Posts tagged lie detection

- I Cannot Tell a Lie by Adrienne Anifant in John Jay’s JusticeMatters, Fall 2012 …which just arrived in the mail a few days ago. (I’ve said it a hundred times, amazing faculty [srsly, none better] but the admin could use a trailer load of help.)
Fascinating article about Professor Maria Hartwig’s work towards the effectiveness of interrogation techniques based on “embodied cognition” and new approaches for detecting deception which seek to, “…reduce false accusations, wrongful convictions, lengthy appeals and the concomitant stress and anxiety to the accused and their families.” Her recent work is funded by the FBI/High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group. Clearly, I’d love to meet her. So maybe I WILL. Operation cold email awesome people in effect. Boom. 

- I Cannot Tell a Lie by Adrienne Anifant in John Jay’s JusticeMatters, Fall 2012 …which just arrived in the mail a few days ago. (I’ve said it a hundred times, amazing faculty [srsly, none better] but the admin could use a trailer load of help.)

Fascinating article about Professor Maria Hartwig’s work towards the effectiveness of interrogation techniques based on “embodied cognition” and new approaches for detecting deception which seek to, “…reduce false accusations, wrongful convictions, lengthy appeals and the concomitant stress and anxiety to the accused and their families.” Her recent work is funded by the FBI/High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group. Clearly, I’d love to meet her. So maybe I WILL. Operation cold email awesome people in effect. Boom. 

"Cross-Cultural Variation and fMRI Lie-Detection"

Welcome to a paper I’ll be referencing IRL. I was actually fighting with myself last night about populations to use for my fMRI study (I don’t want to use college students, since my study isn’t about college students), which Bruni brings up in the abstract:

On several basic features of perception and cognition, Western university students turn out to be outliers relative to the general human population, so that data based on them should be interpreted with caution.

So, I’m really glad I have this paper to base my request of special population off of now…since I’m not sure how easy it will be getting access to the population I need

So big up to Tommaso Bruni, former ‘guest list neighbor’ at the Neuroethics and Law Blog!  From Bruni’s conclusion:

The long and the short of this paper is that cross-cultural experiments on fMRI lie-detection should be performed before this technique enters courts, because the lab experiments with US citizens risk having an unacceptably low external validity. As a matter of fact, I suggest the technique cannot live up to the Daubert standards without such checks, because no error rate calculated in the lab can be projected onto real life without them. I do not take any position about the ethical acceptability of fMRI lie-detection, but argue that more neuroscientific research is needed (not only in the cross-cultural field) in order to assess its full potential both legally and morally. I therefore encourage and endorse more funding for fMRI lie-detection research. Only sound and carefully conducted empirical research can lead to new forensic technologies that can be useful to ascertain the truth and to justly determine legal proceedings. (via)

I ABSOLUTELY agree with him on why (technically) lie detection isn’t ready for courts.

Hey look internet, I agree with someone!

“Can It Read My Mind?” – What Do the Public and Experts Think of the Current (Mis)Uses of Neuroimaging?

Emerging applications of neuroimaging outside medicine and science have received intense public exposure through the media. Media misrepresentations can create a gulf between public and scientific understanding of the capabilities of neuroimaging and raise false expectations. To determine the extent of this effect and determine public opinions on acceptable uses and the need for regulation, we designed an electronic survey to obtain anonymous opinions from as wide a range of members of the public and neuroimaging experts as possible.

We found evidence of public skepticism about the use of neuroimaging for applications such as lie detection or to determine consumer preferences and considerable disquiet about use by employers or government and about how their data would be stored and used. While also somewhat skeptical about new applications of neuroimaging, experts grossly underestimated how often neuroimaging had been used as evidence in court. Although both the public and the experts rated highly the importance of a better informed public in limiting the inappropriate uses to which neuroimaging might be put, opinions differed on the need for, and mechanism of, actual regulation. Neuroscientists recognized the risks of inaccurate reporting of neuroimaging capabilities in the media but showed little motivation to engage with the public. The present study also emphasizes the need for better frameworks for scientific engagement with media and public education.   Via H/T vaughanbell


Figure 1. Responses from members of the public to how well neuroimaging can achieve various aims.

jtotheizzoe:

The perfect lie detector may be closer to reality than you think. The opportunities for its misuse are many, but MRI and EEG-based lie detection science is on the brink of being able to detect lies with startling accuracy - sometimes before you even know you’re going to lie.

