Literature DB >> 18633835

Towards clinical trials of lie detection with fMRI.

J G Hakun1, K Ruparel, D Seelig, E Busch, J W Loughead, R C Gur, D D Langleben.   

Abstract

Recent reports of successful fMRI-based discrimination between lie and truth in single subjects raised the interest of prospective users and a public concern about the potential scope of this technology. The increased scrutiny highlighted the lack of controlled "real life", i.e. prospective clinical trials of this technology that conform to the common standards of medical device development. The ethics of conducting such trials given the paucity of data on fMRI-based lie detection has also been questioned. To probe the potential issues of translating the laboratory research into practice, we conducted a case study in which we adapted the standard Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT), a well-established model of producing deception, to the common scenario of lying on a resume. The task consisted of questions about pertinent items on the subject's resume, three of which could be independently verified as truth (KNOWN) and three that could not be verified and were thus termed UNKNOWN. The subject had an incentive to lie on all UNKNOWN items, and on debriefing confirmed that he had done so. Data was preprocessed, masked with a priori regions of interest, thresholded, and qualitatively evaluated for consistency with the previously reported prefronto-parietal Lie > Truth pattern. Deceptive responses to two out of the three UNKNOWN items were associated with the predicted prefronto-parietal fMRI pattern. In the third UNKNOWN this pattern was absent, and instead, increased limbic (amygdala and hippocampus) response was observed. Based on published prefronto-parietal Lie response pattern, only the first two items could be categorized as Lie. If confirmed, this demonstration of amygdala and hippocampus activation in a Lie > Truth contrast illustrates the need to integrate the limbic system and its emotional and cognitive correlates into the existing model of deception. Our experiment suggests an approach to a naturalistic scenario and the research questions that need to be answered in order to set the stage for prospective clinical trials of fMRI-based lie detection.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 18633835     DOI: 10.1080/17470910802188370

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Neurosci        ISSN: 1747-0919            Impact factor:   2.083


  7 in total

1.  Lying about the valence of affective pictures: an fMRI study.

Authors:  Tatia M C Lee; Tiffany M Y Lee; Adrian Raine; Chetwyn C H Chan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Using Brain Imaging for Lie Detection: Where Science, Law and Research Policy Collide.

Authors:  Daniel D Langleben; Jane Campbell Moriarty
Journal:  Psychol Public Policy Law       Date:  2013-05-01

Review 3.  Deceptively simple … The "deception-general" ability and the need to put the liar under the spotlight.

Authors:  Gordon R T Wright; Christopher J Berry; Geoffrey Bird
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 4.  Integrating Brain Science and Law: Neuroscientific Evidence and Legal Perspectives on Protecting Individual Liberties.

Authors:  Calvin J Kraft; James Giordano
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 4.677

5.  Multivariate Bayesian decoding of single-trial event-related fMRI responses for memory retrieval of voluntary actions.

Authors:  Dongha Lee; Sungjae Yun; Changwon Jang; Hae-Jeong Park
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  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 7.  Prospects of functional magnetic resonance imaging as lie detector.

Authors:  Elena Rusconi; Timothy Mitchener-Nissen
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 3.169

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.