Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27142046›Full record

Trial reportBMC neuroscience2016

Uninstructed BIAT faking when ego depleted or in normal state: differential effect on brain and behavior.

Wanja Wolff, Sebastian Schindler, Christoph Englert, Ralf Brand, Johanna Kissler

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Wanja WolffDepartment of Sport Science - Section Sport Psychology, University of Konstanz, Universitätsstr. 10, 78457, Constance, Germany.
Sebastian SchindlerDepartment of Psychology, University of Bielefeld, Universitätsstr. 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany. sebastian.schindler@uni-bielefeld.de.
Christoph EnglertDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Bern, Fabrikstr. 8, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Ralf BrandSport and Exercise Psychology, University of Potsdam, Im Neuen Palais 10, 14469, Potsdam, Germany.
Johanna KisslerDepartment of Psychology, University of Bielefeld, Universitätsstr. 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeception can distort psychological tests on socially sensitive topics. Understanding the cerebral processes that are involved in such faking can be useful in detection and prevention of deception. Previous research shows that faking a brief implicit association test (BIAT) evokes a characteristic ERP response. It is not yet known whether temporarily available self-control resources moderate this response. We randomly assigned 22 participants (15 females, 24.23 ± 2.91 years old) to a counterbalanced repeated-measurements design. Participants first completed a Brief-IAT (BIAT) on doping attitudes as a baseline measure and were then instructed to fake a negative doping attitude both when self-control resources were depleted and non-depleted. Cerebral activity during BIAT performance was assessed using high-density EEG.

resultsCompared to the baseline BIAT, event-related potentials showed a first interaction at the parietal P1, while significant post hoc differences were found only at the later occurring late positive potential. Here, significantly decreased amplitudes were recorded for 'normal' faking, but not in the depletion condition. In source space, enhanced activity was found for 'normal' faking in the bilateral temporoparietal junction. Behaviorally, participants were successful in faking the BIAT successfully in both conditions.

conclusionsResults indicate that temporarily available self-control resources do not affect overt faking success on a BIAT. However, differences were found on an electrophysiological level. This indicates that while on a phenotypical level self-control resources play a negligible role in deliberate test faking the underlying cerebral processes are markedly different.

Indexed as

AssociationDeceptionElectroencephalographyPsychological TestsSelf-ControlAdultAttitudeAttitude to HealthBrainEgoEvoked PotentialsExecutive FunctionFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeCognitive controlDeceptionEEG/ERPEgo depletionFakingImplicit association test (IAT)

Identifiers

PMID27142046
PMCPMC4855370

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.