Exploring time- and frequency- dependent functional connectivity and brain networks during deception with single-trial event-related potentials

Abstract

To better characterize the cognitive processes and mechanisms that are associated with deception, wavelet coherence was employed to evaluate functional connectivity between different brain regions. Two groups of subjects were evaluated for this purpose: 32 participants were required to either tell the truth or to lie when facing certain stimuli, and their electroencephalogram signals on 12 electrodes were recorded. The experimental results revealed that deceptive responses elicited greater connectivity strength than truthful responses, particularly in the θ band on specific electrode pairs primarily involving connections between the prefrontal/frontal and central regions and between the prefrontal/frontal and left parietal regions. These results indicate that these brain regions play an important role in executing lying responses. Additionally, three time- and frequency-dependent functional connectivity networks were proposed to thoroughly reflect the functional coupling of brain regions that occurs during lying. Furthermore, the wavelet coherence values for the connections shown in the networks were extracted as features for support vector machine training. High classification accuracy suggested that the proposed network effectively characterized differences in functional connectivity between the two groups of subjects over a specific time-frequency area and hence could be a sensitive measurement for identifying deception.

Dynamic Default Mode Network across Different Brain States

“…The brain is a complex system in which the dynamic adjustment of network organization over multiple time scales is crucial for mediating perception and cognition2223242526272829303132. Characterizing the dynamics of brain FC or properties of network topology is thought to be important for gaining a better understanding of brain function and behavioural performance13333435.…”

Functional Connectivity Pattern Analysis Underlying Neural Oscillation Synchronization during Deception

“…In addition, Seth et al [17] reported that the alpha activities exhibited a significant decrease during deception, which could be used to classify truthful and deceptive responses on a trial-by-trial basis. Further, Gao et al [18] proposed that, at the system level, the connectivities between the prefrontal/frontal and central regions and between the prefrontal/frontal and left parietal regions play crucial roles in the processing of deception. Particularly, high theta synchronization was observed primarily in the abovementioned networks during deception [18].…”

“…Further, Gao et al [18] proposed that, at the system level, the connectivities between the prefrontal/frontal and central regions and between the prefrontal/frontal and left parietal regions play crucial roles in the processing of deception. Particularly, high theta synchronization was observed primarily in the abovementioned networks during deception [18]. Thus, the frequency components and high level of synchronization between different regions in a specific frequency band may functionally reflect a transient change in the system process of deception.…”

“…Emerging studies reported that EEG coherence might be an important method to measure the functional connectivity of specific frequency bands between pairs of cortical regions [18–20]. EEG coherence measures the extent of oscillatory synchronization between two scalp electrode sites' signal within certain frequency bands [21]; the index of EEG coherence is coherence value [22, 23].…”

A influência da empatia em negociadores da Polícia Militar na tarefa de detecção de mentiras

“…Então, cada vez mais com o avanço das tecnologias, diversos estudos científicos vêm sendo realizados utilizando-se de outras técnicas que têm se mostrado promissoras para a área da detecção de mentiras. Por exemplo, a Termografia (Panasiti et al, 2016;Moliné et al, 2017), Eletroencefalograma (Gao et al, 2016;Kohan, Nasrabadi, Sharifi & Shamsollahi, 2020) e Ressonância Magnética Funcional (Farah, Hutchinson, Phelps & Wagner, 2014;Kireev, Korotkov, Medvedeva, Masharipov & Medvedev, 2017).…”