Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25595193›Full record

ArticleBehavioral and brain functions : BBF2015

Decoding the processing of lying using functional connectivity MRI.

Weixiong Jiang, Huasheng Liu, Lingli Zeng, Jian Liao, Hui Shen, Aijing Luo, Dewen Hu, Wei Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral and brain functions : BBF, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Weixiong JiangDepartment of Radiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410013, P.R. China. jiangweixiong68@163.com.
Huasheng LiuDepartment of Radiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410013, P.R. China. liuhas_20040125@163.com.
Lingli ZengCollege of Mechatronics and Automation, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, Hunan, 410073, P.R. China. lingl.zeng@gmail.com.
Jian LiaoDepartment of Radiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410013, P.R. China. leslie0912@163.com.
Hui ShenCollege of Mechatronics and Automation, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, Hunan, 410073, P.R. China. shenhui_nudt@126.com.
Aijing LuoKey Laboratory of Medical Information Research (Central South University), College of Hunan Province, Changsha, Hunan, 410083, P.R. China. Ajlul@sohu.com.
Dewen HuCollege of Mechatronics and Automation, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, Hunan, 410073, P.R. China. dwhu@nudt.edu.cn.
Wei WangDepartment of Radiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410013, P.R. China. cjr.wangwei@vip.163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious functional MRI (fMRI) studies have demonstrated group differences in brain activity between deceptive and honest responses. The functional connectivity network related to lie-telling remains largely uncharacterized.

methodsIn this study, we designed a lie-telling experiment that emphasized strategy devising. Thirty-two subjects underwent fMRI while responding to questions in a truthful, inverse, or deceitful manner. For each subject, whole-brain functional connectivity networks were constructed from correlations among brain regions for the lie-telling and truth-telling conditions. Then, a multivariate pattern analysis approach was used to distinguish lie-telling from truth-telling based on the functional connectivity networks.

resultsThe classification results demonstrated that lie-telling could be differentiated from truth-telling with an accuracy of 82.81% (85.94% for lie-telling, 79.69% for truth-telling). The connectivities related to the fronto-parietal networks, cerebellum and cingulo-opercular networks are most discriminating, implying crucial roles for these three networks in the processing of deception.

conclusionsThe current study may shed new light on the neural pattern of deception from a functional integration viewpoint.

Indexed as

DeceptionBrain MappingCerebellumFemaleFrontal LobeGeneralization, PsychologicalGyrus CinguliHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNerve NetNeural PathwaysParietal LobeReaction TimeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25595193
PMCPMC4316800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.