the future of lie detection - wordpress.com...integration of future technology to existing...
Post on 06-Apr-2020
5 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
The Future of Lie Detection
Jennifer M. C. Vendemia
Corey Boswell
Scott Meek
Michelle Phillips
Adam Craig
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Extra Info
• This talk: http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2i
• My Curriculum Vita and publications: http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2i
• My contact information: http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2i
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Outline • A brief Bio about me.
• Integration of technology is about integration of personalities and skills as it is about widgets.
• Integration of Future Technology to Existing Technology • Why aren’t we using the best techniques now?
• The challenge of setting standards
• Using Advanced Technology to Study the Central Nervous System
• The Science of Deception Modeling • Central Nervous System Measures
• Event Related Potentials (Brain Waves)
• The Unbelievably short course on fMRI
• Bringing the Science back to “Normal” populations, and “Special” populations
• Theory of Mind
• Prepotency of Truth
• Pathological Liars: Antisocial Disorder, Conduct Disorder
• Malingering
• A study of ratio and deception
• Conclusions
• Future Directions
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Integration of Future Technology to Existing
Technology
Future technologies will relate to existing
polygraph techniques in one of three ways:
1. they will provide another channel of information
within the standard polygraph-measuring paradigm
2. they will provide an alternate methodology to
existing exams.
3. they will provide a theory of deception that can be
applied to any dependent variable: fMRI – ERP –
Polygraph etc….
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Polygraph Channel Assist
• Thermal imaging, voice recognition, and pupillometry
operate within the existing polygraph methodology,
because these measures assess peripheral nervous
system activity, which is easily manipulated by the
standard detection of deception exam
• However, they do not all measure the same aspects of PNS activity
• Researchers have not attempted to systematically document the ways
in which the measures differ from one another, therefore translation of
results from one study to another is difficult
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
The Difference between Deception Detection
and Studying Cognitive Neuroscientific
Modeling of Deception
Deception Detection
• Test Standard Exam Formats
• Apply new sensors (ERP, fMRI,
NIRS, Pupillometry, Exhaled Gasses…)
• Attempt new machine learning
or statistical approaches
Modeling Deception
• Multi-method Approach for
Solving A Levels of Analysis
Problem
• Study technologies that add
NEW information to model
• Converging Lines of Evidence
• Iterative Research with
Interlocking Clusters which
address aspects of a specific
framework
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
A perspective on
current Credibility
Assessment
Approaches.
The top panel shows the model
as applied to peripheral nervous
system measures and the bottom
panel shows the model applied to
central nervous system
measures.
A conceptual strategy for project allocation of studies related to CNS
measures of deception.
Unclassified Classified
Basic Research Applied Research Application
Analytical Assumptions Solutions
Methodological Solutions
Stimuli Solutions
Unity Solutions
Construct Solutions
RELIABILITY GENERALIZABILTY UTILITY
Test-retest Culture Paradigm Testing (DRT, CRT) Field Testing
VALIDITY Individual Differences Technological Applications
Construct : Does the model accurately map the underlying processes to the act of deception
Measurement Translation (Across CNS measures, and between CNS and PNS Measures)
Measurement: Do the measures assess the model parameters of interest.
Discriminate: Does the model assess the inferred construct of interest and not other inferred constructs
Practical Reality—PDD is a combination of a
clinical interview plus a piece of equipment
• Any technology must be
tailored to the situational
environment
• PDD examiners represent
a highly skilled workforce
that is already in place,
with a significant
experience that no
technology will replace
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
• We have a tendency to
skip to utility without
testing the other steps
• In order to translate
between these domains,
theoretical links must be
quantified
• Money goes to SEXY
science widgets before
DULL theory and testing
Inferential Measures of cortical activity
EEG, ERP, PET, Behavioral, fMRI, MRI Measurement Error
Neural correlates of underlying psychological processes
Structures, systems, patterns of activity State vs. Event
Lower order psychological constructs
Postulate model to map lower order constructs to higher
order construct
Hierarchical models with multiple levels of underlying
processes are possible
Attention, Cognition, Emotion, Motivation
Higher Order Social Psychological Construct
Deception: define and operationalize
Definition: identification of properties of underlying
dimensions
Operationalization: measurement of those
dimensions
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Classic Research and Test Approach
Multimethod Approach for Solving A Levels of Analysis Problem
Polygraph is a general (summative
measure), while ERP and fMRI are very
specific measures
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Cortical Control of EDA About 80% of variance in polygraph
findings are associated with
differences in EDA
Three Independent Systems
• Emotional: Ipsilateral control
from hypothalamus and
limbic system
• Orienting and Attention:
contralateral control from
prefrontal and premotor
cortex
• Gross motor and muscle
tone: contralateral reticular
activating system
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
The focus for the talk will be
on the emotional and the
attention systems.
