by the factor of 12.5 to 1. So again, that's where it comes from. But the Moravian study, he was obviously flawed. The Argyll study, why was that flawed? Well, first of all, if you're going to draw a general conclusion

about body language and nonverbal communication in the world, how many people sending the message would you need to use? You need to use what? Thousands, certainly hundreds. Argal used one. He had one person sending the message. He had different decoders, of course, but just one person. And I quote, an attractive female student age 23.

So we don't even know if it generalizes to all attractive men aged 55 or anything else. It's like an extraordinary, the biased study. So I don't think that conclusion about it's all body language really works. It doesn't generalize to other utterances. Experiments were very biased. It's much more complicated than that. And yet, some of the work I'm doing in some domains say that the nonverbal accompaniments are incredibly powerful, but you have to measure them the right way.

So as a blanket thing, which is it's 12 and a half times, that doesn't work. but in specific demands you sometimes find that components of body language have a massive effect. But I think that that little story I think just highlights, I think when you go to body language books, you have to go with a degree of cynicism. And all the time you have to think is, what does this science actually say about this particular thing? And sometimes the science just doesn't support it. Do you have to also consider that body language isn't necessarily the same across,

all cultures? It's certainly not the same across all cultures. Different cultures of different rules about social distance, about eye gaze and how eye gaze has to be used, different repertoires of gestural movements, different rules of conversation in gestural movements. Some cultures, people will actually inhibit the hand movements so the other person stop them taking the floor. So it's vastly different across cultures. And this notion that there is a kind of Western view. view of body language, which is meant to be, you know, the norm, which we generalise to every culture, just doesn't hold up. There are very specific rules and regulations about non-verbals used. And yet, sometimes, again, if you know where to look, there are kind of deeper aspects

of non-verbal communication, which are incredibly similar across cultures. And I'm talking about things like micro-expressions and some of the kind of conceptual gestures that people use, which are incredibly similar. I did some work on Arabic and English looking at some kind of conceptual, what are called, iconic gestures. And the similarities were incredible for talking about aspects of the world.

The movements were very, very similar. And yet, you have to always be aware of culture, class-based, even generational-based differences in the use of body language. Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goal. because we're built for what you're building.

Fit for your ambition for citizens' bank. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean front room.

Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expect. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. This podcast is sponsored by Name, Audio and Focal.

With over 100 years of combined expertise, Name and Focal have been bringing music to listeners just as the artist intended. Since day one, this mantra has shaped every innovation in high-fi design, technology and acoustic engineering, balancing craftsmanship and tradition with pioneering thinking. Name audio pushes cutting-edge technology

to ensure digital precision whilst sustaining Pratt, pace, rhythm and timing, the elusive quality that makes music feel alive and gives it emotional texture. Today, in partnership with French acoustic specialist focal, name audio creates systems that deliver exceptional sound and unforgettable listening experiences at home.

Try it for yourself at a focal powered by name boutique. Visit vocal powered by name.com for more information. So overall, I take it that the accuracy of body language interpretation, you know, if you're not trained, it wouldn't be high enough of a standard to stand up in a courtroom, for instance. You'd have to be quite well trained for this sort of stuff. Well, what does stand up in courtrooms is sometimes courts are specifically interested in a kind of microanalysis of what happens. But you have to be quite practiced at it. But that does doesn't mean to say people can't get practiced at it. I mean, again, with the kind of experiments I do, I sometimes play little clips of behaviour to people and ask them to comment on things

or what do they see or how do they interpret stuff. So I did some experimental work looking at. When people speak, they often make spontaneous movements of the hands, as I do all the time, of course. And these hand movements, there are different types. There are some called iconic gestures. And iconic gestures, you're talking about something. And the gesture kind of kind of conundated. next to the speech you're talking about. And they're pretty obvious ones. And sometimes the gestures can be more abstract. We call those not surprisingly metaphoric gestures.

