바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.32 No.1

Citation Share

P300 숨긴정보검사에서 순열 검증의 정확도

The Accuracy of Permutation Test in P300-based Concealed Information Test

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2020, v.32 no.1, pp.69-83
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2020.32.1.005
전하정 (충남대학교)
손진훈 (충남대학교)
엄진섭 (충북대학교)
전하정, 손진훈, & 엄진섭. (2020). P300 숨긴정보검사에서 순열 검증의 정확도. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 32(1), 69-83, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2020.32.1.005

초록

본 연구의 목적은 P300 숨긴정보검사에서 저역통과필터나 100 ms 구간의 P300 평균전위를 사용하더라도 관련자극과 무관련자극의 시행수 차이로 인하여 관련자극의 P300 진폭이 과대추정된다는 것을 밝히고, 부트스트랩 방법의 1 종 오류율은 유의수준보다 크게 나타나지만 순열 검증의 1 종 오류율은 적절하게 통제된다는 것을 증명하는 것이다. 몬테 카를로 연구를 이용하여 30 Hz, 10 Hz, 또는 5 Hz 저역통과필터를 사용하는 경우와 P300 정점 또는 100 ms 구간의 P300 평균전위를 사용하는 경우에 부트스트랩 방법과 순열 검증의 1 종 오류율과 통계적 검증력을 산출하였다. 연구 결과, 저역통과필터를 사용하거나 100 ms 구간의 P300 평균전위를 사용하여도 관련자극의 P300 진폭이 과대추정되는 정도가 무관련자극의 P300 진폭이 과대추정되는 정도보다 약 1 ㎶ 이상 더 컸다. 이로 인하여 부트스트랩 방법의 1 종 오류율은 유의수준보다 더 높게 나타났다. 그러나 순열 검증의 1 종 오류율은 유의수준과 동일하였다. 순열 검증의 검증력은 5 Hz의 저역통과필터를 사용하고 100 ms 구간의 P300 평균전위를 사용하는 경우에 가장 높았다. 본 연구결과는 P300 숨긴정보검사 뿐만 아니라 시행수가 서로 다른 자극의 P300 진폭을 비교하는 모든 경우에도 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

keywords
P300, 숨긴정보검사, 순열 검증, 1 종 오류, 검증력, P300, concealed information test, permutation test, type 1 error, power

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to show the P300 amplitude of probe stimulus is overestimated more than that of irrelevant stimulus because of the difference of the number of trials between two stimuli in the P300-based concealed information test, and to demonstrate that the type 1 error rate of bootstrap method is higher than the significance level, but that of permutation test is the same as the significance level. The type 1 error rate and the statistical power of bootstrap method and permutation test were estimated by using Monte Carlo study in the case of using 30 Hz, 10 Hz, or 5 Hz low-pass filter, and using P300 peak amplitude or P300 mean amplitude of 100 ms interval. As a result, despite using low-pass filter or P300 mean amplitude of 100 ms interval, the extent of overestimation for the P300 amplitude of probe stimulus was greater at least about 1 ㎶ than that of irrelevant stimulus. For this reason the type 1 error rate of bootstrap method was higher than the significance level. However, the type 1 error rate of permutation test was the same as the significance level. The power of permutation test was highest when 5 Hz low-pass filter and P300 means amplitude of 100 ms interval were used. The results of this study can be used in all cases where the P300 amplitudes of two stimuli with different number of trials are compared.

keywords
P300, 숨긴정보검사, 순열 검증, 1 종 오류, 검증력, P300, concealed information test, permutation test, type 1 error, power

참고문헌

1.

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.

2.

Ambach, W., Bursch, S., Stark, R., & Vaitl, D. (2010). A concealed information test with multimodal measurement. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 75, 258-267.

3.

Arasteh, A., Moradi, M. H., & Janghorbani, A. (2016). A novel method based on empirical mode decomposition for P300-based detection of deception. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 11, 2584-2593.

4.

Bergström, Z. M., Anderson, M. C., Buda, M., Simons, J. S., & Richardson-Klavehn, A. (2013). Intentional retrieval suppression can conceal guilty knowledge in ERP memory detection tests. Biological psychology, 94, 1-11.

5.

Bowman, H., Filetti, M., Alsufyani, A., Janssen, D., & Su, L. (2014). Countering countermeasures: Detecting identity lies by detecting conscious breakthrough. PloS one, 9(3), e90595.

6.

Cutmore, T. R. H., Djakovic, T., Kebbell, M. R., & Shum, D. H. K. (2009). An object cue is more effective than a word in ERP-based detection of deception. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 71, 185-192.

7.

Dowdy, S., Wearden, S., & Chilko, D. (2011). Statistics for research (Vol. 512). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: CRC press.

8.

Ellwanger, J., Rosenfeld, J. P., Sweet, J. J., & Bhatt, M. (1996). Detecting simulated amnesia for autobiographical and recently learned information using the P300 event-related potential. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 23, 9-23.

9.

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

10.

