Wagner-Altendorf Tobias A, van der Lugt Arie H, Banfield Jane F, Meyer Carsten, Rohrbach Caterina, Heldmann Marcus, Münte Thomas F
Department of Neurology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Jul 17;14:277. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00277. eCollection 2020.
Deceptive behavior, and the evaluation of others' behavior as truthful or deceptive, are crucial aspects of human social interaction. We report a study investigating two participants in a social interaction, performing a deception task. The first participant, the "informant," made true or false autobiographical statements. The second participant, the "detective," then classified these statements as truth or lie. Behavioral data showed that detectives performed slightly above chance and were better at correctly identifying true as compared with deceptive statements. This presumably reflects the "truth bias": the finding that individuals are more likely to classify others' statements as truthful than as deceptive - even when informed that a lie is as likely to be told as the truth. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded from the informant. Event-related potential (ERP) analysis revealed a smaller contingent negative variation (CNV) preceding "convincing" statements (statements classified as true by the detective) compared to "unconvincing" statements (statements classified as lie by the detective) - irrespective of whether the statements were actually truthful or deceptive. This finding suggests a distinct electrocortical signature of "successful" compared to "unsuccessful" deceptive statements. One possible explanation is that the pronounced CNV indicates the individuals' higher "cognitive load" when processing unconvincing statements.
欺骗行为以及对他人行为是真实还是欺骗性的评估,是人类社会互动的关键方面。我们报告了一项研究,该研究调查了社会互动中的两名参与者,他们执行了一项欺骗任务。第一名参与者,即“告密者”,做出真实或虚假的自传陈述。第二名参与者,即“侦探”,然后将这些陈述分类为真话或谎言。行为数据表明,“侦探”的表现略高于随机水平,并且与识别欺骗性陈述相比,他们在正确识别真实陈述方面表现得更好。这大概反映了“真相偏差”:即个体更有可能将他人的陈述分类为真实而非欺骗性的这一发现——即使被告知说谎的可能性与说真话的可能性一样大。我们记录了“告密者”的脑电图(EEG)数据。事件相关电位(ERP)分析显示,与“不可信”陈述(被“侦探”分类为谎言的陈述)相比,“可信”陈述(被“侦探”分类为真实的陈述)之前的关联性负变(CNV)较小——无论这些陈述实际上是真实的还是欺骗性的。这一发现表明,与“不成功”的欺骗性陈述相比,“成功”的欺骗性陈述具有独特的脑电特征。一种可能的解释是,明显的CNV表明个体在处理不可信陈述时具有更高的“认知负荷”。