Clinical Neuro-psychology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Chung-Ang University Seoul, South Korea.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jan 31;7:18. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00018. eCollection 2013.
The study aimed to investigate whether a combination of the P3-based Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) and reality monitoring (RM) distinguished between individuals who are guilty, witnesses, or informed, and using both tests provided more accurate information than did the use of either measure alone. Participants consisted of 45 males that were randomly and evenly assigned to three groups (i.e., guilty, witness, and informed). The guilty group conducted a mock crime where they intentionally crashed their vehicle into another vehicle in a virtual environment (VE). As those in the witness group drove their own vehicles, they observed the guilty groups' vehicle crash into another vehicle. The informed group read an account and saw screenshots of the accident. All participants were instructed to insist that they were innocent. Subsequently, they performed the P3-based GKT and wrote an account of the accident for the RM analysis. A higher P3 amplitude corresponded to how well the participants recognized the presented stimulus, and a higher RM score corresponded to how well the participants reported vivid sensory information and how much less they reported uncertain information. Findings for the P3-based GKT indicated that the informed group showed lower P3 amplitude when presented with the probe stimulus than did the guilty and witness groups. Regarding the RM analysis, the informed group obtained higher RM scores on visual, temporal, and spatial details and lower scores on cognitive operations than the guilty and witness groups. Finally, discriminant analysis revealed that the combination of the P3-based GKT and RM more accurately distinguished between the three groups than the use of either measure alone. The findings suggest that RM may build upon a weakness of the P3-based GKT's. More specifically, it may build upon its susceptibility to the leakage of information about the crime, therefore helping protect innocent individuals who have information about a crime from being perceived as guilty.
本研究旨在探讨 P3 为基础的有罪知识测试(GKT)和现实监控(RM)的结合是否可以区分有罪者、目击者和知情者,并且使用这两种测试比单独使用任何一种测试提供更准确的信息。参与者由 45 名男性组成,他们被随机且平均分配到三个组(即有罪、目击和知情)。有罪组在虚拟环境(VE)中故意将他们的车辆撞向另一辆车,进行模拟犯罪。当那些作为目击者的人驾驶自己的车辆时,他们观察到有罪组的车辆撞向另一辆车。知情组阅读一份描述并查看事故的截图。所有参与者都被指示坚持说自己是无辜的。随后,他们进行了基于 P3 的 GKT 并写了一份事故报告进行 RM 分析。更高的 P3 振幅对应于参与者识别呈现刺激的程度,而更高的 RM 分数对应于参与者报告生动感官信息的程度以及报告不确定信息的程度。基于 P3 的 GKT 的研究结果表明,当呈现探针刺激时,知情组的 P3 振幅比有罪和目击者组低。关于 RM 分析,知情组在视觉、时间和空间细节方面获得了更高的 RM 分数,而在认知操作方面获得了更低的分数,比有罪和目击者组。最后,判别分析表明,基于 P3 的 GKT 和 RM 的结合比单独使用任何一种测试更能准确地区分这三个组。这些发现表明,RM 可能弥补了基于 P3 的 GKT 的弱点。更具体地说,它可能弥补了其对犯罪信息泄漏的敏感性,因此有助于保护那些对犯罪有了解但不会被认为有罪的无辜个体。