Post by Giulia Sperandio on May 11, 2016 4:58:43 GMT
I bet that when you were a child you watched a cartoon or a TV show with a lie-detector. I personally remember a Sponge Bob episode with a lie-detector and I got really stoked about it. Unfortunately at that time it was just a dream, however research focusing on fMRI scans to detect lie is not only possible, but is happening. By getting participants to go over many trials and mapping the areas according to BOLD levels, scientists are trying to find where the brain lightens up when a lie is told. Not only deception is responsible for this, but memory and attention might also be important factors to consider as these can influence the results of an fMRI.
As cool and dope as it seems, relying solely on fMRI will not provide us a completely accurate method for truth or lie detection. If you repeat a lie over and over again, it can be like something automatic that would probably pass detection. The over-emotion and deception associated to a truthful event may be identified as a lie. The repression of traumatic events (do you remember Spider from last quarter?) may also influence your BOLD signal because you simply do not accept the lie (or the opposite can happen and your levels of deception just skyrocket and something bad happens but that’s not my argument heh). Another factor to consider when using fMRI as a truth detector is sensitivity and specificity. Researchers either have 100% in sensitivity and a low number in specificity or the other way around. This flaw and these reasons are some of my arguments to support how truth detectors are still not possible (and not recommended).
Much more study needs to be done to have a truthful detector. I would say that not only brain signals must be analyzed, but also micro-expressions, heart rate etc. What do you think is a constraint to truth detectors? What do you think would help develop one? What is missing? Do you believe we will ever get the technology and the accuracy to implement truth detectors in courts? If you do, what do you think would be the benefits of it or the downsides?
(feel free to answer one or two of the questions, that was probably a lot)
As cool and dope as it seems, relying solely on fMRI will not provide us a completely accurate method for truth or lie detection. If you repeat a lie over and over again, it can be like something automatic that would probably pass detection. The over-emotion and deception associated to a truthful event may be identified as a lie. The repression of traumatic events (do you remember Spider from last quarter?) may also influence your BOLD signal because you simply do not accept the lie (or the opposite can happen and your levels of deception just skyrocket and something bad happens but that’s not my argument heh). Another factor to consider when using fMRI as a truth detector is sensitivity and specificity. Researchers either have 100% in sensitivity and a low number in specificity or the other way around. This flaw and these reasons are some of my arguments to support how truth detectors are still not possible (and not recommended).
Much more study needs to be done to have a truthful detector. I would say that not only brain signals must be analyzed, but also micro-expressions, heart rate etc. What do you think is a constraint to truth detectors? What do you think would help develop one? What is missing? Do you believe we will ever get the technology and the accuracy to implement truth detectors in courts? If you do, what do you think would be the benefits of it or the downsides?
(feel free to answer one or two of the questions, that was probably a lot)