But sometimes they'd be quite subtle little things. They're just little handflicks and so on. So I do some experimental work where I show people videos of people talking. And then I ask them questions. I talk about, you know, someone's talking about someone running along and they do a little hand flick. And I said, what direction are they running in? When people go, no idea he didn't say.

and other people saying he was running this way, from left to right. They've picked up on this tiny, tiny movement. They're sensitive to those kind of movements, which is really interesting. And the differences between people, the individual difference, are massive,

whether people are sensitive to kind of subtle movements or not. And I've done some work using eye tracking when people talk to people in conversation. Some people focus, you know, we're normally thought to focus on the eyes. But some people, once the hand starts moving just slightly away from the face, their eyes are drawn automatically to that,

and they're picking up the movement and decoding the movement. And that suggests to me, because of people's different socialisation, different background experiences, some people are tuned into some of these cues, which are very powerful and important cues, and other people are not. But the question is,

can you train people to be more sensitive to the important cues? And the answer is you can. So people can pick up on this. But it's not the big macro cues. It's not the crotch disqual cues. It's not the crotch. clay. It's not steeple. It's kind of much more subtle little hand movements and eye movements and so on.

Because again, of course, not surprisingly, the eyes connect to what we're saying as well. When we go into a period of planning what we're going to say, the eyes, we avert, I guess, temporarily, and then look back. And again, that is a kind of subtle cue that there's something cognitively going on there, which could be really interesting to know. So that's really, really interesting. And it kind of sets me up for the question that I think everyone wants to know about, which is what are the key ways that a person's hand gestures might reveal hidden thought? You know, what sort of things could people be looking out for? Well, the first thing they should be looking out for is a mismatch between what people are saying and what they're doing with their hands, because it's really interesting. Because what's interesting

about speech is that when we're lying, if we're a pretty good liar, we rehearse what we're going to say. the lie on things that we've done before. Someone says what did you do last night? And you've got something there you don't want to reveal. You think about a previous night out and you kind of based it around that. You use fragments of the truth. Of course you do. I have never met a human being yet who practices what their hand movements are going to be doing.

Because the point about hand movements, these spontaneous movements, is their unconscious. We know the hands are doing something. If you ask me, I know my hands are moving. If you say to me exactly what movements have been made there, I wouldn't be able to tell you. So these are unconscious, but generally alongside speech. And what's interesting is when people talk sometimes, the hand movements simply don't match what they're saying in this speech. So I've got clips of people talking about closeness in relationships. And what's really interesting, if people talk about themselves and their partner, they use this thing in front of them called the gestural space in a systematic way.

So if you're really loved up with someone, you'll go, you know, myself and my partner. With your hands very close. You have the hands very close. And it's weird to watch, but it does happen. We use this gestural space systematically. So if someone's saying they're really close, but the hands aren't indicated closeness, that to me would be a cue that there's something going on there.

So that would be one type of cue. And that's called a gesture speech mismatch. And there's some really good scientific evidence on that. But there's another really interesting cue with the hands to deception, which is if you ask people how they can tell someone lying. Everyone goes for the eyes, of course, or the face. And the problem is we know that people are going to be looking at this closely when we lie. So we're trying to get our eye contact right. We're trying not to look too shifty, you know, we're trying to control our eyes. And we're trying to control

our facial expression. You know, it's hard sometimes. And there are cues in the face, but they're not as obvious as you might think. But what's really interesting is when people are lying, they will often inhibit their hand movements. It's almost as if we unconsciously know they can give too much away. And the best behavioral signs of deception seem to be this attempt to control the body. It's almost if we're trying to dampen down the number of different behaviors we do. There are fewer foot movements when people are deceiving

and fewer hand movements. So people do try and dampen it down. And I did some research into this myself a few years ago with some colleagues. And we find it's really interesting in that there are fewer hand movements, fewer gestural movements when people are deceiving. But there are some gestures.

In other words, it looks a bit too odd if you inhibit all the time, so there are some, but there are fewer of them. This matches do occur, by the way. So people are talking about events and the gesture doesn't match the speech. But one other really odd thing happens as well, which is when people are gesturing, there are different what are called phases of a gesture. We move the hand into position to make the gestural movement. That's called the preparation phase. Then there's something called a pre-stroke hold. It's temporarily stationary.

Then we do the meaningful bit of the gesture, and that's called the stroke phase, and then something called a post-stroke hold, stationary again, and then the retraction phase. So five phases. When people are lying, two weird things happen, apart from the fact that they make fewer gestures. The stroke phase of the gesture, the meaningful bit, gets much shorter. So it's almost as if they want to do something, but they want to do it quickly and get it over with. and the probability of a post-stroke hold decreases dramatically

so once they do the gesture, they get the hand back to the body as quickly as possible. So there are weirdly interesting differences in the kind of action sequence of displaying the gesture. As I say, they're less frequent and when they are displayed,

they're done slightly differently. So there are cues there. But of course, the point about deception, and again, this is the health warning, I think with reading deception cues. It's all relative to the individual. If you want to tell someone's lying, you have to have a baseline of their behavior.