• Emotional: Ipsilateral
control from
hypothalamus and limbic
system
• Orienting and Attention:
contralateral control from
prefrontal and premotor
cortex
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Classic Polygraph Designs
GUILTY KNOWLEDGE
Questions are asked related to a crime or intention and compared to questions that are not related to a crime or intention
COMPARISON QUESTION
Images or questions involving a previously experienced event are presented infrequently among images involving an event that was not experienced
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
A sequence of questions are asked to which most individuals are expected to feel “guilty”, these are compared to crime relevant questions to which only the individuals who committed the crime would feel “guilty”
RELEVANT/IRRELEVANT
Classic Polygraph Designs
Mechanism: the closing of a
working memory loop when the
infrequently presented
information is presented
The action is independent of a
response, i.e. deception
Both perpetrators and victims
have identical responses in this
test
Individuals who have committed
multiple crimes may respond on
this test whether or not they
committed this particular crime
Mechanism: uncertain
mechanisms
Guilt Complexes
Response difficulty
Hobson’s Choice
Social interaction between
examiner and individual
Question order
Frequency of item
presentation
GUILTY KNOWLEDGE COMPARISON QUESTION RELEVANT/IRRELEVANT
Mechanism: uncertain
mechanisms,
Guilt Complexes
Response difficulty
Social interaction between
examiner and individual
Question order
Frequency of item
presentation
Early Studies Separating Exogenous and
Attentional Studies of Deception
• Type of memory
• Preparedness to deceive
• Switching between deceptive and truthful
strategies
• Characteristics of stimulus delivery
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
The Unbelievably Short Course on fMRI
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Str
uctu
ral S
can
B
ET
Str
uctu
ral S
can
B
OLD
F
unctional S
can
Pixels vs Voxels
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Pixel: a point in a 2-d space Voxel: a point in a 3-d space
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
BE
T S
tructu
ral S
can
B
OLD
F
unctional S
can
Structural Scan
Voxel = 1mm X 1mm x 1mm
Functional Scan
Voxel = 3.33mm X 3.33mm x 3.33mm
Measuring Deoxyhemoglobin
• fMRI measurements
are of amount of
deoxyhemoglobin per
voxel
• We assume that
amount of
deoxygenated
hemoglobin is
predictive of neuronal
activity
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Reprinted from:
http://www.neurology.org/content/79/2/e10/
F1.large.jpg
BOLD response reflects
pooled local field
potential activity (Logothetis et al, 2001)
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Calcarine
Sulci
Fusiform
Gyri
fMRI Hemodynamic Response
Impulse-Response Systems
• Impulse: single event that evokes changes in a
system
• Assumed to be of infinitely short duration
• Response: Resulting change in system
=
Impulses
Response
Output
Percent Signal Change
• Peak / mean(baseline)
• Often used as a basic
measure of “amount of
processing”
• Amplitude variable across
subjects, age groups, etc.
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
500
505
200
205
1%
1%
Social Evaluation
Ethics: Is this an appropriate situation in which to lie (norm)?
Theory of mind: Is my lie convincing my audience?
Cognitive Processing
LTM: Do I remember the truth?
Error detection: Is the lie consistent?
Inhibition: Remember not to tell the truth…
Emotional Processing
Mood
Emotion
Valence
Arousal
Semantics
Cognition
Emotions
There is no one “Process” called
Lying
Social
Cognition
The goal of our research is to isolate
the various cognitive processes
involved in the act of deception
Semantic memory studies • Separate deception from preparedness, attention and memory
• Establish baseline characteristics of truthful and deceptive waveforms
Autobiographical Information Studies • Establish baseline characteristics of truthful and deceptive waveforms to
episodic memory
• Determine if these waveforms differ from those to semantic memory lies
• Determine the effects of practice
Mock Crime Studies • Determine if waveforms measured in this study are more similar to those in
the semantic memory study or the autobiographical memory study
• Determine the effects of memory decay
Long Term
Working Memory
Resting
Executive Control
Response Inhibition
Working Memory
Attention Shifting
Resource Allocation
Exogenous Attention Endogenous Attention
Long Term
Memory
Re-evaluation
Disengage
Generate Deception
Social Schema
Decision Making
Frequency
Coping Mechanisms
Cognitive Control
Modality
Intensity
Query
Response
Social Evaluation
A Framework for Studying Deception
There is no one part of the brain involved in
Deception
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Brain Regions are Correlated with Cognition, Social
Evaluation, and Emotional Processes Involved in
Deception
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Lateral View of Cortex Medial View of Cortex
Bro
dm
an
n A
rea
s
An
ato
mic
al R
eg
ion
s
Brodmann
Areas
Anatomical Names Special Regions of
Interest
6 Supplementary Motor Area (A)
6, 8 Superior Frontal Gyrus (B)
9, 10 Medial Frontal Cortex '(C)
9, 10, 46 Middle Frontal Gyrus (D)Dorsolateral
Prefrontal Cortex
10, 11, 47 Orbital Frontal CortexVentromedial
Prefrontal Cortex
11,12 Orbital Gyri '(E)
24, 32 Anterior Cingulate Gyrus (F)
Inferior Gyrus
44 Pars Opercularis (G)
45 Pars Triangularis (H)
47 Pars Orbitalis (I)Ventral Lateral
Prefrontal Cortex
22 Superior Temporal Lobe (J)
39 Angular Gyrus (K)
40 Supramarginal Gyrus (L)
Broca's Area
Wernicke's Area
In our first study N= 11 in 2000
• We were interested mostly in looking at
working memory areas and attention • We wanted to verify that fMRI relative activation would
correspond with ERP activation
• We know what cognitive processes cause brain waves, while
we don’t know what causes fMRI
The recording scenario
ERPs are
recorded as
participants
answer a
series of
questions
truthfully or
deceptively
EEG is
measured from
3 – 256
electrodes on
the head
Figure 3. 18 Regions derived
from the 128-channel net
corresponding to the frontal,
central, parietal, temporal,
and occipital locations of the
10-20 system.
