Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “LIE DETECTION”

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.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Unicorns or Tiger Woods: are lie detection experts myths or rarities? A response to on lie detection "wizards" by Bond and Uysal.

Bond and Uysal (this issue) complain that expert lie detectors identified by O'Sullivan and Ekman (2004) are statistical flukes. They ignore one class of experts we have identified and misrepresent the procedures we use to identify the others. They also question the psychometric validity of the measures and protocol used. Many of their points are addressed in the chapter they criticize. The fruitfulness of the O'Sullivan-Ekman protocol is illustrated with respect to improved identification of expert lie detectors, as well as a replicated pattern of errors made by experts from different professional groups. The statistical arguments offered confuse the theoretical use of the binomial with the empirical use of the normal distribution. Data are provided that may clarify this distinction.

Deception↗
PubMed2006

Lie detection: historical, neuropsychiatric and legal dimensions.

Lying and deception are behaviors that have been studied and discussed extensively in the scientific, philosophical and legal communities for centuries. The purpose of this article is to provide a general overview of the literature and thinking to date about deception, followed by an analysis of the efficacy and evolution of lie detection techniques. The first part explores the definitions of lying, from animal behaviorists' perspectives to philosophical theories, along with demographics and research about the prevalence of lying and characteristics of those who lie. This is followed by a discussion of possible motivations for lying, moral arguments about the legitimacy of or prohibition against lying, and developmental theorists' explanations for the growth of a human being's capacity to lie. The first section provides an introduction for the second part, a historical and critical review of lie detection techniques. Early methods, such as phrenology and truth serums are contrasted with more modern-day approaches, such as polygraphy and functional MRIs. Conclusions are drawn about whether technology has really advanced the art of detecting deception. Finally, the article enters a discussion about the law's response to lie detection methods and to deception in general. United States landmark cases, at both the state and federal level, are critiqued with regard to their impact on the admissibility into court of lie detection methods as evidence. Just as the scientific community has been wary of embracing many of these methods, so has the legal community. Through a review of the legal, scientific and pseudo-scientific issues surrounding deception, a greater understanding is reached of the complexity of this universal and morally loaded behavior.

History, 19th Century↗
PubMed2006

Detecting lies in children and adults.

In this study, observers' abilities to detect lies in children and adults were examined. Adult participants observed videotaped interviews of both children and adults either lying or telling the truth about having been touched by a male research assistant. As hypothesized, observers detected children's lies more accurately than adults' lies; however, adults' truthful statements were detected more accurately than were children's. Further analyses revealed that observers were biased toward judging adults' but not children's statements as truthful. Finally, consistent with the notion that there are stable individual differences in the ability to detect lies, observers who were highly accurate in detecting children's lies were similarly accurate in detecting adults' lies. Implications of these findings for understanding lie-detection accuracy are discussed, as are potential applications to the forensic context.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: application to lie detection.

Patterns of brain activity during deception have recently been characterized with fMRI on the multi-subject average group level. The clinical value of fMRI in lie detection will be determined by the ability to detect deception in individual subjects, rather than group averages. High-dimensional non-linear pattern classification methods applied to functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) images were used to discriminate between the spatial patterns of brain activity associated with lie and truth. In 22 participants performing a forced-choice deception task, 99% of the true and false responses were discriminated correctly. Predictive accuracy, assessed by cross-validation in participants not included in training, was 88%. The results demonstrate the potential of non-linear machine learning techniques in lie detection and other possible clinical applications of fMRI in individual subjects, and indicate that accurate clinical tests could be based on measurements of brain function with fMRI.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Lie detection with contingent negative variation.

topographies of contingent negative variation (CNV) were recorded in a paradigm of delayed response with feedback for three kinds of faces: familiar, strange and target. Subjects made responses to the faces according to whether the faces were familiar or not, but also, gave deliberately deceptive responses to target faces to 'cheat the computer'. Subjects were told that the computer could judge whether they were being honest or not. For each trial of the experiment, if subjects cheated the computer successfully and their responses were judged as honest and they were given a reward, otherwise they received a penalty. In this simulated lie detection test, CNV exhibited more negative shifts for target than those for non-target (familiar and strange). These differences could be accounted for by subjects' motivation and uncertainty about passing the test. With the results of further paired t-tests between target and non-target faces at each electrode, CNV was demonstrated as a reliable indicator for lie detection. In addition, vector length was used to capture global CNV information and was found to be a very good indicator, even better than the CNV information at the individual electrode sites.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1991

The truth will out: interrogative polygraphy ("lie detection") with event-related brain potentials.

The feasibility of using Event Related Brain Potentials (ERPs) in Interrogative Polygraphy ("Lie Detection") was tested by examining the effectiveness of the Guilty Knowledge Test designed by Farwell and Donchin (1986, 1988). The subject is assigned an arbitrary task requiring discrimination between experimenter-designated targets and other, irrelevant stimuli. A group of diagnostic items ("probes"), which to the unwitting are indistinguishable from the irrelevant items, are embedded among the irrelevant. For subjects who possess "guilty knowledge" these probes are distinct from the irrelevants and are likely to elicit a P300, thus revealing their possessing the special knowledge that allows them to differentiate the probes from the irrelevants. We report two experiments in which this paradigm was tested. In Experiment 1, 20 subjects participated in one of two mock espionage scenarios and were tested for their knowledge of both scenarios. All stimuli consisted of short phrases presented for 300 ms each at an interstimulus interval of 1550 ms. A set of items were designated as "targets" and appeared on 17% of the trials. Probes related to the scenarios also appeared on 17% of the trials. The rest of the items were irrelevants. Subjects responded by pressing one switch following targets, and the other following irrelevants (and, of course, probes). ERPs were recorded from FZ, CZ, and PZ. As predicted, targets elicited large P300s in all subjects. Probes associated with a given scenario elicited a P300 in subjects who participated in that scenario. A bootstrapping method was used to assess the quality of the decision for each subject. The algorithm declared the decision indeterminate in 12.5% of the cases. In all other cases a decision was made. There were no false positives and no false negatives: whenever a determination was made it was accurate. The second experiment was virtually identical to the first, with identical results, except that this time 4 subjects were tested, each of which had a minor brush with the law. Subjects were tested to determine whether they possessed information on their own "crimes." The results were as expected; the Guilty Knowledge Test determined correctly which subject possessed which information. The implications of these data both for the practice of Interrogative Polygraphy and the interpretation of the P300 are discussed.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Polygraph lie detection on real events in a laboratory setting.

This laboratory study dealt with real-life intense emotional events. Subjects generated embarrassing stories from their experience, then submitted to polygraph testing and, by lying, denied their stories and, by telling the truth, denied a randomly assigned story. Money was given as an incentive to be judged innocent on each story. An interrogator, blind to the stories, used Control Question Tests and found subjects more deceptive when lying than when truthful. Stories interacted with order such that lying on the second story was more easily detected than lying on the first. Embarrassing stories provide an alternative to the use of mock crimes to study lie detection in the laboratory.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging.

The accurate detection of deception or lying is a challenge to experts in many scientific disciplines. To investigate if specific cerebral activation characterized feigned memory impairment, six healthy male volunteers underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging with a block-design paradigm while they performed forced-choice memory tasks involving both simulated malingering and under normal control conditions. Malingering that demonstrated the existence and involvement of a prefrontal-parietal-sub-cortical circuit with feigned memory impairment produced distinct patterns of neural activation. Because astute liars feign memory impairment successfully in testing once they understand the design of the measure being employed, our study represents an extremely significant preliminary step towards the development of valid and sensitive methods for the detection of deception.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

"Intuitive" lie detection of children's deception by law enforcement officials and university students.

Adults' ability to detect children's deception was examined. Police officers, customs officers, and university students attempted to differentiate between children who lied or told the truth about a transgression. When children were simply questioned about the event (Experiment 1), the adult groups could not distinguish between lie-tellers and truth-tellers. However, participants were more accurate when the children had participated in moral reasoning tasks (Experiment 2) or promised to tell the truth (Experiment 3) before being interviewed. Additional exposure to the children did not affect accuracy (Experiment 4). Customs officers were more certain about their judgments than other groups, but no more accurate. Overall, adults have a limited ability to identify children's deception, regardless of their experience with lie detection.

Adult↗
PubMed2007

On lie detection "wizards".

M. O'Sullivan and P. Ekman (2004) claim to have discovered 29 wizards of deception detection. The present commentary offers a statistical critique of the evidence for this claim. Analyses reveal that chance can explain results that the authors attribute to wizardry. Thus, by the usual statistical logic of psychological research, O'Sullivan and Ekman's claims about wizardry are gratuitous. Even so, there may be individuals whose wizardry remains to be uncovered. Thus, the commentary outlines forms of evidence that are (and are not) capable of diagnosing lie detection wizardry.

Deception↗