Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
    Neuroimage. 2011 Mar 1;55(1):312-9. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.025. Epub 2010 Nov 24.

    Lying in the scanner: covert countermeasures disrupt deception detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging.

    Source

    Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. ganis@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu

    Abstract

    Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have documented differences between deceptive and honest responses. Capitalizing on this research, companies marketing fMRI-based lie detection services have been founded, generating methodological and ethical concerns in scientific and legal communities. Critically, no fMRI study has examined directly the effect of countermeasures, methods used by prevaricators to defeat deception detection procedures. An fMRI study was conducted to fill this research gap using a concealed information paradigm in which participants were trained to use countermeasures. Robust group fMRI differences between deceptive and honest responses were found without, but not with countermeasures. Furthermore, in single participants, deception detection accuracy was 100% without countermeasures, using activation in ventrolateral and medial prefrontal cortices, but fell to 33% with countermeasures. These findings show that fMRI-based deception detection measures can be vulnerable to countermeasures, calling for caution before applying these methods to real-world situations.

    Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

    PMID:
    21111834
    [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

      Supplemental Content

      Icon for Elsevier Science

      Save items

      Recent activity

      Your browsing activity is empty.

      Activity recording is turned off.

      Turn recording back on

      See more...
      Write to the Help Desk