Good, P. I. (2005). Permutation, parametric, and bootstrap tests of hypotheses. New York: Springer.

11.

Janssen, A., & Pauls, T. (2005). A Monte Carlo comparison of studentized bootstrap and permutation tests for heteroscedastic two-sample problems. Computational Statistics, 20, 369-383.

12.

Johnson, R. (1993). On the neural generators of the P300component of the event-related potential. Psychophysiology, 30, 90-97.

13.

Konietschke, F., & Pauly, M. (2014). Bootstrapping and permuting paired t-test type statistics. Statistics and Computing, 24, 283-296.

14.

Kubo, K., & Nittono, H. (2009). The role of intention to conceal in the P300-based concealed information test. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 34, 227-235.

15.

Lefebvre, C. D., Marchand, Y., Smith, S. M., & Connolly, J. F. (2009). Use of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to assess eyewitness accuracy and deception. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73, 218-225.

16.

Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

17.

Lukács, G., Grządziel, A., Kempkes, M., & Ansorge, U. (2019). Item roles explored in a modified P300-Based CTP concealed information test. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 44, 195-209.

18.

Lukács, G., Weiss, B., Dalos, V. D., Kilencz, T., Tudja, S., &Csifcsák, G. (2016). The first independent study on the complex trial protocol version of the P300-based concealed information test: Corroboration of previous findings and highlights on vulnerabilities. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 110, 56-65.

19.

Marchand, Y., Inglis-Assaff, P. C., & Lefebvre, C. D. (2013). Impact of stimulus similarity between the probe and the irrelevant items during a card-playing deception detection task: The “irrelevants” are not irrelevant. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 35, 686-701.

20.

Matsuda, I., Nittono, H., & Ogawa, T. (2011). Event‐related potentials increase the discrimination performance of the autonomic‐based concealed information test. Psychophysiology, 48, 1701-1710.

21.

Meijer, E. H., Selle, N. K., Elber, L., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2014). Memory detection with the concealed information test: A meta analysis of skin conductance, respiration, heart rate, and P300 data. Psychophysiology, 51, 879-904.

22.

Meijer, E. H., Smulders, F. T., Merckelbach, H. L., & Wolf, A. G. (2007). The P300 is sensitive to concealed face recognition. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 66, 231-237.

23.

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

24.

Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 2128-2148.

25.

Robinson, J. (1987). Nonparametric confidence intervals in regression: The bootstrap and randomization methods. In M. L. Puri, J. P. Vilaplana, & W. Wertz (Eds.), New perspectives in theoretical and applied statistics (pp. 243-255). New York: Wiley and Sons.

26.

Rosenfeld, J. P. (2005). Brain fingerprinting: A critical analysis. The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 4, 20-37.

27.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Angell, A., Johnson, M., & Qian, J. H. (1991). An ERP‐based, control‐question lie detector analog:Algorithms for discriminating effects within individuals'average waveforms. Psychophysiology, 28, 319-335.

28.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Biroschak, J. R., & Furedy, J. J. (2006). P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical versus incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60, 251-259.

29.

Rosenfeld, J. P., & Donchin, E. (2015). Resampling (bootstrapping) the mean: A definite do. Psychophysiology, 52, 969-972.

30.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Hu, X., & Pederson, K. (2012). Deception awareness improves P300-based deception detection in concealed information tests. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 86, 114-121.

31.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Winogard, M., Lui, M. A., Vandenboom, C., & Chedid, E. (2008). The complex trial protocol(CTP): A new, countermeasure-resistant, accurate, P300-based method for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 45, 906-919.

32.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Reinhart, A. M., Bhatt, M., Ellwanger, J., Gora, K., Sekera, M., & Sweet, J. (1998). P300 correlates of simulated malingered amnesia in a matching-to-sample task:topographic analyses of deception versus truthtelling responses. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 28, 233-247.

33.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Shue, E., & Singer, E. (2007). Single versus multiple probe blocks of P300-based concealed information tests for autobiographical versus incidentally learned information. Biological Psychology, 74, 396-404.

34.

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.

35.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Sweet, J. J., Chuang, J., Ellwanger, J., & Song, L. (1996). Detection of simulated malingering using forced choice recognition enhanced with event-related potential recording. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 10, 163-179.

36.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Ward, A., Meijer, E. H., & Yukhnenko, D. (2017). Bootstrapping the P300 in diagnostic psychophysiology: How many iterations are needed?. Psychophysiology, 54, 366-373.

37.

Semlitsch, H. V., Anderer, P., Schuster, P., & Presslich, O. (1986). A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology, 23, 695-703.

38.

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.

39.

Verschuere, B., Rosenfeld, J. P., Winograd, M. R., Labkovsky, E., & Wiersema, R. (2009). The role of deception in P300memory detection. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 14, 253-262.

40.

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

41.

Zoumpoulaki, A., Alsufyani, A., & Bowman, H. (2015). Resampling the peak, some dos and don'ts. Psychophysiology, 52, 444-448.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책