Premium
A comparison of methods for the analysis of event‐related potentials in deception detection
Author(s) -
ALLEN JOHN J. B.,
IACONO WILLIAM G.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
psychophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.661
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1469-8986
pISSN - 0048-5772
DOI - 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02137.x
Subject(s) - bootstrapping (finance) , psychology , deception , incentive , psychophysiology , event (particle physics) , lie detection , receiver operating characteristic , sensitivity (control systems) , bayesian probability , cognitive psychology , social psychology , artificial intelligence , econometrics , machine learning , computer science , neuroscience , physics , quantum mechanics , electronic engineering , engineering , economics , microeconomics
We previously reported that a Bayesian‐based event‐related potential memory assessment procedure (Allen, lacono, & Danielson. 1992, Psychophysiology. 29, 504‐522) was highly accurate at identifying previously learned material, regardless of an individual's motivational incentive to conceal information. When a bootstrapping procedure (Harwell & Donchin, 1991. Psychophysiology, 2ft, 531‐547) is applied to these same data, greater motivational incentives appear to increase the accuracy of the procedure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to examine these two procedures and a new procedure. ROC curves indicated that all three methods produce extremely high rates of classification accuracy and that the sensitivity of the bootstrapping procedure to motivational incentive is due to the particular cut points selected. One or the other method may be preferred depending upon incentive to deceive, the cost of incorrect decisions, and the availability of extra psychophysiological data.