Article

The contribution of executive processes to deceptive responding

Department of Psychology, Queens College, 65-30 Kissena Blvd., Flushing, NY 11367, USA.
Neuropsychologia (Impact Factor: 3.45). 02/2004; 42(7):878-901. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2003.12.005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We measured behavioral responses (RT) and recorded event-related brain potentials (ERPs) when participants made truthful and deceptive responses about perceived and remembered stimuli. Participants performed an old/new recognition test under three instructional conditions: Consistent Truthful, Consistent Deceptive and Random Deceptive. Compared to Consistent Truthful responses, Consistent Deceptive responses to both perceived and remembered stimuli produced the same pattern of less accurate, slower and more variable responses and larger medial frontal negativities (MFN). The MFN is thought to reflect activity in anterior cingulate cortex, a brain area involved in monitoring actions and resolving conflicting response tendencies. The Random Deceptive condition required participants to strategically monitor their long-term response patterns to accommodate a deceptive strategy. Even compared to the Consistent Deceptive condition, RTs in the Random Deceptive condition were significantly slower and more variable and MFN activity increased significantly. MFN scalp distribution results revealed the presence of three different patterns of brain activity; one each for truthful responses, deceptive responses and strategic monitoring. Thus, the data indicate that anterior cingulate cortex plays a key role in making deceptive responses.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ray Johnson, Jul 29, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
87 Views
  • Source
    • "It should be noted that so far most evidence for the contribution of response inhibition is indirect. Response inhibition has been used to explain differential effects of lying compared with truth telling, as for instance elevated RTs (Seymour et al., 2000; Verschuere and De Houwer, 2011), enlarged activation in brain areas linked to response inhibition (Spence et al., 2001; Schumacher et al., 2010; Vartanian et al., 2013) and stronger ERPs linked to conflict-detection (Johnson et al., 2004, 2005, 2008; Dong et al. 2010). More direct evidence of response inhibition during lying is scarce. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the widespread belief that alcohol makes the truth come out more easily, we know very little on how alcohol impacts deception. Given that alcohol impairs response inhibition, and that response inhibition may be critically involved in deception, we expected that alcohol intake would hamper lying.
    Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire). Supplement 11/2014; 50(1). DOI:10.1093/alcalc/agu079
  • Source
    • "le response of lying ( Mohamed et al . , 2006 ; Osman , Channon , & Fitzpatrick , 2009 ; Pennebaker & Chew , 1985 ) . ADCAT posits that with the decision to deceive in a particular way active in WM , the central executive suppresses the accurate sharing of specific information , [ K ] often involving active inhibitory centers in the frontal lobe ( Johnson et al . , 2004 ; Kozel , Padgett , & George , 2004 ; Mohamed et al . , 2006 ) . The intrinsic load of inhibiting truthful responding depends on how elaborate truth - related memories are and how habitual honest responding is ( Van Bockstaele et al . , 2012 ; Verschuere et al . , 2011 ) . For instance , if a truth was recently encoded or is unavailable"
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Little is known about the cognition of deception (Gombos, 2006). We propose a cognitive account of serious lying (i.e., deception involving high stakes) in response to a solicitation of a truth: Activation-Decision-Construction-Action Theory (ADCAT). Built on the Activation-Decision-Construction Model of answering questions deceptively ( Walczyk, Roper, Seeman, & Humphrey, 2003), the theory elaborates on the roles of executive processes, theory of mind, emotions, motivation, specifies cognitive processing thoroughly, and considers the rehearsal of lies. ADCAT's four processing components are (a) activation of the truth, the (b) decision whether and how to alter deceptively the information shared, (c) construction of a deception, and (d) action [acting sincere while delivering a lie]. Core constructs are “theory of mind” and “cognitive resources”. Specifically, throughout serious deception, individuals are inferring the current or potential mental states of targets and taking steps to minimize the allocation of cognitive resources during delivery to appear honest and lie well.
    New Ideas in Psychology 08/2014; 34:22–36. DOI:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2014.03.001 · 0.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "These increases had their maximum at FCz, compatible with their being generated in the supplementary motor area (Lang et al., 1990). Similarly, consciously selecting deceptive responses is reflected by increased medial-frontal negativity (Johnson, Barnhardt, & Zhu, 2003). Perhaps a similar phenomenon, possibly also reflecting the difficulty of response selection, is the negative potential peaking at about 400 ms after incompatible Stroop stimuli (Hanslmayr et al., 2008; Liotti, Woldorff, Perez, & Mayberg, 2000). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The P3b component of ERPs has been proposed to reflect decisions or, alternatively, activation of stimulus-response links or, alternatively, to depend on stimulus processing only. These three views make different predictions about how difficulty of response selection will affect the oddball effect. In three experiments, frequent and rare targets were accompanied by ancillary stimuli. Large oddball-P3bs, evoked by rare targets, were greatly reduced when responses had to be selected by combining information from targets and ancillary stimuli. Difficult response selection with rare targets was also reflected by a large frontocentral negativity, which could be separated from P3b when intervals were varied between targets and ancillary stimuli, and, therefore, did not cause P3b reduction. It is concluded that the usual increase of P3b with rare task-relevant targets depends on the existence of readily available stimulus-response links.
    Psychophysiology 08/2014; 51(11). DOI:10.1111/psyp.12262 · 3.18 Impact Factor
Show more