Limitations to the detection of deception: True and false recollections are poorly distinguished using an event-related potential procedure

John Allen, Ralf Mertens

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

The utility of using indices of neural function to identify deception relies on finding highly reliable and valid approaches that adequately identify the guilty and exonerate the innocent. A class of approaches, based on the guilty knowledge technique (GKT), assume that guilty individuals will recognize specific crime-relevant details, whereas innocent individuals will not. Memory distortions, however, may limit the accuracy of such procedures. To investigate these limits, two studies were conducted to examine whether brain electrical activity could differentiate true from false recollections elicited by the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. The design of each study maximized the opportunity of finding electrocortical differences between true and false recognition. Each study found very high rates of false recognition, with little evidence that brain electrical activity could differentiate true from false memories. Results suggested that under certain conditions both true and false recollections can produce a pattern of brain activity indicative of recognition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)473-490
Number of pages18
JournalSocial Neuroscience
Volume4
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Development
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Limitations to the detection of deception: True and false recollections are poorly distinguished using an event-related potential procedure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this