바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

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

logo

P300-기반 거짓말 탐지 연구

P300-based Studies in Detection of Deception

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2009, v.23 no.1, pp.111-129
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2009.23.1.007
김영윤 (경기대학교)
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

초록

본 연구는 거짓말 탐지를 목적으로 사건관련전위의 요인 P300을 이용한 연구들을 개관하였다. 사건관련전위에 대한 기본적인 개념과 P300의 특징을 알아보고, P300-기반 유죄지식검사와 P300-기반 통제질문검사를 이용한 연구들을 살펴보았다. 각 연구에서 주요한 연구결과를 제시하고 거짓말 탐지에 사용된 분류법에 대해 기술하였으며 분류의 정확도를 정리하였다. 마지막으로 P300-기반 거짓말 탐지에 대응책의 영향을 탐색하였으며 P300-기반 거짓말 탐지 연구들의 한계와 추후 연구 방향을 제안하였다.

keywords
Lie detection, Event-related Potentials, P300, Guilty Knowledge Test, 거짓말 탐지, 사건관련전위, P300, 유죄지식검사

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate P300-based studies in lie detection. First, this study described the concept of event-related potentials (ERP) and the characteristics of P300. Important results were reviewed in regard to P300-based guilty knowledge test and P300-based control question test in previous studies. In detection of deception, the methods for ERP assessment in P300-based studies were evaluated on the basis of the accuracy of classification. In addition, this study examined the effect of countermeasures in P300-based lie detection. The limitations of previous studies and the directions for the further research were suggested in order to detect deception with more accuracy.

keywords
Lie detection, Event-related Potentials, P300, Guilty Knowledge Test, 거짓말 탐지, 사건관련전위, P300, 유죄지식검사

참고문헌

1.

박판규 (2003). 거짓말탐지검사. 삼우사.

2.

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

3.

Abootalebi, V., Moradi, M. H., & Khalizadeh, M. A. (2009). A new approach for EEG feature extraction in P300-based lie detection. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, in press.

4.

Allen, J. J., & Iacono, W. (1997). A comparison of methods for the analysis of event-related potentials in deception detection. Psychophysiology, 34, 234- 240.

5.

Bennington, J. Y., & Polich, J. (1999). Comparison of P300 from passive and active tasks for auditory and visual stimuli. International Journal of Psy- chophysiology, 34, 171-177.

6.

Boaz, T. L., Perry, N. W., Raney, G., Fischler, I. S., & Shuman, D. (1991). Detection of guilty knowledge with event-related potentials. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 788-795.

7.

Brett, A. S., Phillips, M., & Beary, J. F. (1986). Pre- dictive power of the polygraph:Can the “lie detector” really detect liars? Lancet, 1, 544-547.

8.

Donchin, E., & Cole, M. G. H. (1988). Is the P300 com- ponent a manifestation of context updating? Behav- ioral Brain Science, 11, 357-374.

9.

Donchin, E., Karis, D., Bashore, T. R., Coles, M. G. H., & Gratton, G. (1986). Cognitive psychophysiology and human information processing. In M. G. H. Coles, E. Donchin, & S. W. Porges(Eds.), Psy- chophysiology:systems, processes and applica- tions. New York:Guilford press.

10.

Duncan-Johnson, C. C., & Donchin, E. (1977). On quan- tifying surprise:The variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability. Psychophysio- logy, 14, 456-467.

11.

Ekman, P. (1992). Telling lies. New York:Norton.

12.

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

13.

Farwell, L. A., & Smith, S. S. (2001). Using brain MERMER testing to detect knowledge despite efforts to conceal. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 46, 135-143.

14.

Ford, E. B. (2006). Lie detection:Historical, neuro- psychiatric and legal dimensions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 29, 159-177.

15.

Garcia-Larrea, L., & Cezanne-Bert, G. (1998). P3, positive slow wave and working memory load:A study on the functional correlates of slow wave activity. Electroencephalogram and Clinical Neurophysi- ology, 108, 260-273.

16.

Guevin, L. (2002). Picking your brain in the name of security. BiometriTech. Retrieved from(http:// www.biometritech.com/features/laurapop5.htm)

17.

Happel, M. D. (2005). Neuroscience and the detection of deception. Review of Policy Research, 22, 667- 685.

18.

Hillyard, S. A., Squires, K. C., Bauer, J. W., & Lindsay, P. H. (1971). Evoked potential correlates of auditory signal detection. Science, 172, 1357-1360.

19.

Johnson, M. M., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (1992). Oddball- evoked P300-based method of deception detection in the laboratory. II:Utilization of non-selective activation of relevant knowledge. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 12, 289-306.

20.

Johnson, R., Barnhardt, J., & Zhu, J. (2003). The deceptive response:Effects of response conflict and strategic monitoring on the late positive component and episodic memory-related brain activity. Biological Psychology, 64, 217-253.

21.

Johnson, R., Barnhardt, J., & Zhu, J. (2005). Differential effects of practice on the executive processes used for truthful and deceptive responses:An event- related brain potential study. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 386-404.

22.

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

23.

Lykken, D. T. (1981). A tremor in the blood:Uses and abuses of the lie detector. New York:McGraw- Hill Book Company.

24.

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

25.

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

26.

Mohamed, F. B., Faro, S. H., Gordon, N. J., Platek, S. M., Ahmad, H., & Williams, J. M. (2006). Brain mapping of deception and truth telling about an ecologically valid situation:Functional MR imaging and polygraph investigation-initial experience. Radiology, 238(2), 679-688.

27.

National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, DC:National Academies Press.

28.

Neshige, R., & Luder, H. (1992). Recording of event- related potentials (P300) from human cortex. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 9, 294-298.

29.

Phan, K. L., Magalhaes, A., Ziemlewicz, T. J., Fitzgerald, D. A., Green, C., & Smith, W. (2005). Neural cor- relates of telling lies:A functional magnetic reso- nance imaging study at 4 Tesla. Academic Radiology, 12, 164-172.

30.

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

31.

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.

32.

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.

33.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Cantwell, B., Nasman, V. T., Wojdac, V., Ivanov, S., & Mazzeri, L. (1988). A modified, event-related potential-based guilty knowledge test. Internatioanl Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 157-161.

34.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Nasman, V. T., Whalen, R., Cantwell, B., & Mazzeri, L. (1987). Late vertex positivity as a guilty knowledge indicator:A new method of lie detection. International Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 125-129.

35.

Rosenfeld, J. P., Shue, E., & Singer, E. (2007). Single versus multiple probe blocks of P300-based con- cealed information tests for self-referring versus incidentally obtained information. Biological Psy- chology, 74, 396-404.

36.

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.

37.

Smith, M. E., Halgren, E., Sokolik, M., Baudena, P., Musolino, A., Liegeois-Chauvel, C., & Chauvel, P. (1990). The intracranial topography of the P3 event- related potential elicited during auditory oddball. Electroencephalogram and Clinical Neurophysiology, 76, 235-248.

38.

Squires, N. K., Squires, K, C., & Hillyard, S. A. (1975a). Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man. Electro- encephalogram and Clinical Neurophysiology, 38, 387-401.

39.

Squires, N. K., Squires, K, C., & Hillyard, S. A. (1975b). Decision-related cortical potentials during an auditory signal detection task with cued intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Per- ception and Performance, 1, 268-279.

40.

Steinbrook, R. (1992). The polygraph test-A flawed diag- nostic methods. New England Journal of medicine, 327(2), 122-123.

41.

Sutton, S., Braren, M., & Zubin, J. (1965). Evoked potentials correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science, 150, 1187-1188.

42.

Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York:Academic Press.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격