Citation

Lui M, Rosenfeld JP. Psychophysiology 2009; 46(4): 889-903.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Society for Psychophysiological Research, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00810.x

PMID

19386050

Abstract

We studied a lie detection protocol immune to countermeasures. The 4 stimulus conditions were (1 and 2) supraliminal acquaintance name primed by subliminal acquaintance name (A-A) versus subliminal nonacquaintance name (N-A) and (3 and 4) supraliminal nonacquaintance name primed by subliminal acquaintance name (A-N) versus subliminal nonacquaintance name (N-N). In Experiment 1 and replication, principal components analysis-derived event-related potential components revealed significant differences between dishonestly answered supraliminal acquaintance conditions with differing primes (A-A vs. N-A). In Experiment 2 subjects were required to lie in A-N and N-N conditions, in contrast to Experiment 1, in which subjects lied in A-A and N-A conditions. No significant effects were found. In Experiment 3, the lying task was removed and no significant differences were found. We conclude that subliminal primes modulate ERPs in conditions with supraliminal acquaintance name when the task involves lying.

Language: en