Literature DB >> 18465389

Neuroanatomical correlates of malingered memory impairment: event-related fMRI of deception on a recognition memory task.

Jeffrey N Browndyke1, James Paskavitz, Lawrence H Sweet, Ronald A Cohen, Karen A Tucker, Kathleen A Welsh-Bohmer, James R Burke, Donald E Schmechel.   

Abstract

PRIMARY
OBJECTIVE: Event-related, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data were acquired in healthy participants during purposefully malingered and normal recognition memory performances to evaluate the neural substrates of feigned memory impairment. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Pairwise, between-condition contrasts of neural activity associated with discrete recognition memory responses were conducted to isolate dissociable neural activity between normal and malingered responding while simultaneously controlling for shared stimulus familiarity and novelty effects. Response timing characteristics were also examined for any association with observed between-condition activity differences. OUTCOMES AND
RESULTS: Malingered recognition memory errors, regardless of type, were associated with inferior parietal and superior temporal activity relative to normal performance, while feigned recognition target misses produced additional dorsomedial frontal activation and feigned foil false alarms activated bilateral ventrolateral frontal regions. Malingered response times were associated with activity in the dorsomedial frontal, temporal and inferior parietal regions. Normal memory responses were associated with greater inferior occipitotemporal and dorsomedial parietal activity, suggesting greater reliance upon visual/attentional networks for proper task performance.
CONCLUSIONS: The neural substrates subserving feigned recognition memory deficits are influenced by response demand and error type, producing differential activation of cortical regions important to complex visual processing, executive control, response planning and working memory processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18465389      PMCID: PMC2875084          DOI: 10.1080/02699050802084894

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Inj        ISSN: 0269-9052            Impact factor:   2.311


  28 in total

Review 1.  Symptom validity testing: a critical review.

Authors:  K J Bianchini; C W Mathias; K W Greve
Journal:  Clin Neuropsychol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.535

2.  Brain activity during simulated deception: an event-related functional magnetic resonance study.

Authors:  D D Langleben; L Schroeder; J A Maldjian; R C Gur; S McDonald; J D Ragland; C P O'Brien; A R Childress
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Behavioural and functional anatomical correlates of deception in humans.

Authors:  S A Spence; T F Farrow; A E Herford; I D Wilkinson; Y Zheng; P W Woodruff
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2001-09-17       Impact factor: 1.837

4.  Neural correlates of different types of deception: an fMRI investigation.

Authors:  G Ganis; S M Kosslyn; S Stose; W L Thompson; D A Yurgelun-Todd
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  A pilot study of functional magnetic resonance imaging brain correlates of deception in healthy young men.

Authors:  F Andrew Kozel; Letty J Revell; Jeffrey P Lorberbaum; Ananda Shastri; Jon D Elhai; Michael David Horner; Adam Smith; Ziad Nahas; Daryl E Bohning; Mark S George
Journal:  J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.198

6.  Combining voxel intensity and cluster extent with permutation test framework.

Authors:  Satoru Hayasaka; Thomas E Nichols
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information.

Authors:  J Peter Rosenfeld; Matthew Soskins; Gregory Bosh; Andrew Ryan
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.016

8.  Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Tatia M C Lee; Ho-Ling Liu; Li-Hai Tan; Chetwyn C H Chan; Srikanth Mahankali; Ching-Mei Feng; Jinwen Hou; Peter T Fox; Jia-Hong Gao
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios.

Authors:  Ralf Mertens; John J B Allen
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 4.016

10.  A replication study of the neural correlates of deception.

Authors:  Frank Andrew Kozel; Tamara M Padgett; Mark S George
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 1.912

View more
  6 in total

1.  Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to detect the prefrontal cortical responses to deception under different motivations.

Authors:  Fang Li; Huilin Zhu; Qianqian Gao; Guixiong Xu; Xinge Li; Ziqiang Hu; Sailing He
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 3.732

2.  Electrophysiological markers of working memory usage as an index for truth-based lies.

Authors:  Yu-Hui Lo; Philip Tseng
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.282

3.  Lie Detection Using fNIRS Monitoring of Inhibition-Related Brain Regions Discriminates Infrequent but not Frequent Liars.

Authors:  Fang Li; Huilin Zhu; Jie Xu; Qianqian Gao; Huan Guo; Shijing Wu; Xinge Li; Sailing He
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  Do parkinsonian patients have trouble telling lies? The neurobiological basis of deceptive behaviour.

Authors:  Nobuhito Abe; Toshikatsu Fujii; Kazumi Hirayama; Atsushi Takeda; Yoshiyuki Hosokai; Toshiyuki Ishioka; Yoshiyuki Nishio; Kyoko Suzuki; Yasuto Itoyama; Shoki Takahashi; Hiroshi Fukuda; Etsuro Mori
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2009-03-31       Impact factor: 13.501

Review 5.  Memory and self-neuroscientific landscapes.

Authors:  Hans J Markowitsch
Journal:  ISRN Neurosci       Date:  2013-05-14

Review 6.  Effort, symptom validity testing, performance validity testing and traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Erin D Bigler
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 2.311

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.