Figure 3. 18 Regions derived
from the 128-channel net
corresponding to the frontal,
central, parietal, temporal,
and occipital locations of the
10-20 system.
Figure 3. 18 Regions derived
from the 128-channel net
corresponding to the frontal,
central, parietal, temporal,
and occipital locations of the
10-20 system.
Raw Data: Regions derived from the 128-channel net corresponding to the
frontal, central, parietal, temporal, and occipital locations of the 10-20
system (Jasper, 1958).
HD-ERP Analysis: Spatial PCA followed by a Temporal PCA
Spatial Loadings
Temporal Loadings
Normalized mV
Aspects of deception in the ERP
0 250 500 750ms
P3a: An early attention
related component with
an anterior distribution and
positive deflection. Occurs
when one switches
tasks such as from telling
the truth to telling a lie.
N400: A component that
occurs when what we’ve heard,
said, or seen does not match the
contents of our semantic (and
possibly) episodic memory. Anterior
distribution, negative deflection
P3b: A late component that
is related to decision
making, workload, inhibition,
and attention, and context
updating.
Experimental Procedure ● Two-Stimulus Paradigm
● ERP Recording during one Session
● fMRI Recording during one Session
● Participants were randomly color cued to answer questions about themselves truthfully (80 trials) and deceptively (80 trials)
Figure 1. Time course of stimulus presentation and recording for the two-
stimulus paradigm.
I attended Weston Nile High School.
True
+
Stimulus 1 2500 ms
Fixation 750 ms
Stimulus 2 2500 ms
Onset of Stimulus Recording
Figure 1. Time course of stimulus presentation and recording for the two-
stimulus paradigm.
I attended Weston Nile
High School.
True
+
Stimulus 1 2500 ms
Fixation 750 ms
Stimulus 2 2500 ms
Onset of Stimulus Recording
I attended Weston Nile High School.
True
+
Stimulus 1 2500 ms
Fixation 750 ms
Stimulus 2 2500 ms
Onset of Stimulus Recording
I attended Weston Nile
High School.
True
+
Stimulus 1 2500 ms
Fixation 750 ms
Stimulus 2 2500 ms
Onset of Stimulus Recording
ERP Results
ERP Results
ERP Results
Early Attention
Exogenous Attention
Reflexive/ Orienting
Executive Control
Intensity Frequency Modality
Coping
Mechanisms Cognitive
Control
Escape potential Consequences
Endogenous Attention
Raw Data
P3a: Attention, Error Response Monitoring
Prior Group Dipole Source Analysis, showed that activity in this area could be explained by a
single Source in the Right Anterior Cingulate (BA 32; Vendemia et al., 2005)
800 Ms 0
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 800
ms
Z(m
V)
Attention Shifting, Resource Allocation,
Working Memory
Endogenous Attention
Occipital/parietal
Region
Multimodal
Processing
Anterior Cingulate
Attention Shifting
Resource
Allocation BA
24,32
Working Memory
BA 9,10
P1: positive
visual
component
100ms
N2b: attention
processing 220-
300 ms
P3a: Attention
shifting
component 250 –
350 ms
P3b: Working
memory 350 –
600 ms
Time window difference between truth
and deception 20 - 40 ms
The exchange of
information from the N2 to
the P3a
Attention Based “Load-Switching”
minmax FLORls ttt
● Determine Minimum FL and Maximum OR Latency
● Load-Switching Window is Difference:
tls = 64 ms tls = 40 ms
* Neocortical
interaction time,
tls, is greater for
deception.
● Algorithm: first FL MIN after OR MAX
Figure adapted from Schillaci & Vendemia
(under review). IEEE.
Individual Dipole Models of the P3a
Resource allocation, attention switching, response conflict – all studies
Lee, Langleben, Ganis, Kozel, Faro, Spence, Phan
Raw Data Spatial Loadings Temporal Loadings
P3a: Selective Attention, Attention Switching, Response Selection
Prior Group Dipole Source Analysis, showed that activity in this area could be explained by a
single Source in the Left Anterior Cingulate (BA 24; Vendemia et al., 2005)
800 Ms 0
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 800
ms
Z(m
V)
N400: Shows that although memory is accessed during the task
it is not exclusively correlated with deception.
