An object cue is more effective than a word in ERP-based detection of deception

International Journal of Psychophysiology

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 185-192

  Cutmore, Tim R H ^a   Djakovic, Tatjana ^a   Kebbell, Mark R ^a   Shum, David H K ^a  

^a GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Brain activity; Deception; Detection; ERP; Event related potentials; Memory

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CUES; DECEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS, P300; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LIE DETECTION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 61349193805     PISSN: 01678760     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.08.003     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abootalebi V., Moradi M.H., and Khalilzadeh M.A. A comparison of methods for ERP assessment in a P300-based GKT. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 62 (2006) 309-320
2. Ally B.A., and Budson A.E. The worth of pictures: using high density event-related potentials to understand the memorial power of pictures and the dynamics of recognition memory. NeuroImage 35 (2007) 378-395
3. Ben-Shakhar G., and Elaad E. The validity of psychophysiological detection of information with the Guilty Knowledge Test: a meta-analytic review. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (2003) 131-151
4. Boaz T.L., Perry Jr. N.W., Raney G., Fischler I.S., and Shuman D. Detection of guilty knowledge with event-related potentials. J. Appl. Psychol. 76 (1991) 788-795
5. Brown E., Deffenbacher K., and Sturgill W. Memory for faces and the circumstances of encounter. J. Appl. Psychol. 62 (1977) 311-318
6. Buckner R.L., Logan J., Donaldson D.I., and Wheeler M.E. Cognitive neuroscience of episodic memory encoding. Brain Activity Cog. Proc. 105 2-3 (2000) 127-139
7. Celka P., and Cutmore T.R.H. Recursive smooth noise reduction using subspace approach: application to evoked potential. Proceedings of the World Conference on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Seoul, August 27-Septembre 01 2006 (2006) 1063-1067
8. Cutmore, T.R.H. & Celka, P. (in press). Composite noise reduction of ERPs using wavelet, model-based and principle component subspace methods, J. Psychophys.
9. Donchin E., and Coles M.G.H. Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?. Behav. Brain Sci. 11 (1988) 357-374
10. Fabiani M., Gratton G., Karis D., and Donchin E. The definition, identification, and reliability of measurement of the P300 component of the event-related brain potential. In: Ackles P.K., Jennings J.R., and Coles M.G.H. (Eds). Advances in Psychophysiology (1987), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT
11. Fang F., Liu Y., and Shen Z. Lie detection with contingent negative variation. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 50 (2003) 247-255
12. Farwell L.A., and Donchin E. The truth will out: interrogative polygraphy ("lie detection") with event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 28 (1991) 531-547
13. Fischler I., Childers D.G., Achariyapaopan X., and Perry N.W. Brain potentials during sentence verification: automatic aspects of comprehension. Biol. Psychol. 21 (1985) 83-105
14. Hillstrom A.P., and Yu-Chin C. Factors that guide or disrupt visual processing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 22 (2006) 648-656
15. Iacono W.G. Forensic 'lie detection': procedures without scientific basis. J. Forensic Psychol. Pract. 1 (2001) 75-86
16. Iacono W.G. The forensic application of "brain fingerprinting": why scientists should encourage the use of P300 memory detection methods. Am. J. Bioeth. 8 (2008) 30-32
17. Johnson D.J., and Rugg M.D. Modulation of the electrophysiological correlates of retrieval cue processing by the specificity of task demands. Brain Res. 1071 (2006) 153-164
18. Johnson P.E., Grazioli S., Jamal K., and Berryman R.G. Detecting deception: adversarial problem solving in a low base-rate world. Cogn. Sci. 25 (2001) 355-392
19. Johnson R. The amplitude of the P300 component of the event-related potential: Review and synthesis. In: Ackles P.K., Jennings J.R., and Coles M.G.H. (Eds). Advances in Psychophysiology (1988), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT
20. Johnson Jr. R., Barnhardt J., and Zhu J. The contribution of executive processes to deceptive responding. Neuropsychologia 42 (2004) 878-901
21. Keppel G., and Wickens T.D. Design and Analysis: A Researchers Handbook. 4th Ed. (2004), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey
22. Kozel F.A., and Padgett T.M. A replication of the neural correlates of deception. Behav Neurosci 118 (2004) 852-856
23. Kutas M., and Hillyard S.A. Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biol. Psychol. 11 (1980) 99-116
24. Lefebvre C.C., Marchand Y., Smith S.M., and Connolly J.F. Determining eye witness identification accuracy using event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 44 (2007) 894-904
25. Lykken D.T. A Tremor in the Blood (1981), McGraw-Hill, New York
26. Lykken D.T. Trial by polygraph. Behav. Sci. Law 2 (1984) 75-92
27. McBride D.M., and Dosher B.A. Conscious Cogn. 11 (2002) 423-460
28. Meegan D.V. Neuroimaging techniques for memory detection: scientific, ethical and legal issues. Am. J. Bioeth. 8 (2008) 9-20
29. Mintzer M.Z., and Snodgrass J.G. The picture superiority effect: support for the distinctiveness model. Am. J. Psychol. 112 (1999) 113-146
30. National Research Council. The Polygraph and Lie Detection (2003), The National Academies Press, Washington DC
31. Potts G.F. An ERP index of task relevance evaluation of visual stimuli. Brain Cogn. 56 (2004) 5-13
32. Reid J.E., and Inbau F.E. Truth and Deception: The Polygraph ("Lie Detector") Technique (1977), Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore
33. Rosenfeld J.P., Nasman V.T., Whalen R., Cantwell B., and Mazzeri L. Late vertex positivity in event-related potentials as a guilty knowledge indicator: a new method of lie detection. Int. J. Neurosci. 34 (1987) 125-129
34. Rosenfeld J.P., Cantwell B., Nasman V.T., Wojdac V., Ivanov S., and Mazzeri L. A modified event-related potential-based guilty knowledge test. Int. J. Neurosci. 42 (1988) 157-161
35. Rosenfeld J.P., Angell A., Johnson M., and Qian J. Psychophysiology 28 (1991) 319-335
36. Rosenfeld J.P., Soskins M., Bosh G., and Ryan A. Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology 41 2 (2004) 205-219
37. Rosenfeld J.P., Biroschak J.R., and Furedy J.J. P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical verses incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 60 (2006) 251-259
38. Rosenfeld J.P., Shue E., and Singer E. Single verses multiple probe blocks of P300-based concealed information tests for self-referring verses incidentally obtained information. Biol. Psychol. 74 (2007) 396-404
39. Rugg M.D., and Wilding E.L. Retrieval processing and episodic memory. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4 (2000) 108-115
40. Saxe L., Dougherty D., and Cross T. The validity of polygraph testing: scientific analysis and public controversy. Am. Psychol. 40 (1985) 355-366
41. Sawaki R., and Katayama J. Stimulus context determines whether non-target stimuli are processed as task-relevant or distractor information. Clin. Neurophysiol. 117 (2006) 2532-2539
42. Semlitsch H.V., Anderer P., Schuster P., and Presslich O. A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology 23 (1986) 695-703
43. Soskins M., Rosenfeld J.P., and Niendam T. Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis: complex vs. simple paradigms. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 40 (2001) 173-180
44. Wasserman S., and Bockenholt U. Bootstrapping: applications to psychophysiology. Psychophysiology 26 (1989) 208-221
45. Vrij A. Detecting Lies and Deceit: The Psychology of Lying and the Implications for Professional Practice (2000), Chichester Wiley, USA