ArticlePsychophysiology2024
Cortical oscillations and event-related brain potentials during the preparation and execution of deceptive behavior.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cortical oscillations and event-related brain potentials during the preparation and execution of deceptive behavior.Psychophysiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deception often occurs in response to a preceding cue (e.g., a precarious question) alerting us about the need to subsequently lie. Here, we simulate this process by adapting a previously established paradigm of intentionally false responding, now instructing participants about the need for deception (vs. truthful responses) by means of a simple cue occurring before each response-relevant target. We analyzed event-related brain potentials (ERPs) as well as cortical oscillations recorded from the scalp. In an experimental study (N = 44), we show that a cue signaling the need for deception involves increased attentional selection (P2, P3a, P3b). Moreover, in the period following the cue and leading up to the target, ERP and oscillatory signatures of anticipation and preparation (Contingent Negative Variation, alpha suppression) were found to be increased during trials requiring a deceptive as compared to a truthful response. Additionally, we replicated earlier findings that target processing involves enhanced motivated attention toward words requiring a deceptive response (LPC). Moreover, a signature of integration effort and semantic inhibition (N400) was observed to be larger for words to which responses have to be intentionally false as compared to those to which responses must be truthful. Our findings support the view of the involvement of a series of basic cognitive processes (especially attention and cognitive control) when responses are deliberately wrong instead of right. Moreover, preceding cues signaling the subsequent need for lying already elicit attentional and preparatory mechanisms facilitating the cognitive operations necessary for later successful lying.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.