Left Anterior Temporal
Previous Group Dipole Source Analysis, showed that activity in this area had a variety of
sources ( Vendemia et al., 2005)
800 Ms
0
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 800
ms
Z(m
V)
P3b: Decision making and workload
Previous Group Dipole Source Analysis, showed that activity in this area had a variety of sources including
those for motor response( Vendemia et al., 2005)
800 Ms 0
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 800
ms
Z(m
V)
Mapping Brain Waves to fMRI Data
P3a, P3b, N4, and late positive complex dipole solutions projected
onto the axial, saggital and coronal MRI sections for one
representative participant.
Axial Sagittal CoronalAxial Sagittal Coronal
Anterior Cingulate fMRI Activations During Deception
Across All Participants
Cingulate Gyrus fMRI Activations During Deception
Across All Participants
Middle Frontal fMRI Activations During
Deception Across All Participants
Inferior Frontal Gyrus Activations During Deception
Across All Participants
Medial Frontal fMRI Activations During Deception
Across All Participants
Middle Temporal fMRI Activations During
Deception Across all Participants
Superior Frontal Gyrus fMRI Activations During
Deception Across All Participants
Superior Temporal Gyrus fMRI Activations During
Deception Across All Participants
Group fMRI Results
• BA10: L Superior Frontal
• BA 21: L Middle Temporal
• BA46: L Middle Frontal
• BA 6: Left Middle Frontal
• BA6: Superior Frontal
• BA39: R Inferior Parietal
• BA21: R Middle Temporal
• BA8: R Superior Frontal
• BA 22: Right Superior Temporal
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
• BA39: R Inferior Parietal
• BA24 L Anterior Cingulate
• BA21: R Middle Temporal
• BA8: R Superior Frontal
• BA 22: Right Superior Temporal
Attention, Error Response
Monitoring
Memory is Accessed
Decision making and workload
• BA10: L Superior Frontal
• BA 21: L Middle Temporal
Study 2: Deception and Semantic Memory
The goal of this study was to see if we could manipulate where the deceptive response was time locked.
The results from this study would help us determine how to design questions.
Participants Normal or corrected to normal vision
No known neurological disorders
College students, ages 18 – 24 Study 1, N = 34 (24 women, 10 men)
Study 2, N = 43 (25 women, 18 men)
Study 3, N = 28 ( 16 women, 12 men
Method
Randomly assigned a deceptive presentation color
Practiced on a paper and pencil version of the task
Additional computer-based practice with 67% correct threshold to continue to experimental trials
Three blocks of 60 randomized trials each
Paradigm
Incongruent
Truthful
Congruent
Deceptive
Incongruent
Deceptive
Congruent
Truthful
+ True
The grass
is green. + False
The grass
is green.+ False
The grass
is green. + True
Stimulus 2
1000 ms
Fixation
Prompt
750 ms
Stimulus 1
2500 ms
The grass
is green.
Incongruent
Truthful
Congruent
Deceptive
Incongruent
Deceptive
Congruent
Truthful
+ True
The grass
is green. + False
The grass
is green.+ False
The grass
is green. + True
Stimulus 2
1000 ms
Fixation
Prompt
750 ms
Stimulus 1
2500 ms
The grass
is green.
Participants respond truthfully to one color and lie to the other.
Response
Agree
Response
Agree
Response
Disagree
Response
Disagree
Predictability of Second Stimulus Across
Experiments
Experiment Deception Congruity Predictability
1 Both
2 Deception
3 Neither
Analyses
Data were recorded from the 128 channel HD electrode system
Data were segmented for 100 ms preceding Stimulus 2 and for 1000 ms after stimulus 2
After screening and filtering, data were submitted to Temporal Principal Components Analyses
Components with loadings above .85 were submitted to 2 X 2 repeated measures ANOVAs
Stimulus 1
(2500ms) Fixation
Prompt
(750 ms) Stimulus 2 (Response Termination)
Results: Reaction Time Data Deception RTs significantly greater than truthful across all experiments
Incongru
ent
Lie
Task
Condit
ion
Congru
ent
Lie
Congru
ent
Tru
e
Incongru
ent
Tru
e
Incongru
ent
Lie
1.4 µV
-1.4 µV
Topographical
Distribution of
Waveforms in
Experiment 2.
Results: P3a
When deception was predictable but congruity was not and when neither were predictable, the PCA component of the early frontally-distributed waveform was greater for deceptive responses than truthful responses F(1, 42) = 4.79, p = .034 and F(1, 27) = 4.44, p = .045.
