Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Boulevard Juriquilla 3001, Querétaro 76230, Mexico.
Departamento de Psicobiología y Neurociencias, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Av. Universidad 3004, Ciudad de México, México.
Neuroscience. 2021 Aug 1;468:88-109. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2021.06.005. Epub 2021 Jun 8.
Interpretation of the neural findings of deception without considering the ecological validity of the experimental tasks could lead to biased conclusions. In this study we classified the experimental tasks according to their inclusion of three essential components required for ecological validity: intention to lie, social interaction and motivation. First, we carried out a systematic review to categorize fMRI deception tasks and to weigh the degree of ecological validity of each one. Second, we performed a meta-analysis to identify if each type of task involves a different neural substrate and to distinguish the neurocognitive contribution of each component of ecological validity essential to deception. We detected six categories of deception tasks. Intention to lie was the component least frequently included, followed by social interaction. Monetary reward was the most frequent motivator. The results of the meta-analysis, including 59 contrasts, revealed that intention to lie is associated with activation in the left lateral occipital cortex (superior division) whereas the left angular gyrus and right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) are engaged during lying under instructions. Additionally, the right IFG appears to participate in the social aspect of lying including simulated and real interactions. We found no effect of monetary reward in our analysis. Finally, tasks with high ecological validity recruited fewer brain areas (right insular cortex and bilateral anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)) compared to less ecological tasks, perhaps because they are more natural and realistic, and engage a wide network of brain mechanisms, as opposed to specific tasks that demand more centralized processes.
如果不考虑实验任务的生态有效性来解释欺骗的神经发现,可能会导致有偏见的结论。在这项研究中,我们根据实验任务包含的三个必要组成部分(说谎意图、社会互动和动机)将其进行了分类。首先,我们进行了系统评价,对 fMRI 欺骗任务进行了分类,并权衡了每项任务的生态有效性程度。其次,我们进行了荟萃分析,以确定每种类型的任务是否涉及不同的神经基质,并区分欺骗中生态有效性的每个必要组成部分的神经认知贡献。我们发现了六种欺骗任务类别。说谎意图是最不常包含的组成部分,其次是社会互动。金钱奖励是最常见的激励因素。荟萃分析的结果,包括 59 个对比,表明说谎意图与左外侧枕叶(上部分)的激活有关,而在指令下说谎时,左角回和右额下回(IFG)则参与其中。此外,右 IFG 似乎参与了包括模拟和真实互动的说谎的社交方面。我们在分析中没有发现金钱奖励的效果。最后,与生态有效性较低的任务相比,具有较高生态有效性的任务招募的大脑区域较少(右侧岛叶和双侧前扣带回皮质),这可能是因为它们更自然和真实,涉及广泛的大脑机制网络,而不是需要更集中过程的特定任务。