1
|
Melis G, Ursino M, Scarpazza C, Zangrossi A, Sartori G. Detecting lies in investigative interviews through the analysis of response latencies and error rates to unexpected questions. Sci Rep 2024; 14:12268. [PMID: 38806588 PMCID: PMC11133341 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63156-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 05/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
In this study, we propose an approach to detect deception during investigative interviews by integrating response latency and error analysis with the unexpected question technique. Sixty participants were assigned to an honest (n = 30) or deceptive group (n = 30). The deceptive group was instructed to memorize the false biographical details of a fictitious identity. Throughout the interviews, participants were presented with a randomized sequence of control, expected, and unexpected open-ended questions about identity. Responses were audio recorded for detailed examination. Our findings indicate that deceptive participants showed markedly longer latencies and higher error rates when answering expected (requiring deception) and unexpected questions (for which premeditated deception was not possible). Longer response latencies were also observed in participants attempting deception when answering control questions (which necessitated truthful answers). Moreover, a within-subject analysis highlighted that responding to unexpected questions significantly impaired individuals' performance compared to answering control and expected questions. Leveraging machine-learning algorithms, our approach attained a classification accuracy of 98% in distinguishing deceptive and honest participants. Additionally, a classification analysis on single response levels was conducted. Our findings underscore the effectiveness of merging response latency metrics and error rates with unexpected questioning as a robust method for identity deception detection in investigative interviews. We also discuss significant implications for enhancing interview strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Melis
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy.
- Human Inspired Technology Research Centre, University of Padua, Padova, Italy.
| | - Martina Ursino
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy
| | - Cristina Scarpazza
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy
- Translational Neuroimaging and Cognitive Lab, IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Venice, Italy
| | - Andrea Zangrossi
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy
- Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padua, Padova, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sartori
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Luber B, Beynel L, Spellman T, Gura H, Ploesser M, Termini K, Lisanby SH. Effects of Online Single Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Prefrontal and Parietal Cortices in Deceptive Processing: A Preliminary Study. Front Hum Neurosci 2022; 16:883337. [PMID: 35795258 PMCID: PMC9250982 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.883337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to test the functional role of parietal and prefrontal cortical regions activated during a playing card Guilty Knowledge Task (GKT). Single-pulse TMS was applied to 15 healthy volunteers at each of three target sites: left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and midline parietal cortex. TMS pulses were applied at each of five latencies (from 0 to 480 ms) after the onset of a card stimulus. TMS applied to the parietal cortex exerted a latency-specific increase in inverse efficiency score and in reaction time when subjects were instructed to lie relative to when asked to respond with the truth, and this effect was specific to when TMS was applied at 240 ms after stimulus onset. No effects of TMS were detected at left or right DLPFC sites. This manipulation with TMS of performance in a deception task appears to support a critical role for the parietal cortex in intentional false responding, particularly in stimulus selection processes needed to execute a deceptive response in the context of a GKT. However, this interpretation is only preliminary, as further experiments are needed to compare performance within and outside of a deceptive context to clarify the effects of deceptive intent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bruce Luber
- Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States
- *Correspondence: Bruce Luber
| | - Lysianne Beynel
- Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Timothy Spellman
- Department of Neuroscience, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT, United States
| | - Hannah Gura
- Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Markus Ploesser
- Department of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, United States
- Forensic Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Kate Termini
- Clinical and Forensic Psychology, Fifth Avenue Forensics, New York, NY, United States
| | - Sarah H. Lisanby
- Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States
| |
Collapse
|