The functional anatomical distinction between truth telling and deception is preserved among people with schizophrenia

Kaylor-Hughes, Catherine; Lankappa, Sudheer; Fung, Robert; Hope-Urwin, Alexandra E.; Wilkinson, Iain D.; Spence, Sean A.

doi:10.1002/cbm.785

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A color cue on the screen instructs when to lie or tell the truth. This paradigm has been successfully used with children (Otgaar, Verschuere, Meijer, & Van Oorsouw, 2012), adolescents (Verschuere, Spruyt, Meijer, & Otgaar, 2011), and adults (Fullam, McKie, & Dolan, 2009;Kaylor-Hughes et al, 2011). In this task, one typically observes significant lie effects in error rates and RTs, indicating that lying is typically slower and more error-prone than truth telling (Spence et al, 2001;Van Bockstaele et al, 2012).…”

Section: Current Studymentioning

confidence: 98%

From junior to senior Pinocchio: A cross-sectional lifespan investigation of deception

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the first study to map deception across the entire lifespan. Specifically, we investigated age-related difference in lying proficiency and lying frequency. A large community sample (n = 1005) aged between 6 and 77 were surveyed on their lying frequency, and performed a reaction-time (RT) based deception task to assess their lying proficiency. Consistent with the inverted U-shaped pattern of age-related changes in inhibitory control that we observed in a stop signal task, we found that lying proficiency improved during childhood (in accuracy, not RTs), excelled in young adulthood (in accuracy and RTs), and worsened throughout adulthood (in accuracy and RTs). Likewise, lying frequency increased in childhood, peaked in adolescence, and decreased during adulthood. In sum, we observed important age-related difference in deception that generally fit with the U-shaped pattern of age-related changes observed in inhibitory control. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed from a cognitive view of deception.

show abstract

Section: Current Studymentioning

confidence: 98%

From junior to senior Pinocchio: A cross-sectional lifespan investigation of deception

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The accuracy of discrimination between two conditions within subjects is not equivalent to the probability of detecting liars in a cohort containing liars and truth tellers, with truth-tellers being a majority. Though studies have begun to address these gaps (Abe, et al, 2009; Ganis, Kosslyn, Stose, Thompson, & Yurgelun-Todd, 2003; Ganis, Rosenfeld, Meixner, et al, 2011; Kaylor-Hughes, et al, 2010; Kozel, et al, 2009; Mildner, Zysset, Trampel, Driesel, & Moller, 2005; Nunez, Casey, Egner, Hare, & Hirsch, 2005), comprehensive answers to the translational questions require a more robust effort.…”

Section: The Current State Of Scientific Concerns: What Needs To Be Donementioning

confidence: 99%

Using brain imaging for lie detection: Where science, law, and policy collide.

Langleben¹,

Moriarty²

2013

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Progress in the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the brain to evaluate deception and differentiate lying from truth-telling has created anticipation of a breakthrough in the search for technology-based methods of lie detection. In the last few years, litigants have attempted to introduce fMRI lie detection evidence in courts. This article weighs in on the interdisciplinary debate about the admissibility of such evidence, identifying the missing pieces of the scientific puzzle that need to be completed if fMRI-based lie detection is to meet the standards of either legal reliability or general acceptance. We believe that the Daubert’s “known error rate” is the key concept linking the legal and scientific standards. We posit that properly-controlled clinical trials are the most convincing means to determine the error rates of fMRI-based lie detection and confirm or disprove the relevance of the promising laboratory research on this topic. This article explains the current state of the science and provides an analysis of the case law in which litigants have sought to introduce fMRI lie detection. Analyzing the myriad issues related to fMRI lie detection, the article identifies the key limitations of the current neuroimaging of deception science as expert evidence and explores the problems that arise from using scientific evidence before it is proven scientifically valid and reliable. We suggest that courts continue excluding fMRI lie detection evidence until this potentially useful form of forensic science meets the scientific standards currently required for adoption of a medical test or device. Given a multitude of stakeholders and, the charged and controversial nature and the potential societal impact of this technology, goodwill and collaboration of several government agencies may be required to sponsor impartial and comprehensive clinical trials that will guide the development of forensic fMRI technology.

show abstract

“…This was, therefore, the first aim of our study. To relate to most of the published studies on deception, we used an instructed lies paradigm, which, although suffers from some weaknesses ([27], [28]; see [16] for review), is still valued in the field [29], [30]) and constitutes a common interrogation tactics polygraph examiners use (for a review see: [31]). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex, Lies and fMRI—Gender Differences in Neural Basis of Deception

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deception has always been a part of human communication as it helps to promote self-presentation. Although both men and women are equally prone to try to manage their appearance, their strategies, motivation and eagerness may be different. Here, we asked if lying could be influenced by gender on both the behavioral and neural levels. To test whether the hypothesized gender differences in brain activity related to deceptive responses were caused by differential socialization in men and women, we administered the Gender Identity Inventory probing the participants’ subjective social sex role. In an fMRI session, participants were instructed either to lie or to tell the truth while answering a questionnaire focusing on general and personal information. Only for personal information, we found differences in neural responses during instructed deception in men and women. The women vs. men direct contrast revealed no significant differences in areas of activation, but men showed higher BOLD signal compared to women in the left middle frontal gyrus (MFG). Moreover, this effect remained unchanged when self-reported psychological gender was controlled for. Thus, our study showed that gender differences in the neural processes engaged during falsifying personal information might be independent from socialization.

show abstract

The functional anatomical distinction between truth telling and deception is preserved among people with schizophrenia

Abstract: As in healthy cohorts, the brains of people with schizophrenia exhibit a functional anatomical distinction between the states of truthfulness and deceit. Furthermore, this distinction pertains even in the presence of delusions.

Cited by 17 publications

References 28 publications

From junior to senior Pinocchio: A cross-sectional lifespan investigation of deception

From junior to senior Pinocchio: A cross-sectional lifespan investigation of deception

Using brain imaging for lie detection: Where science, law, and policy collide.

Sex, Lies and fMRI—Gender Differences in Neural Basis of Deception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About