Poker Players' Arms Give Away Their Hands

Volunteers who watched video of pro poker players could discern the quality of the cards in play by how the players moved their arms when adding chips to the pot. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A good “poker face” can hide the quality of your cards. But your arms might still be giving away your hands. That’s the finding of a study to come out in the journal Psychological Science. [Michael L. Slepian et al., Quality of Professional Players’ Poker Hands is Perceived Accurately from Arm Motions, link to come]

Volunteers watched videos of the World Series of Poker. The videos were edited so the subjects saw one of three different views of the players: the poker players’ entire bodies from the table up, or just the players’ faces or just the players’ arms pushing chips into the pot. “When participants were watching chips being pushed into the center of the table by the players, it was only then could they accurately perceive how good a hand was better than chance. They couldn’t do it for the whole body and if anything they were worse from just watching the face.” Michael Slepian, a psychology doctoral student at Stanford University, and a co-author of the study. 

No pros were among the video watchers. But there’s some evidence that, as might be expected, they’d be even better at catching arm cues. “In one of our studies, the more participants were familiar with poker—even though they were all novices—the better they did.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe