ERP and fMRI Research in the Detection of Deception

2. Organization Theoretical Research with ERPs fMRI in 5 seconds Current Deception Research with fMRI Techniques combining multiple methods

4. Aspects of deception in the ERP

5. ERPs: The Signal-Noise Approach Signal: Brain wave associated with deception Several potential waveforms are studied The most consistent is the P300 evoked in an oddball paradigm with concealed information Noise: Every other signal generated by the human brain

6. The Signal-Noise Approach has Historically Proven Inadequate for BOTH Polygraph and ERPs Reliability Both measures deliver consistent results across repeated tests Validity But NEITHER measure has been experimentally validated They measure something, but not necessarily deception

7. Functional MRI This technique allows us to watch the human brain in action.

8. Functional MRI An MRI scanner can detect the magnetic change as blood flow increases in certain parts of the brain. We can use this to determine which parts of the brain are most active.

9. Functional MRI Example: ask a person to move their eyes

10. Activated Parts of the Brain

11. Current Research in fMRI: Regions of Activation sited in Bhaat et al (in press)

12. Individual Trials fMRI studies

13. Variability in fMRI Approaches Within Subject Noise Subject movement Respiratory, cardiac artifacts Scanner instability Attentional modulation Inconsistent cognitive strategy Learning effects Drugs and medications Anxiety Countermeasures Between Subject Noise Consistent differences in factors related to within subject noise Anatomic variability Cytoarchitectonic variability Variability in venous drainage patterns Differences in hemoglobin concentrations Between Paradigm Noise Inconsistent definition of the type of deception DIfferences in the rate, number, and type of stimuli presented Differences in the type of memory to which the participants deceive Differences in reward/punishment scenario

15. Incidental Measurement Differences

16. Example paradigm differences Spence, Farrow, Herford, Wilkinson, Zheng, and Woodruff (2001): directed lies to episodic memory Langleben, Schroeder, Maldjian, Gur, McDonald, Ragland, O�Brien, and Childress (2002): directed lies in a digit recall type task with cards Lee, Liu, Tan, Chan, Mahankali, Feng, Hou, Fox, and Gao (2002): Feigned memory impairment to digit span and autobiographical memories Ganis, Kosslyn, Stose, Thompson, and Yurgelun-Todd (2003): Planned lies vs. spontaneous lies to long latency episodic information Kozel, Padgett, and George (2004): Planned lies to recently short latency episodic information Faro, Mohamed, Gordon, Platek, Williams, and Ahmad (2004): Planned lies to short latency episodic information

17. Deception is a complicated socio-dynamic cognitive process It is possible that deception is not the result of a unique structure or system within the human brain Rather it is the result of several sub-processes that are also recruited during other socio-dynamic cognitive processes (like lecturing)

18. Conclusions from MRI Studies Motivation: Kozel, Langleben, Phan Orbitofrontal activation only present in Kozel Autobiographical Memory: Ganis, Lee, Spence Temporal activation present only in LEE Weighing of multiple information sources�all studies Prefrontal cortex: Lee, Ganis, Kozel, Faro Resource allocation, attention switching, response conflict � all studies Lee, Langleben, Ganis, Kozel, Faro, Spence, Phan Regions of confusion Cuneus, cerebellum

19. Conclusions These technologies are not ready for practical application The issues that limit the utility of ERP and fMRI have nothing to do with the equipment The major problems all revolve around the supporting science The science is currently in its infancy, and has thus far had a troubled development