Where there are people, there are lies. The theory of Machiavellian intelligence claims that our capacity to deceive was developed by virtue of our distant ancestors’ way of life and refined as their primate brains grew and developed more complex structures. Our closest relatives indicate that, from an evolutionary point of view, it has to do with the youngest part of the brain, that outer layer of coiling tissue called the neocortex, which takes up nearly eighty percent of human brain volume. The Scottish primatologist Richard Byrne and his partner Nadia Corp of the University of St. Andrews have explored the brains and behaviors of eighteen species of primates, and they found a striking connection. The larger the animal’s neocortex, the better they were at deceiving their fellow primates in everyday situations. 
Homo sapiens lies all the time. As individuals, we discover the nature of the lie at around the age of three or four and, from then on, it is a natural companion without which only very few can imagine living. You can’t really conceive of a modern, well-functioning society without the lie.

Read all the details on these technologies at Salon.

jtotheizzoe is on the one. I talked about this before, but it’s well worth repeating since ERPs are rarely mentioned in conjunction with lie detection given the glam factor of fMRIs. I venture EEG’s measuring Event Related Potentials is looking like a Preakness winner compared to fMRI scans for lie detection given the temporal (variation over time) vs spacial capabilities. It’s all about millisecond timing in deception. 
I just sat down with Dr. Ray Johnson of Queens College yesterday and discussed his work in deception spanning over 10 years- which is fascinating and deserves to be brought up. It reveals self conflict in the executive processes of the brain during deception shown by timing & amplitudes as well as the neural networks underlying explicit &  episodic  memory. 
That’s right, I’m doing interviews now. Booyah.

jtotheizzoe:

The perfect lie detector may be closer to reality than you think. The opportunities for its misuse are many, but MRI and EEG-based lie detection science is on the brink of being able to detect lies with startling accuracy - sometimes before you even know you’re going to lie.

Where there are people, there are lies. The theory of Machiavellian intelligence claims that our capacity to deceive was developed by virtue of our distant ancestors’ way of life and refined as their primate brains grew and developed more complex structures. Our closest relatives indicate that, from an evolutionary point of view, it has to do with the youngest part of the brain, that outer layer of coiling tissue called the neocortex, which takes up nearly eighty percent of human brain volume. The Scottish primatologist Richard Byrne and his partner Nadia Corp of the University of St. Andrews have explored the brains and behaviors of eighteen species of primates, and they found a striking connection. The larger the animal’s neocortex, the better they were at deceiving their fellow primates in everyday situations.

Homo sapiens lies all the time. As individuals, we discover the nature of the lie at around the age of three or four and, from then on, it is a natural companion without which only very few can imagine living. You can’t really conceive of a modern, well-functioning society without the lie.

Read all the details on these technologies at Salon.

jtotheizzoe is on the one. I talked about this before, but it’s well worth repeating since ERPs are rarely mentioned in conjunction with lie detection given the glam factor of fMRIs. I venture EEG’s measuring Event Related Potentials is looking like a Preakness winner compared to fMRI scans for lie detection given the temporal (variation over time) vs spacial capabilities. It’s all about millisecond timing in deception.

I just sat down with Dr. Ray Johnson of Queens College yesterday and discussed his work in deception spanning over 10 years- which is fascinating and deserves to be brought up. It reveals self conflict in the executive processes of the brain during deception shown by timing & amplitudes as well as the neural networks underlying explicit &  episodic  memory.

That’s right, I’m doing interviews now. Booyah.

Brain Scan Evidence Rejected by Brooklyn Court | Wired Science | Wired.com

datajunkie:

Interesting… I had expected the fMRI would fail the science test, not a legal one. Thoughts on this from my lawyer peeps?

▼▲

The legal question relies on the science. It’s all about the Daubert Standard -a test “used by a trial judge to make a preliminary assessment of whether an expert’s scientific testimony is based on reasoning or methodology that is scientifically valid and can properly be applied to the facts at issue.” (via) So, using this test,  it must have been empirically tested, had peer review and publication, a known error rate determined in its practice, governing standards/body, and be generally accepted in its field. Some states, like NY I believe, use the Frye test, but some say, the 2 are nearly the same.