Results: P3b
When congruity was predictable but deception was not and when neither were predictable, the P3b component was significantly smaller in the deceptive condition than in the truthful condition, F(1, 42) = 5.37, p = .028 and F(1, 27) = 6.63, p = .028.
Topographic distribution of Principal Component scores
Exp. 2 Exp. 3
Congruent Incongruent
Deceptive
Tru
thfu
l D
eceptive
T
ruth
ful
Results: N4
When deception and
congruity were predictable,
and when only deception
was predictable, the mean
PCA scores for the N4 were
significantly more negative
in the incongruent
condition than in the
congruent condition [F(1,
33) = 22.59, p < .0001, and
F(1,42) = 46.75, p < .0001],
respectively. However,
when neither were
predictable the N4
waveform was not
observed in the data.
The PCA scores for deceptive responding were significantly greater than those for truthful
responding when both congruity and deception were predictable F (1, 33) = 5.33, p = .027. The
relationship between the conditions was similar when congruity was predictable; however, the
effect only appeared as an interaction with the congruity effect.
Deceptive
Tru
thfu
l
Congruent Incongruent
Summary P3b
• Donchin (1981) P3b relates to context updating and response selection.
• While Comerchero & Polich (1999) degree of attention required for a discrimination task affects P3b size.
• In the current study the P3b was smaller in deceptive conditions, suggesting that these stimuli created higher processing demands.
P3a
• Comerchero difficult tasks redirection of attention can produce a P3a.
• The task in the present study was extremely difficult.
• Redirection of attention to differing processing demands may have produced the P3a.
• In Study 1, the first stimulus predicted every processing demand for the second stimulus. This resulted in a suppression of the P3a effect.
N4
• In conditions with of predictability
Study 3: Mock Crime Study with Brain Wave
Measures
Goal: Can we model a classic mock crime paradigm
• Can we predict deception with similar rates of
accuracy to a polygraph?
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
• In the mock crime study participants
either committed a mock crime or
participated in the control condition
• They were asked a series of questions • Non-relevant crime questions to which both
groups responded truthfully
• Control Relevant questions about the control
condition to which all participants responded
truthfully
• Crime relevant questions to which mock
crime participants responded deceptively
• Probable lie questions to which all
participants lied
• Trivial questions to which all participants
responded truthfully
• The N2b, P3a, N4, and P3b were
measured for each of these conditions
Memory: The Mock
Crime Study
Non-
relevant
crime
Control
relevant
Crime
relevant
Probable
lie
Trivial
N2b P3a N4 P3b
0.7 - 1.0
0.4 - 0.7
0.1 - 0.4
-0.1 - -0.1
-0.4 - -0.1
-0.7- -0.4
-1.0- -0.7
Normalized
Amplitude mV
It is possible, similar to previous research, to
separate groups based on their waveforms
Observed Predicted
Control Steal Test
Percent Correct
Control 26 2 92.9%
Steal Test 3 23 88.5%
Overall Percentage
53.7% 46.3% 90.7%
HD-ERP Model: The final
model consisted of six
predictors
1. Mid-parietal P3b latency
for trivial questions
2. right parietal P3b
amplitude for probable Lie
questions
3. right parietal P3a latency
for trivial questions,
4. right anterior temporal P3b
amplitude for control
questions
5. right parietal N2 latency for
trivial questions
6. mid-parietal P3a amplitude
for crime-relevant
questions.
Conclusions from the Mock
Crime Study
• Behavioral data predicted involvement in a mock crime in almost 82% of cases
• Brain wave data successfully classified participants nearly 91% of the time.
• TP3b is the strongest predictor of deceptive behavior.
• Of note, participants in the control condition lied to only 20% of the questions (probable lie questions). • The P3b was a strong predictor to these questions because control
subjects generated an oddball P3.
• As control participants remembered items in two conditions, but were only deceptive to one, these results show for the first time that the P3 oddball can be produced by deception without the interference of memory.
• Participants in the mock crime condition responded deceptively to 40% of the questions. Because they did not generate an oddball P3, we believe that the deception to the mock crime questions was identical in nature to the probable lie questions.
