A comparison of methods for ERP assessment in a P300-based GKT.

P300-based GKT (guilty knowledge test) has been suggested as an alternative approach for conventional polygraphy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate three classifying methods for this approach and compare their performances in a lab analogue. Several subjects went through the designed GKT paradigm and their respective brain signals were recorded. For the analysis of signals, BAD (bootstrapped amplitude difference) and BCD (bootstrapped correlation difference) methods as two predefined methods alongside a new approach consisting of wavelet features and a statistical classifier were implemented. The rates of correct detection in guilty and innocent subjects were 74-80%. The results indicate the potential of P300-based GKT for detecting concealed information, although further research is required to increase its accuracy and precision and evaluating its vulnerability to countermeasures.

[1]  R.Quian Quiroga,et al.  Obtaining single stimulus evoked potentials with wavelet denoising , 2000, nlin/0006027.

[2]  E. Basar,et al.  Event-related oscillations are 'real brain responses'--wavelet analysis and new strategies. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[3]  E. Basar,et al.  Wavelet entropy analysis of event-related potentials indicates modality-independent theta dominance , 2002, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[4]  R Quian Quiroga,et al.  Wavelet Transform in the analysis of the frequency composition of evoked potentials. , 2001, Brain research. Brain research protocols.

[5]  C. Rosenberg,et al.  Electroencephalography: Basic Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields, 3rd Ed. , 1994 .

[6]  S Hira,et al.  [Effects of a mental countermeasure on the physiological detection of deception using the event-related brain potentials]. , 2001, Shinrigaku kenkyu : The Japanese journal of psychology.

[7]  Joel P Rosenfeld.  'Brain fingerprinting': A critical analysis. , 2005 .

[8]  R. Gur,et al.  Telling truth from lie in individual subjects with fast event‐related fMRI , 2005, Human brain mapping.

[9]  E. Basar,et al.  Gamma, alpha, delta, and theta oscillations govern cognitive processes. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[10]  Ernst Fernando Lopes Da Silva Niedermeyer,et al.  Electroencephalography, basic principles, clinical applications, and related fields , 1982 .

[11]  R. Knight,et al.  Mechanisms of human attention: event-related potentials and oscillations , 2001, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[12]  Mohammad Hassan Moradi,et al.  DETECTION OF THE COGNITIVE COMPONENTS OF BRAIN POTENTIALS USING WAVELET COEFFICIENTS , 2004 .

[13]  J. Lorberbaum,et al.  A pilot study of functional magnetic resonance imaging brain correlates of deception in healthy young men. , 2004, The Journal of neuropsychiatry and clinical neurosciences.

[14]  J. Rosenfeld,et al.  Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. , 2004, Psychophysiology.

[15]  J. Peter Rosenfeld.  Event-related potentials in detection of deception,malingering, and false memories , 2002 .

[16]  V. Samar,et al.  Wavelet Analysis of Neuroelectric Waveforms: A Conceptual Tutorial , 1999, Brain and Language.

[17]  Chetwyn C. H. Chan,et al.  Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[18]  U. Böckenholt,et al.  Bootstrapping: applications to psychophysiology. , 1989, Psychophysiology.

[19]  Gershon Ben-Shakhar,et al.  The Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) as an application of psychophysiology: Future prospects and obstacles. , 2002 .

[20]  Timothy J Ziemlewicz,et al.  Neural correlates of telling lies: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study at 4 Tesla. , 2005, Academic radiology.

[21]  J. Allen,et al.  The identification of concealed memories using the event-related potential and implicit behavioral measures: a methodology for prediction in the face of individual differences. , 1992, Psychophysiology.

[22]  Ahmet Ademoglu,et al.  Analysis of Pattern Reversal Visual Evoked , 1997 .

[23]  M. George,et al.  A replication study of the neural correlates of deception. , 2004, Behavioral neuroscience.

[24]  M Schürmann,et al.  Toward new theories of brain function and brain dynamics. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[25]  Michael Unser,et al.  A review of wavelets in biomedical applications , 1996, Proc. IEEE.

[26]  S. Mallat.  A wavelet tour of signal processing , 1998 .

[27]  J P Rosenfeld,et al.  Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis: complex vs. simple paradigms. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[28]  J. Wade Davis,et al.  Statistical Pattern Recognition , 2003, Technometrics.

[29]  E Donchin,et al.  The truth will out: interrogative polygraphy ("lie detection") with event-related brain potentials. , 1991, Psychophysiology.

[30]  A. Ademoglu,et al.  Analysis of pattern reversal visual evoked potentials (PRVEPs) by spline wavelets , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[31]  Murray Kleiner,et al.  Handbook of polygraph testing. , 2002 .

[32]  A. Medl.  Time Frequency and Wavelets in Biomedical Signal Processing , 1998, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[33]  Tobias Egner,et al.  Intentional false responding shares neural substrates with response conflict and cognitive control , 2005, NeuroImage.

[34]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Neural correlates of different types of deception: an fMRI investigation. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.