You have to know how often they gesture. Because some people gesture much more than others. Some people hardly gesture at all. So if you're trying to read the cues, get the baseline, work out their gestural frequency, ask them about the thing, question, does the gesture decrease in frequency? Is there a mismatch?

And when they do gesture, how long or short is it? A normal gesture, I mean, sometimes they're less than a second, you know, about 800 to 900 milliseconds, but when they're lying, 300 milliseconds, really quick little gestures. So there are cues there, but it's all in the action sequence. Could these sorts of cues only reveal one layer of deception, though? You know, and what actually counts as deception? So, for instance, if you were to ask me now, if I want to eat a big slice a cake, a big part of me would say, yes, you know, absolutely, you know, but not wanting to appear greedy, I might say no to you with my hand gestures indicating I'm being deceptive. However, you know,

at the same time, another voice might be in my head saying, actually having that cake isn't a good idea, it will spoil your dinner, right? So in that respect, is body language analysis only really good at showing that immediate lay of deception, you know, what someone's knee-jerk thoughts are, not what they would truly think if they were actually to give some time to that issue in their head. Yeah, no, it's a very interesting question because it does just reflect at that moment in time. And of course, the whole point is lying or deception here is about the intention to deceive. So, but you're absolutely right. Sometimes we do give an answer and then, well, afterwards, number of complicated things happen. A, we come up with a different answer, but sometimes we

rationalise or justify why we give that answer in the first list. We do a lot of cognitive work. And a lot of my work is exactly into that domain. The Nobel laureate, Daniel Kahneman, calls those system one and system two. We have this automatic quick response, which is system one, and then this more rational response system two. And I'm really interested in the relationship between those two systems. But what these cues to deceptions are picking up is, Let me emphasize, there is no single behavioral indicator of deception, but there is indicators of the conditions

associated with deceptions and the emotional aspects of deception. And the gesture stuff I'm talking about is almost, I think it's a kind of unconscious desire to dampen down behavior, which is self-execute to these kind of things. And I think what you're looking for is that kind of emotional and cognitive aspects of the insulin, instant response. So in other words, do you feel a degree of discomfort when you're turning down the cake because you know you secretly want it? So there might be a cue there. And secondly, are you thinking

about it more than normal? Because if you definitely know you don't want it, it should be instantaneous. And there's sometimes cues in those microposes when people answer. They can be very revealing, because sometimes it's very hard to speed up your mental activity to sound exactly right. So again, it's a bit like the gestural stuff. There are cues there. But what we're thinking about is we're thinking about the response at that moment in time. We're thinking about the emotions associated with lying. We're thinking about the cognitions associated with lying.

Because if you ask someone where they've been last night and they're lying and they haven't rehearsed it well, there's going to be pauses there. And what I always like to tell people is when we talk about pauses, we always say, well, I sometimes hear pauses. about 40% of all spontaneous speech is pauses distributed in particular ways. But you can get pretty good at detecting slight variations in those pauses. So again, that can be a very useful cue. And as I say, sometimes with behavioral cues, it's almost as if our unconscious self

as trying to restrict the information we send. And that's why the gesture is an important cue. How can you tell a fake smile from a genuine one? Well, Fakes Miles and Jeddah wants are, it's a critical aspect of being a human being because all the stuff on all those body language books with 250,000 different expressions, I would give someone a slightly more useful tip, which is, look, the point about people in real life is they're often trying to disguise their emotions. They're often trying to camouflage themselves in some way.

And they're often trying to mask how they feel. And the way human beings do that is they use the commonest mask of all. which is a smile. And the beautiful thing about a smile is we can do it intentionally. We can all smile intentionally. And yet sometimes smiles can reflect a genuine and underlying emotional state. So the first tip in trying to decode human beings accurately is distinguishing those two types of smiles. And genuine smiles involve the muscles around the eyes in a way that fake smiles or masking smiles don't.

but the single best cue distinguishing the two is watch how it leaves the face because a fake smile, a masking smile, leaves the face very quickly. It goes on the face quickly and leaves abruptly.

And when you get used to looking at for it, you can pick up on it all the time. Just watch celebrities on television being interviewed and watch when they're smart. They're very good at smiling, but watch the smile fading. And then the secret is to look for the micro expression, the little expression underneath that masking smile

and you'll be able to decode how they feel at that point in time. So that's probably the single best tip into kind of reading people more accurately, which is learn to distinguish those two types of smiles. And when someone smiles, don't think, oh my goodness, they're so happy. We smile when we're so happy and when we're so sad, so afraid, and so many other things as well.