Predicting deceptive behavior with ERPs using a Relevant / Irrelevant
paradigm
fMRI Research into deception
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
fMRI Research into deception
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
A Side Note on Current Research in fMRI: Regions of Activation sited in
Bhaat et al (2008)
Area 9, 10
Area 8
Caudate
Sensory Motor Strip
Cerebellum
Area 17
Area 32
VLPFC
Area 21
*Additional regions: Hippocampal gyrus, left inferior parietal
Variability in fMRI Approaches
• Within Subject Noise • Subject movement
• Respiratory, cardiac artifacts
• Scanner instability
• Attentional modulation
• Inconsistent cognitive strategy
• Learning effects
• Drugs and medications
• Anxiety
• Countermeasures
• Between Subject Noise • Consistent differences in
factors related to within subject noise
• Anatomic variability
• Cytoarchitectonic variability
• Variability in venous drainage patterns
• Differences in hemoglobin concentrations
• Between Paradigm Noise • Inconsistent definition of the
type of deception
• DIfferences in the rate, number, and type of stimuli presented
• Differences in the type of memory to which the participants deceive
• Differences in reward/punishment scenario
Individual Trials fMRI Studies
Example paradigm differences
• Spence, Farrow, Herford, Wilkinson, Zheng, and Woodruff (2001): directed lies to episodic memory
• Langleben, Schroeder, Maldjian, Gur, McDonald, Ragland, O’Brien, and Childress (2002): directed lies in a digit recall type task with cards
• Lee, Liu, Tan, Chan, Mahankali, Feng, Hou, Fox, and Gao (2002): Feigned memory impairment to digit span and autobiographical memories
• Ganis, Kosslyn, Stose, Thompson, and Yurgelun-Todd (2003): Planned lies vs. spontaneous lies to long latency episodic information
• Kozel, Padgett, and George (2004): Planned lies to recently short latency episodic information
• Faro, Mohamed, Gordon, Platek, Williams, and Ahmad (2004): Planned lies to short latency episodic information
Conclusions from MRI Studies
• Motivation: Kozel, Langleben, Phan
• Orbitofrontal activation only present in Kozel
• Autobiographical Memory: Ganis, Lee, Spence
• Temporal activation present only in LEE
• Weighing of multiple information sources—all studies
• Prefrontal cortex: Lee, Ganis, Kozel, Faro
• Resource allocation, attention switching, response conflict – all studies
• Lee, Langleben, Ganis, Kozel, Faro, Spence, Phan
• Regions of confusion
• Cuneus, cerebellum
Suggestions for fMRI
• Choose paradigms for testing appropriate to
screening
• Systematically investigate processes known
to be associated with deception
• Ground work research in this area has yet to
be conducted
• Combine fMRI with other measures, in order
to provide tangential evidence for findings
Adapted From Peterson et al., 1999
Attention in Cognitively Challenging Tasks like the Stroop is
Similar to the Directed Lie Task with Two-Stimuli
Adapted From Christ et al., 2009
Summary of Deception Studies Summary of Stroop Test Studies
Study 4: Does the percentage of deceptive
responses during a paradigm affect the fMRI
measure?
The fMRI studies use a variety of response ratios
In a survey of 20 fMRI and PET studies
10% - 50% of trials were deceptive in standard paradigms
20 %-100% of trials were deceptive in malingering paradigms
Paradigm
Three Groups
• Group 1 = 20% deception (n=15)
• Group 2 = 50% deception (n=20)
• Group 3 = 80% deception (n=16)
Hypotheses
• In all groups deception
would be associated with
greater relative activation
in prefrontal areas than
truthtelling
• Relative activation related
to WM load, due to
keeping both truthful and
deceptive response sets
would be greatest during
the 50% conditions as
measured by activation in
the medial and lateral
frontal cortex as well as
the parietal cortex Adapted From Christ et al., 2009
Group Results
N = 15
20% Lie, 80% Truth
50% Lie, 50% Truth
N=20
L > T
True > Lie
Group Results
N = 16
80% Lie, 20% Truth
• The only identified affect of switching….
Working Memory Hypothesis: RT for truthful and deceptive
responses across differing percentages of deceptive responses
* Effect of switching covaried
Results
• Relative activation L>T during the 50% condition is
greater than during the 20% condition in regions
related working memory, inhibition, and task
switching
• In the 20% condition, relative activation in the medial
prefrontal and parietal cortex associated with
inhibition was not greater for deceptive responses
• In the 20% condition, relative activation in regions of
the parietal cortex associated with working memory
was not present
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Conclusions
• The ratio of deceptive responses is an
important variable in paradigms of deception
• However, lateral prefrontal regions
associated with working memory load and
attention switching are relatively more active
regardless of ratio
Study 5: Deception vs. Poor Recall
• This series of behavioral, ERP and fMRI
studies utilized the Misinformation Effect
Prepotency of Truthful Responses
Many researchers assume that truthful
responses are prepotent
Priority over other responses
Maturational primacy
Repetition with positive reinforcement
Greater motivational charge
Researchers tend to forget that links (retrieval cues)
to memory are associated with hippocampal
activation and it may be this link that is prepotent
rather than the actual memory
Prepotency in WM and/or LTM
• LTM: For example, Ganis argues that truthful
knowledge is gained through multimodal
world interaction which results in broader
neural networks with more retrieval cues.
• WM: Vrij asserts that recall is not a
necessary step in the act of deception
the prepotency of truthful responses in wm would
explain the longer latency between truthful and
deceptive responses that occurs even in situations
where participants lie on 80 – 90% of the trials
Behavioral
• RT using Misinformation and Deception
Lo
g T
ran
sfo
rme
d R
Ts
(ms)
2.75
2.8
2.85
2.9
2.95
Factual Information Misinformation
Narrative Content
Truthful
Deception
**
*
Meek, Phillips, Boswell, Vendemia (2013).
