Both High Cognitive Load and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Right Inferior Frontal Cortex Make Truth and Lie Responses More Similar

Hernández, Nuria Sánchez; Masip, Jaume; Gómez‐Ariza, Carlos J.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00776

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 77 publications

(103 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results may therefore agree with a growing body of literature suggesting that task load is an important factor for consideration in assessing tDCS outcomes (de Almeida, Pope, & Hansen, 2020;Gill, Shah-Basak, & Hamilton, 2015;Meiron & Lavidor, 2013;Sánchez, Masip, & Gómez-Ariza, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

TDCS Modulates Working Memory Maintenance Processes in Healthy Individuals

Nikolin

Martin

Loo

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The effects of tDCS at the prefrontal cortex are often investigated using cognitive paradigms, particularly working memory tasks. However, the neural basis for the neuromodulatory cognitive effects of tDCS, including which subprocesses are affected by stimulation, is not completely understood. Aims: We investigated the effects of tDCS on working memory task-related spectral activity during and after tDCS to gain better insights into the neurophysiological changes associated with stimulation. Methods: We reanalysed data from 100 healthy participants grouped by allocation to receive either Sham (0 mA, 0.016 mA, and 0.034 mA) or Active (1 mA or 2 mA) stimulation during a 3-back task. Electroencephalography (EEG) data was used to analyse event-related spectral power in frequency bands associated with working memory performance. Results: Frontal theta event-related synchronisation (ERS) was significantly reduced post-tDCS in the active group. Participants receiving active tDCS had slower response times following tDCS compared to Sham, suggesting interference with practice effects associated with task repetition. Theta ERS was not significantly correlated with response times or accuracy. Conclusions: tDCS reduced frontal theta ERS post-stimulation, suggesting a selective disruption to working memory cognitive control and maintenance processes. These findings suggest that tDCS selectively affects specific subprocesses during working memory, which may explain heterogenous behavioural effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

TDCS Modulates Working Memory Maintenance Processes in Healthy Individuals

Nikolin

Martin

Loo

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) also played a key role in deception in prior reports (Hakun et al, 2008;Kireev, Korotkov, Medvedeva, Masharipov, & Medvedev, 2017;Sánchez et al, 2020;Vartanian et al, 2013). For example, a study conducted by Hakun et al (2008) revealed that IFG activity was predictive of a concealed target during a concealed information task (CIT).…”

Section: Predictability Of Deceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, when searching neural activities for deceptive responses, most prior studies directly compared the differences between truth‐telling versus lying conditions. However, the cognitive burden for lying is heavier than that for truth‐telling: lying may require more engagement of working memory, exogenous, endogenous attention, and cognitive control (Sánchez, Masip, & Gómez‐Ariza, 2020 ; Vartanian et al, 2013 ). Usually, when people attempt to lie to a question, they need to intentionally suppress the default truthful response and then make a reverse reaction, which may therefore increase the difficulty of lying.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting spontaneous deception in the brain

Feng

Hung

Hsieh

2022

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deception detection can be of great value during the juristic investigation. Although the neural signatures of deception have been widely documented, most prior studies were biased by difficulty levels. That is, deceptive behavior typically required more effort, making deception detection possibly effort detection. Furthermore, no study has examined the generalizability across instructed and spontaneous responses and across participants. To explore these issues, we used a dual-task paradigm, where the difficulty level was balanced between truth-telling and lying, and the instructed and spontaneous truth-telling and lying were collected independently. Using Multivoxel pattern analysis, we were able to decode truth-telling versus lying with a balanced difficulty level. Results showed that the angular gyrus (AG), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and postcentral gyrus could differentiate lying from truth-telling. Critically, linear classifiers trained to distinguish instructed truthful and deceptive responses could correctly differentiate spontaneous truthful and deceptive responses in AG and IFG with above-chance accuracy. In addition, with a leave-one-participant-out analysis, multivoxel neural patterns from AG could classify if the left-out participant was lying or not in a trial. These results indicate the commonality of neural responses subserved instructed and spontaneous deceptive behavior as well as the feasibility of cross-participant deception validation.

show abstract

“…There have also been several studies of deception using tDCS. Two studies stimulated the right temporo-parietal junction and found decreased deceptive responding in a social context (Tang et al, 2017 ; Noguchi and Oizumi, 2018 ), while most have focused on PFC stimulation (Priori et al, 2008 ; Karim et al, 2010 ; Mameli et al, 2010 ; Fecteau et al, 2013 ; Maréchal et al, 2017 ; Sánchez et al, 2020 ). Priori et al found bilateral stimulation increased reaction time in deceitful responses compared to truth, while Mameli et al, Karim et al, and Fecteau et al found faster RT in lie conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Online Single Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Prefrontal and Parietal Cortices in Deceptive Processing: A Preliminary Study

Luber

Beynel

Spellman

et al. 2022

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to test the functional role of parietal and prefrontal cortical regions activated during a playing card Guilty Knowledge Task (GKT). Single-pulse TMS was applied to 15 healthy volunteers at each of three target sites: left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and midline parietal cortex. TMS pulses were applied at each of five latencies (from 0 to 480 ms) after the onset of a card stimulus. TMS applied to the parietal cortex exerted a latency-specific increase in inverse efficiency score and in reaction time when subjects were instructed to lie relative to when asked to respond with the truth, and this effect was specific to when TMS was applied at 240 ms after stimulus onset. No effects of TMS were detected at left or right DLPFC sites. This manipulation with TMS of performance in a deception task appears to support a critical role for the parietal cortex in intentional false responding, particularly in stimulus selection processes needed to execute a deceptive response in the context of a GKT. However, this interpretation is only preliminary, as further experiments are needed to compare performance within and outside of a deceptive context to clarify the effects of deceptive intent.

show abstract

Both High Cognitive Load and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Right Inferior Frontal Cortex Make Truth and Lie Responses More Similar

Cited by 5 publications

References 77 publications

TDCS Modulates Working Memory Maintenance Processes in Healthy Individuals

TDCS Modulates Working Memory Maintenance Processes in Healthy Individuals

Detecting spontaneous deception in the brain

Effects of Online Single Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Prefrontal and Parietal Cortices in Deceptive Processing: A Preliminary Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About