FMRI beyond the clinic: will it ever be ready for prime time?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Subjects who were guilty of a mock crime, innocent and informed of the details of the crime or innocent, and uninformed of the details were examined on the polygraph with a modified version of a Control Question Test, which normally contains questions which are incriminating, ambiguous, and likely to be answered with a lie. We challenged the necessity of using incriminating, ambiguous control questions which may demand a lie as an answer. Instead, we created and tested control questions that were unambiguous and answered truthfully. The results, with the modified questions, showed correct identification of 86% of the guilty subjects and 83 to 89% of the innocent subjects.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
It was suggested that, when the Guilty Knowledge Test uses two repetitions, these should be combined showing the contribution of the second repetition to the accuracy of the first. Also recommended were effect size statistics in addition to accuracy rates.
Subjects chose and pretended to steal one object from a box of nine. They then watched a visual display of verbal representations of objects including their chosen object or one of eight novel objects on each trial. They were told to count one of the novel objects and that although they were welcome to try to beat our test, they would be unable to avoid noticing the chosen object. P3 responses were obtained only to counted and to chosen objects in 7 of 10 subjects not eliminated for artifact or noncooperation.
Malingering is a diagnosis that is frequently avoided by physicians. When there is a claim of symptoms or diseases that either are exaggerated or do not exist, the diagnosis of malingering should be entertained. Malingering is associated with a conscious intent to deceive in order to obtain a known gain. Psychoanalytical, criteria-based (DSM-IV) and 'adaptational' models have been advanced to explain malingering. The differential diagnosis of malingering includes factitious disorder, the somatoform disorders, the dissociative disorders, and specific medical conditions without somatoform disorder. Upon consideration of the differential diagnosis, confirmation of the suspicion of malingering is still required in order to make the diagnosis. Confirmation can be achieved by observation or by inferential methods. Observation can be employed with controlled environment observation or with covert, 'real-world' surveillance; inference may involve primary and/or secondary source information. It may be concluded that a greater attempt should be made to identify this diagnosis, as the cost of malingering to society is considerable.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The author explores the topic of rape in order to help security directors and rape victims better understand the medical and legal procedures a victim might experience. He describes how a rape case might be handled and what to expect.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.