ERP
• P3b suppression (P3)
• Red = Deception
• Dotted = Misinformation
Meek, Phillips, Boswell, Vendemia (2013).
Methods
• Day 1: Misinformation task
• View images – break – view images again with
misleading items
• 8 vignettes total, consisting of 50 images each
• Second set of images will contain 12 critical items
with different information
Methods
• Day 2: MRI scanning
• 144 test items (18 per vignette)
• Participants will be instructed to lie or tell the truth
based on a cue (text color – purple or green)
• Deception occurs on half the blocks of questions,
truth on the other half
• Counterbalanced across participants (both blocks
and color cues)
Imaging Parameters
• TR = 2200 ms
• 1 fMRI sessions of 586 echo-planar imaging
volumes (~21.5 minutes)
• T1-weighted structural scans also obtained
Trial
• 15s break screen between blocks • Reminder of color cues
• Fixation screen jittered • 400, 800, 1200, 1600 ms
• 3s question screen
• 3.5s response screen • Target screen
Behavioral
Decp > Truth
• Scale represents z-scores values 0 – 6
• Christ et al., (2009) – Meta-analysis of 12
deceptive fMRI studies showed consistent
prefrontal cortex activation for deceptive >
truthful responses
Decp Mis > Decp Cons
• Dorsal PFC and left parietal
Decp Cons > Decp Mis
• Ventral PFC, ACC, and bilateral STG
% Signal Change
• Right superior
medial frontal gyrus
Right inferior medial
frontal gyrus
Conclusions
• Pattern of activity during deceptive
misinformation responses looks like that seen
during source monitoring tasks
• Mitchell and Johnson (2009) in a review of
source monitoring studies showed that
retrieval engages coordination between
dorsal PFC and posterior regions
• Particularly parietal regions for heavy WM tasks
Conclusions
• Activity during
deception consistent
responses in the ACC
suggests a stronger
inhibitory control
component
• Christ et al., (2009)
• Bilateral STG activation
suggests stronger
memory
representations
• Consistent items were
shown in both
presentations of slides
Yang compared sMRIs in groups of pathological
liars, people with antisocial personality disorder,
and normal controls (N=49)
Review: Pathological Liars, Antisocial
Disorder, Conduct Disorder
Copyright © 2008 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
YANG, Y. et al. The British Journal of Psychiatry 2007;190:174-175
Whole-brain-corrected prefrontal white matter volumes
(IFC), (MFC), (OFC), (SFC) in pathological liars (white),
normal controls (grey) and antisocial controls (Black).
IFC
MFC
OFC
SFC
Pathological Liars
Pathological or Unsuccessful Liars?
Yang: pathological liars
have larger volumes of
white matter combined with
reductions in prefrontal
grey matter
Spence: the population
Yang sampled (employees
at temp agencies)
suggests that the gray-
white matter relationship is
more indicative of
unsuccessful habitual liars
1. Yang et al., 2005
2. Spence, 2005
Individuals with Antisocial Personality
Disorder have difficulty integrating the
language and emotional components of
their thoughts, and thus fail to notice
contradictions in their speech.
Semantic Aphasia (in this case): the
failure to integrate emotional meaning
with language
Cocaine? I've never used it. I've never tried cocaine. I
think I might have tried it once and got nothing out of
it. Just snorted a little bit. And I just don't mess with it.
It's too expensive. And I suppose if I was on the
streets and had enough of it, I might get into it. But
I'm strictly a marijuana man. All I do is... I love to
smoke a reefer. And valiums. And of course alcohol.
—Ted Bundy
Pathological Liars vs. Murderers
• Raine found a similar pattern
of activation PET PFC
reduction with greater
activation sub cortical white
matter in affective murderers
• Similar to the liars in Yang’s
study, the murders committed
by the people in Raine’s
research tend to be the
consequence of unsuccessful
social strategy
Conclusion: Spence’s explanation
for Yang’s findings seems
plausible at this time Affective Murderer
Non-Affective Murderer
Strategizing: Factitious Disorder and Malingering
1. The main difference between a malingered memory paradigm and
other deception paradigms is the need to employ a metacognitive
strategy
2. When adopting a metacognitive strategy for feigned memory
impairment that employs responding correctly to a proportion of
items, the calculation of correct responses involves regions of the
fronto-parietal cortex[1,2].
Malingering Paradigm: For an imagined reward,
participants faked amnesia to digits and autobiographical
information
1. Lee, Liu, Ting, Huang, & Chan, 2009
2. Cowell, Egan, Code, Harasy, & Watson, 2000; Pesenti, Thioux, Seron, & De Volder, 200
Malingering: Lee results
Study 6: Identifying Different Classes of Lies
• Different cortical resources are employed
during different classes of lies
• But what are the classes of lies?
http://wp.me/P3kDLQ-2H
Previous Work
Lie Journal and Autobiographical Story Paradigms
DePaulo, Kashy, Kirkendol, Wyer, and Epstein (1996)
Participants lied overwhelmingly about themselves.
