Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29593514›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2018

Lie Detection Using fNIRS Monitoring of Inhibition-Related Brain Regions Discriminates Infrequent but not Frequent Liars.

Fang Li, Huilin Zhu, Jie Xu, Qianqian Gao, Huan Guo, Shijing Wu, Xinge Li, Sailing He

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Fang LiCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Huilin ZhuCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Jie XuCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Qianqian GaoGuangdong Dance and Drama College, Foshan, China.
Huan GuoSchool of Psychology, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Shijing WuCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Xinge LiCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.
Sailing HeCentre for Optical and Electromagnetic Research, South China Academy of Advanced Optoelectronics, South China Normal University (SCNU), Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was used to test whether monitoring inhibition-related brain regions is a feasible method for detecting both infrequent liars and frequent liars. Thirty-two participants were divided into two groups: the deceptive group (liars) and the non-deceptive group (ND group, innocents). All the participants were required to undergo a simulated interrogation by a computer. The participants from the deceptive group were instructed to tell a mix of lies and truths and those of the ND group were instructed always to tell the truth. Based on the number of deceptions, the participants of the deceptive group were further divided into a infrequently deceptive group (IFD group, infrequent liars) and a frequently deceptive group (FD group, frequent liars). The infrequent liars exhibited greater neural activities than the frequent liars and the innocents in the left middle frontal gyrus (MFG) when performing the deception detection tasks. While performing deception detection tasks, infrequent liars showed significantly greater neural activation in the left MFG than the baseline, but frequent liars and innocents did not exhibit this pattern of neural activation in any area of inhibition-related brain regions. The results of individual analysis showed an acceptable accuracy of detecting infrequent liars, but an unacceptable accuracy of detecting frequent liars. These results suggest that using fNIRS monitoring of inhibition-related brain regions is feasible for detecting infrequent liars, for whom deception may be more effortful and therefore more physiologically marked, but not frequent liars.

Indexed as

deceptiondetection feasibilityfNIRSinhibitionmiddle frontal gyrus

Identifiers

PMID29593514
PMCPMC5859104

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.