Being able to distinguish those two types of smile are absolutely critical to this. I think, I think, I think quite a lot is made in these body language books about when people are sort of touching their face while they're talking or while someone else is talking. Could that be suggestive of anything? Well, that's quite sinister Thomas because as you asked that question, I started touching my chin. According to the body language books, it should be because I'm more sure of myself. I was just checking to see whether I'd cheer properly this morning. There is quite a lot of stuff on that. And actually, there is a little bit of Santa. evidence on what are called self-adaptors, which are self-comfording movements.

So sometimes people do self-comfort with a kind of touching movement. And there is a little bit of interesting research on that. In fact, the guy, one of the pioneers of the scientific study of body language guy called Paul Ekman, he included self-adaptives as one important category of hand movements. So there is a little bit of evidence that self-adaptives increase onto certain states. But again, one has to be careful because the problem is that sometimes the hand naturally touches, the face and it's not necessarily, it's not necessarily that significant. So again, like everything, you have to study the, you know, the timing, how it changed from the

baseline, because some people kind of systematically play with their ears more than other people. They fiddle with their hair more than other people. So with the accuracy of your body language, you're looking for change all the time. You're looking at how things might connect to what they're talking about or something. sensitive topics. And for the life of me, I can't think of how that question, which I was anticipated, as you were moving on to that question, would have elicited it on certain DNA. Because I think people also hold their chin at sometimes as a way of trying to look more

learner or something. It was really interesting what you were just saying about people with body language that are changing from their norm, because I was going to ask about people having their arms folded. You know, so the classic thing is that if someone has their arms folded, they're trying to sort of self-soothe. And I was going to ask basically for me, if I were hypothetically to have a partner who was to sort of fold their arms quite a lot when we're walking together and talking, should I be worried about that? It doesn't seem to be like a good sign to me. But if what you're saying is, if it's not a change for the norm, I don't have a lot to worry about. If it's not a change from the norm, I, I, I don't have a

change from the norm. For body language, it's all contextually driven. So you have to work out what the context is. So if you're talking about your relationship and she folds her arms, that's a different signal altogether. Some people like to sit again with their arms folded. Some people don't. And again, sometimes it's interesting being more aware of one's own body language. So sometimes over the years, I found myself, if I fold my arm, I kind of laugh to myself and think, Was there anything in the conversation, anything in my thoughts, which may have connected with that? But there is such massive individual variation in that as in anything else. So I think the guide to being a good reader of body language is be aware of your circumstances and situation, the context, the conversation, the changes.

I think it's those kind of things. I mean, sometimes these movements in context do have considerable significance, but it's a dead. identifying what seems to be connected with it. That was Professor Jeff Beattie from the Psychology Department at Edgehill University, talking us through the Science of Body Language. Thank you for listening to this episode of Instant Genius, brought to you by the team behind BBC Science Focus magazine, which you can find on sale now in supermarkets and newsagents as well as your preferred app store.

You can, of course, also find us online at ScienceFocus.com. This podcast is sponsored by Name, Audio and Focal. The texture and emotional depth of music can be lost through digital sources or poor signal. Name Audio believes you can have digital precision with analogue warmth. Alongside French acoustic specialist focal, name creates high-end audio systems, combining innovation with craftsmanship, so you can listen to music, just as the artist intended. Discover more at Name Audio.com. Did you know if your windows are bare, indoor temperatures can go up 20 degrees.

Get ahead of summer with custom window treatments like solar roller shades from blinds.com and save up to 45% during the Memorial Day Early Access sale. Whether you want to DIY it or have a pro handle everything, we've got you. Free samples, real design experts, and zero pressure. Just help when you need it. Shop up to 45% off site wide right now during the early access Memorial Day sale at blinds.com. Rules and restrictions apply. Hey, sweetie, your mother showed me this Carvana thing for selling the car.

I'm going to give it a try. Wish me luck. Me again, I put in the license plate. It gave me an offer. Unbelievable. Okay, I accepted the offer. They're picking it up Tuesday from the driveway. I haven't even left my chair.

It's done. The car is gone. I'm holding a check. Anyway, Carvana. Give it a whirl. Love you. So good, you'll want to leave a voicemail about it. Sell your car today on...

Carvana. Pick up fees may apply.