More lies for psychological reasons (e.g. protection from embarrassment) rather than for personal advantage (e.g. material gain).
Kashy and DePaulo (1996)
Manipulativeness positively correlated with rate of lying
A concern with self-presentation not associated with rate of lying
Social anxiety also not associated with rate of lying
DePaulo, Ansfield, Kirkendol, & Boden (2004)
Identified motive and origin categories of serious lies
Serious lies seemed to originate most often in “bad” behavior viewed as immoral, illegal, or unjustifiable
Three most frequently used motives (instrumental, avoid punishment or blame, and entitlement) were generally related to covering up this behavior
Less frequently used motives included lying for reasons of identity management and self-presentation and lying specifically to hurt another person
Design Strategy
Step 1:
Copra Search
Step 2: Independent
Ratings based on observable characteristics
of each deceptive
word
Step 3:
Expert raters of final
categories based on
belongingness
Step 4: Experiment 1: Questionnaire Administration
Step 5: Redesign of
Questionnaire and retesting
Step 6: Multiple site
testing
Copra Search of Seven Dictionaries (American, Oxford,
Encarta, Cambridge, Webster, Wordsmyth, Ultralingua)
• 111 words related to deception
• Each of the words rated based on 21 different dimensions
• Assigned 1 or 0 for each dimension
• No dimensions were considered mutually
Problems with the Words
• Some words are archaic
• Backbite
• Some phrases are slang and archaic
• Sell down the river
• Some words are VERY SPECIFIC
• Perjure
• We tested all of our words for familiarity with
our students
We examined every relationship
between all 111 words
We developed categories based on groups of
Words that were strongly related to one another
Deception Experts
• A questionnaire was developed to evaluate belongingness of individual words to each category
• Questionnaire was administered to 14 experts in the field of deception
• Procedure • Come up with a definition that best fits each group of words (e.g.
lies for gain)
• Read through all the words in each group and rate them based on how well the word matches your definition
• 0 = not related, 1 = poorly related, 2 = moderately related, 3 = highly related, and 4 = perfectly related
For each category, we chose one word that was the best
representative of that category and then the experts
evaluated how closely the other words matched the
representative word
Interpersonal Ploy category
Mock
Put On
Cant
PlantPut Up a Front
Bunk
Bull
Queer
Simulate
Whopper
Pose
Phony
MockPut On
Cant
PlantPut Up a Front
Bunk
Bull
Queer
Simulate
Whopper
Pose
Phony
----- .60 – 1.00
----- .30 - .60
----- .10 - .30
----- .0 -.10
----- Negative Correlation
The final categories based on the expert ratings
Looking at Psychology to Study Deception
Personality Variables State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger et al., 1970)
Center for Epidemiological Studies – Depression Scale (CES-D) (Radloff, 1977)
International Personality Item Pool (Goldberg, 1999): THE IPIP HAS BEEN TRANSLATED INTO MANY LANGUAGES
Agreeableness
Deliberateness
Extraversion
Fairness
Impression Management
Integrity
Macchiavellianism (Manipulativeness)
Neuroticism
Responsibility
Risk-Taking
Self-Monitoring
Sincerity
Looking at Psychology to Study Deception
Measure
Standard
Personality
Items (IPIP,
2006)
How do personality measures relate to Deception measures
Avoidance
Avoidance lies involve attempts to escape or minimize penalties associated
with a specific incidence of inappropriate behavior.
Low sincerity,
Low responsibility
Low Integrity
Interpersonal Ploys and Social Enhancements
Social enhancements have an underlying motivation of
improving one’s social standing by impressing others or gaining
sympathy from others
Low sincerity
High Impression management
Interpersonal ploys involve the underlying motivation of
managing the quality of an ongoing conversation by avoiding
unpleasant information Low sincerity
High Impression management
Higher Depression
Concealment
Concealment lies involve hypocritical acts in which people misrepresent a
quality within themselves.
Low Sincerity
Low Integrity
High Depression
Gainful Misleading
Gainful misleading refers to lies that are employed to extract a specific benefit
from another person. Unlike avoidance lies, which occur after an act, and
concealment lies, which occur in an ongoing manner; gainful misleading lies
represent a deception during a specific action such as a fraud.
Low Fairness
High Impression Management
Verbal Malice
Verbal malice lies involve deceptions that tend to cause harm to another person
while simultaneously benefiting the person causing the harm.
Low Sincerity
Low Integrity
Low Fairness
Conclusions
Not all deceptions are equal. Different categories of deceptions do exist
And those categories are associated with personality characteristics
Future Directions
• Metacognitive Tasks
• Is the ratio of deceptive responses critical when
individuals are able to self-select their patterns of
response
• Special Populations
• Skilled liars
• Individuals with poor deceptive skills: children with
autism spectrum disorders, individuals with
Parkinson’s Disease
top related