Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39642199›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024

Distinguishing deception from its confounds by improving the validity of fMRI-based neural prediction.

Sangil Lee, Runxuan Niu, Lusha Zhu, Andrew S Kayser, Ming Hsu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Sangil LeeHelen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.ORCID 0000-0002-4443-9926
Runxuan NiuSchool of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, International Data Group/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Peking-Tsinghua Center for Life Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.
Lusha ZhuSchool of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, International Data Group/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Peking-Tsinghua Center for Life Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8717-6356
Andrew S KayserDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158.ORCID 0000-0001-5102-2136
Ming HsuHelen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.ORCID 0000-0001-7195-3579

Funding

Dopaminergic Mechanisms Underlying Human Social Behavior: A Multimodal ApproachR01MH112775 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI HSU, MING, KAYSER, ANDREW S · 2019 to 2023
$3.5M
Behavioral and Neural Correlates of Social Function in Alcohol Use DisordersR01AA026587 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KAYSER, ANDREW S · 2018 to 2022
$2.3M
MOST | National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) 32071095MOST | National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) 32325023NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA026587NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH112775NSF (NSF) 1851902STI2030-Major Projects 2022ZD0205100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deception is a universal human behavior. Yet longstanding skepticism about the validity of measures used to characterize the biological mechanisms underlying deceptive behavior has relegated such studies to the scientific periphery. Here, we address these fundamental questions by applying machine learning methods and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to signaling games capturing motivated deception in human participants. First, we develop an approach to test for the presence of confounding processes and validate past skepticism by showing that much of the predictive power of neural predictors trained on deception data comes from processes other than deception. Specifically, we demonstrate that discriminant validity is compromised by the predictor's ability to predict behavior in a control task that does not involve deception. Second, we show that the presence of confounding signals need not be fatal and that the validity of the neural predictor can be improved by removing confounding signals while retaining those associated with the task of interest. To this end, we develop a "dual-goal tuning" approach in which, beyond the typical goal of predicting the behavior of interest, the predictor also incorporates a second compulsory goal that enforces chance performance in the control task. Together, these findings provide a firmer scientific foundation for understanding the neural basis of a neglected class of behavior, and they suggest an approach for improving validity of neural predictors.

Indexed as

DeceptionMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMotivationdeceptionlie detectionMVPApredictionvalidity

Identifiers

PMID39642199
PMCPMC11648856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.