Literature DB >> 30394323

Resting-state Functional Connectivity and Deception: Exploring Individualized Deceptive Propensity by Machine Learning.

Honghong Tang1, Xiaping Lu2, Zaixu Cui3, Chunliang Feng4, Qixiang Lin5, Xuegang Cui6, Song Su7, Chao Liu8.   

Abstract

Individuals show marked variability in determining to be honest or deceptive in daily life. A large number of studies have investigated the neural substrates of deception; however, the brain networks contributing to the individual differences in deception remain unclear. In this study, we sought to address this issue by employing a machine-learning approach to predict individuals' deceptive propensity based on the topological properties of whole-brain resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC). Participants finished the resting-state functional MRI (fMRI) data acquisition, and then, one week later, participated as proposers in a modified ultimatum game in which they spontaneously chose to be honest or deceptive. A linear relevance vector regression (RVR) model was trained and validated to examine the relationship between topological properties of networks of RSFC and actual deceptive behaviors. The machine-learning model sufficiently decoded individual differences in deception using three brain networks based on RSFC, including the executive controlling network (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, middle frontal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex), the social and mentalizing network (the temporal lobe, temporo-parietal junction, and inferior parietal lobule), and the reward network (putamen and thalamus). These networks have been found to form a signaling cognitive framework of deception by coding the mental states of others and the reward or values of deception or honesty, and integrating this information to make a final decision about being deceptive or honest. These findings suggest the potential of using RSFC as a task-independent neural trait for predicting deceptive propensity, and shed light on using machine-learning approaches in deception detection.
Copyright © 2018 IBRO. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cross validation; deception; individual difference; machine learning; neural trait; resting-state fMRI

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30394323     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.10.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroscience        ISSN: 0306-4522            Impact factor:   3.590


  5 in total

Review 1.  Neuroimaging-based Individualized Prediction of Cognition and Behavior for Mental Disorders and Health: Methods and Promises.

Authors:  Jing Sui; Rongtao Jiang; Juan Bustillo; Vince Calhoun
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 13.382

2.  Are Proselfs More Deceptive and Hypocritical? Social Image Concerns in Appearing Fair.

Authors:  Honghong Tang; Shun Wang; Zilu Liang; Walter Sinnott-Armstrong; Song Su; Chao Liu
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-11-21

3.  Pain-free resting-state functional brain connectivity predicts individual pain sensitivity.

Authors:  Tamas Spisak; Balint Kincses; Frederik Schlitt; Matthias Zunhammer; Tobias Schmidt-Wilcke; Zsigmond T Kincses; Ulrike Bingel
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-01-10       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Detecting spontaneous deception in the brain.

Authors:  Yen-Ju Feng; Shao-Min Hung; Po-Jang Hsieh
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 5.399

5.  Group-guided individual functional parcellation of the hippocampus and application to normal aging.

Authors:  Jiang Zhang; Dundi Xu; Hongjie Cui; Tianyu Zhao; Congying Chu; Jiaojian Wang
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 5.038

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.