Langleben Daniel D, Moriarty Jane Campbell
Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine.
Psychol Public Policy Law. 2013 May 1;19(2):222-234. doi: 10.1037/a0028841.
Progress in the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the brain to evaluate deception and differentiate lying from truth-telling has created anticipation of a breakthrough in the search for technology-based methods of lie detection. In the last few years, litigants have attempted to introduce fMRI lie detection evidence in courts. This article weighs in on the interdisciplinary debate about the admissibility of such evidence, identifying the missing pieces of the scientific puzzle that need to be completed if fMRI-based lie detection is to meet the standards of either legal reliability or general acceptance. We believe that the "known error rate" is the key concept linking the legal and scientific standards. We posit that properly-controlled clinical trials are the most convincing means to determine the error rates of fMRI-based lie detection and confirm or disprove the relevance of the promising laboratory research on this topic. This article explains the current state of the science and provides an analysis of the case law in which litigants have sought to introduce fMRI lie detection. Analyzing the myriad issues related to fMRI lie detection, the article identifies the key limitations of the current neuroimaging of deception science as expert evidence and explores the problems that arise from using scientific evidence before it is proven scientifically valid and reliable. We suggest that courts continue excluding fMRI lie detection evidence until this potentially useful form of forensic science meets the scientific standards currently required for adoption of a medical test or device. Given a multitude of stakeholders and, the charged and controversial nature and the potential societal impact of this technology, goodwill and collaboration of several government agencies may be required to sponsor impartial and comprehensive clinical trials that will guide the development of forensic fMRI technology.
利用脑功能磁共振成像（fMRI）来评估欺骗行为并区分谎言与真话的研究取得了进展，这使得人们期待在寻找基于技术的测谎方法方面能取得突破。在过去几年里，诉讼当事人试图在法庭上引入fMRI测谎证据。本文参与了关于此类证据可采性的跨学科辩论，指出了如果基于fMRI的测谎要达到法律可靠性或普遍接受性的标准，科学难题中仍缺失的部分。我们认为，“已知错误率”是连接法律和科学标准的关键概念。我们假定，适当控制的临床试验是确定基于fMRI的测谎错误率并证实或反驳关于该主题有前景的实验室研究相关性的最有说服力的手段。本文解释了当前的科学现状，并分析了诉讼当事人试图引入fMRI测谎的判例法。通过分析与fMRI测谎相关的众多问题，本文指出了当前作为专家证据的欺骗神经成像科学的关键局限性，并探讨了在科学证据被证明有效和可靠之前就使用它所产生的问题。我们建议，在这种潜在有用的法医学形式达到目前采用医学测试或设备所需的科学标准之前，法院应继续排除fMRI测谎证据。鉴于众多利益相关者，以及这项技术的激烈和争议性本质及其潜在的社会影响，可能需要几个政府机构的善意合作来赞助公正和全面的临床试验，以指导法医fMRI技术的发展。
