A Comparison of Detection Accuracy of P300-based Guilty Knowledge Test: Based on Bootstrap Approach

본 연구는 상관부트스트랩(bootstrapped correlation difference, BCD)법과 진폭부트스트랩(bootstrapped amplitude difference, BAD)법을 이용하여 P300-기반 유죄지식검사의 탐지정확률을 도출하고 이를 비교하였다. 강기영과 김영윤(2010)의 연구에서 유죄집단과 무죄집단으로 분류된 총 24명의 피험자들의 사건관련전위 데이터를 이용하여 부트스트랩 분석을 수행하였다. 개개 피험자들의 세 가지 자극 유형(목표자극, 탐침자극, 무관련자극)에 대한 두정중심영역(Pz) 혹은 전두중심영역(Fz)에서의 모든 시행의 사건관련전위 진폭값이 분석에 이용되었다. 목표자극은 유죄지식을 포함하지 않는 실험과제와 관련된 자극으로, 모든 피험자는 실험과제에서 목표자극과 목표자극이 아닌 자극을 분류하도록 지시받았다. 탐침자극은 유죄지식을 포함한 자극으로, 무관련자극은 유죄지식을 포함하지 않는 실험과제와 관련이 없는 자극으로 구성되었다. 부트스트랩 분석은 BCD법과 BAD법으로 나뉘어 실시하였다. BCD법은 목표자극과 탐침자극의 사건관련전위 사이의 상관이 탐침자극과 무관련자극의 사건관련전위 사이의 상관보다 큰지를 계산하는 방법이며, BAD법은 탐침자극의 P300 진폭이 무관련자극의 P300 진폭보다 큰지를 계산하여 한 피험자의 유/무죄 여부를 가려내는 방법이다. 부트스트랩 분석 결과 판정불능을 제외한 BCD법의 탐지정확률은 최대 80.0%, 판정불능을 제외한 BAD법의 탐지정확률은 최대 56.5%로 BCD법의 탐지정확률이 더 높게 나타났다. 본 연구에서는 탐지정확률을 계산하는 방법 중 BAD법보다 BCD법이 더 효율적인 방법으로 나타났다.

keywords: guilty knowledge test, event-related potential, P300, detection accuracy, bootstrap, 유죄지식검사, 사건관련전위, P300, 탐지정확률, 부트스트랩

Abstract

We compared detection accuracies of P300-based guilty knowledge test based on 2 bootstrap approaches: bootstrapped correlation difference (BCD) and bootstrapped amplitude difference (BAD). Event-related potential data of the guilty group (n=12) and the innocent group (n=12) in Kang and Kim(2010)'s study were subjected to bootstrap analysis. P300 amplitude from all single sweeps of each of target, probe, and irrelevant stimulus at the parietal midline (Pz) or the frontal midline (Fz) electrode site was collected for each participant. Target stimulus is relevant to the experimental task, but not related to the crime. Participants were asked to discriminate the target stimulus from other stimuli. Probe stimulus includes the critical information of the crime, the guilty knowledge, thus guilty participants are supposed to pay attention to it compared to irrelevant stimulus. Irrelevant stimulus is not relevant to the crime and the task. Two different bootstrap analysis were applied to determine individual's guilt or innocence. BCD method estimated double-centered correlation coefficients between the average of target and probe sweeps, and between the average of probe and irrelevant sweeps for a participant. If the former are greater than the latter in 600 trials out of 1,000 bootstrap iterations, the participant is regarded as guilty. BAD method estimated amplitude difference between probe and irrelevant sweeps, and if the difference is positive, the participant is found to be guilty. As a result, BCD method outperformed BAD method. The detection accuracies, without indeterminacy, of BCD and BAD were up to 80.0%, 56.5%, respectively. It seems that BCD method is more appropriate to determine individual's guilt or innocence, and to get high detection accuracy of the guilty knowledge test using event-related potentials.

keywords: guilty knowledge test, event-related potential, P300, detection accuracy, bootstrap, 유죄지식검사, 사건관련전위, P300, 탐지정확률, 부트스트랩

참고문헌

강기영, 김영윤 (2010). 문장을 이용한 P300-기반 유죄지식검사. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 23, 19-41.

김영윤 (2009). P300-기반 거짓말 탐지 연구. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 23, 111- 129.

안현철, 김경재, 한인구 (2005). Support Vector Machine을 이용한 고객구매예측모형. 한국지능정보시스템학회논문지, 11, 69-81.

엄진섭, 박광배, 손진훈 (2012). ERP와 동공 반응을 이용한 숨긴정보검사. 감성과학, 15, 259-268.

엄진섭, 한유화, 박광배, 손진훈 (2008). P300 숨긴정보검사의 민감도: 목표자극을 이용하는 측정 패러다임과 두 자극에 대한 범주판단 및 재인검사를 이용하는 측정 패러다임의 비교. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 27, 653-673.

Abootalebi, V., Moradi, M. H., & Khalilzadeh, M. A. (2006). A comparison of methods for ERP assessment in a P300-based GKT. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 309-320.

Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. Annals of Statistics, 7, 1-26.

Farwell, L. A., & Donchin, E. (1991). The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology, 28, 531-547.

Gao, J., Lu, L., Yang, Y., Yu, G., Na, L., & Rao, N. (2012). A novel concealed information test method based on independent component analysis and support vector machine. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 43, 54-63.

10.

Gao, J., Yan, X., Sun, J., & Zheng, C. (2011). Denoised P300 and machine learning-based concealed information test method. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 104, 410-417.

11.

Lui, M., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2008). Detection of deception about multiple, concealed, mock crime items, based on a spatial-temporal analysis of ERP amplitude and scalp distribution. Psychophysiology, 45, 721-730.

12.

MacLaren, V., & Taukulis, H. (2000). Forensic identification with event related potentials. Polygraph, 29, 330-343.

13.

Mertens, R., & Allen, J. J. B. (2008). The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: Deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios. Psychophysiology, 45, 286-298.

14.

Picton, T. W. (1992). The P300 wave of the human event-related potential. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society, 9, 456-479.

15.

Polich, J. (1989). Frequency, intensity, and duration as determinants of P300 from auditory stimuli. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 6, 277-286.

16.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Cantwell, B., Nasman, V. T., Wojdac, V., Ivanov, S., & Mazzeri, L. (1988). A modified, event-related potential-based guilty knowledge test. International Journal of Neuroscience, 42, 157-161.

17.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Soskins, M., Bosh, G., & Ryan, A. (2004). Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 41, 205-219.

18.

Soskins, M., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Niendam, T. (2001). Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis: complex vs. simple paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 40, 173-180.

19.

Strüber, D., & Polich, J. (2002). P300 and slow wave from oddball and single-stimulus visual tasks: inter-stimulus interval effects. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 45, 187-196.

20.

Verschuere, B., Ben-Shakhar, G., & Meijer, E. (2011). Memory detection: Theory and application of the concealed information test. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

21.

Wasserman, S., & Bockenholt, U. (1989). Bootstrapping: Applications to psychophysiology. Psychophysiology, 26, 208-221.

22.

Zhao, M., Zheng, C., & Zhao, C. (2012). A new approach for concealed information identification based on ERP assessment. Journal of Medical Systems, 36, 2401-2409.

바로가기메뉴

논문 상세

Vol.25 No.1

P300-기반 유죄지식검사의 탐지정확률 비교: 부트스트랩 방법을 중심으로

A Comparison of Detection Accuracy of P300-based Guilty Knowledge Test: Based on Bootstrap Approach

초록

Abstract

참고문헌

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물