생물정신의학 (Korean Journal of Biological Psychiatry)

  • 제22권3호
  • /
  • Pages.109-112
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1225-8709(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7571(eISSN)
대한생물정신의학회 (The Korean Society of Biological Psychiatry)
권호 표지

거짓 탐지와 뇌과학 : 기능적 자기공명영상을 활용한 거짓 탐지

Detecting Deception Using Neuroscience : A Review on Lie Detection Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

  • 최예라 (이화여자대학교 뇌융합과학연구원) ;
  • 김상준 (서울고등법원) ;
  • 도혜인 (이화여자대학교 대학원 약학과) ;
  • 신경식 (이화여자대학교 경영대학) ;
  • 김지은 (이화여자대학교 뇌융합과학연구원)
  • Choi, Yera (Ewha Brain Institute, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Sangjoon (Seoul High Court) ;
  • Do, Hyein (College of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Shin, Kyung-Shik (School of Business, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Jieun E. (Ewha Brain Institute, Ewha Womans University)
  • 투고 : 2015.06.17
  • 심사 : 2015.06.26
  • 발행 : 2015.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Since the early 2000s, there has been a continued interest in lie detection using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in neuroscience and forensic sciences, as well as in newly emerging fields including neuroethics and neurolaw. Related fMRI studies have revealed converging evidence that brain regions including the prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, parietal cortex, and anterior insula are associated with deceptive behavior. However, fMRI-based lie detection has thus far not been generally accepted as evidence in court, as methodological shortcomings, generalizability issues, and ethical and legal concerns are yet to be resolved. In the present review, we aim to illustrate these achievements and limitations of fMRI-based lie detection.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Huettel SA, Song AW, McCarthy G. Functional magnetic resonance imaging. 2nd ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc.;2009.
  2. Cacioppo JT, Amaral DG, Blanchard JJ, Cameron JL, Carter CS, Crews D, et al. Social Neuroscience: Progress and Implications for Mental Health. Perspect Psychol Sci 2007;2:99-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00032.x
  3. Aggarwal NK. Neuroimaging, culture, and forensic psychiatry. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009;37:239-244.
  4. Farah MJ, Hutchinson JB, Phelps EA, Wagner AD. Functional MRIbased lie detection: scientific and societal challenges. Nat Rev Neurosci 2014;15:123-131. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3665
  5. Spence SA, Farrow TF, Herford AE, Wilkinson ID, Zheng Y, Woodruff PW. Behavioural and functional anatomical correlates of deception in humans. Neuroreport 2001;12:2849-2853. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200109170-00019
  6. Langleben DD, Schroeder L, Maldjian JA, Gur RC, McDonald S, Ragland JD, et al. Brain activity during simulated deception: an eventrelated functional magnetic resonance study. Neuroimage 2002;15:727-732. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.1003
  7. Lee TM, Liu HL, Tan LH, Chan CC, Mahankali S, Feng CM, et al. Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;15:157-164. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.10020
  8. Ganis G, Kosslyn SM, Stose S, Thompson WL, Yurgelun-Todd DA. Neural correlates of different types of deception: an fMRI investigation. Cereb Cortex 2003;13:830-836. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/13.8.830
  9. Kozel FA, Johnson KA, Mu Q, Grenesko EL, Laken SJ, George MS. Detecting deception using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Biol Psychiatry 2005;58:605-613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.07.040
  10. Christ SE, Van Essen DC, Watson JM, Brubaker LE, McDermott KB. The contributions of prefrontal cortex and executive control to deception: evidence from activation likelihood estimate meta-analyses. Cereb Cortex 2009;19:1557-1566. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhn189
  11. Langleben DD, Loughead JW, Bilker WB, Ruparel K, Childress AR, Busch SI, et al. Telling truth from lie in individual subjects with fast event-related fMRI. Hum Brain Mapp 2005;26:262-272. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20191
  12. Davatzikos C, Ruparel K, Fan Y, Shen DG, Acharyya M, Loughead JW, et al. Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: application to lie detection. Neuroimage 2005;28:663-668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.08.009
  13. Kozel FA, Johnson KA, Grenesko EL, Laken SJ, Kose S, Lu X, et al. Functional MRI detection of deception after committing a mock sabotage crime. J Forensic Sci 2009;54:220-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00927.x
  14. Hakun JG, Seelig D, Ruparel K, Loughead JW, Busch E, Gur RC, et al. fMRI investigation of the cognitive structure of the Concealed Information Test. Neurocase 2008;14:59-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554790801992792
  15. Gamer M, Klimecki O, Bauermann T, Stoeter P, Vossel G. fMRI-activation patterns in the detection of concealed information rely on memory-related effects. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2012;7:506-515. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsp005
  16. Wolpe PR, Foster KR, Langleben DD. Emerging neurotechnologies for lie-detection: promises and perils. Am J Bioeth 2005;5:39-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160590923367
  17. Schauer F. Can bad science be good evidence? Neuroscience, lie detection, and beyond. Cornell Law Rev 2010;95:1191-1220.
  18. Hong SO. The accuracy and legal effects of fMRI lie-detection evidence. Seoul Law J 2011;52:511-540.
  19. Cornell University Law SchoolSearch Cornell [homepage on the Internet]. Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (92-102), 509 U.S. 579 (1993) [cited 2015 Aug 12]. Available from: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-102.ZS.html.
  20. Supreme Court of Korea en banc Decision 2009Da52649 Decided September 2 2011.