Impact of stimulus similarity between the probe and the irrelevant items during a card-playing deception detection task: The “irrelevants” are not irrelevant

REFERENCES

• Abootalebi, V., Moradi, M. H., & Khalilzadeh, M. A. (2006). A comparison of methods for ERP assessment in a P300-based GKT. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62(2), 309–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, J. J., & Iacono, W. G. (1997). A comparison of methods for the analysis of event-related potentials in deception detection. Psychophysiology, 34, 234–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, J. J., Iacono, W., & Danielson, K. (1992). The identification of concealed memories using the event-related potential and implicit behavioral measures: A methodology for prediction in the face of individual differences. Psychophysiology, 29, 504–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, J. J., & Mertens, R. (2009). Limitations to the detection of deception: True and false recollections are poorly distinguished using an event-related potential procedure. Social Neuroscience, 4(6), 473–490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Electroencephalographic Society. (1991). Guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 8, 200–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appelbaum, P. S. (2007). The new lie detectors: Neuroscience, deception, and the courts. Psychiatric Services, 58, 460–462.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azizian, A., Freitas, A., Parvaz, M., & Squires, N. (2006). Beware misleading cues: Perceptual similarity modulates the N2/P3 complex. Psychophysiology, 43, 253–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azizian, A., Freitas, A., Watson, T., & Squires, N. (2006). Electrophysiological correlates of categorization: P300 amplitude as index of target similarity. Biological Psychology, 71, 278–288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Shakhar, G., & Gati, I. (1987). Common and distinctive features of verbal and pictorial stimuli as determinants of psychophysiological responsivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 116(2), 91–105.
   Google Scholar
• DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979–995.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donchin, E. (1981). Presidential address, 1980. Surprise! Surprise? Psychophysiology, 18(5), 493–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doob, A., & Kirschenbaum, H. (1973). Bias in police lineups: Partial remembering. Journal of Police Sciences and Administration, 1, 287–293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekman, P., & O’Sullivan, M. (2006). From flawed self-assessment to blatant whoppers: The utility of voluntary and involuntary behaviour in detecting deception. Behavioural Sciences & the Law, 24, 673–686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellwanger, J., Tenhula, W. N., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Sweet, J. J. (1999). Identifying simulators of cognitive deficit through combined use of neuropsychological test performance and event-related potentials. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21(6), 866–879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farwell, L. A., & Donchin, E. (1991). The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event-related potentials. Psychophysiology, 28, 531–547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaetz, M. (2002). An emerging role for event-related potentials in the assessment of brain injury. Clinical Neurophysiology, 113, 1665–1666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganis, G., & Keenan, J. P. (2009). The cognitive neuroscience of deception. Social Neuroscience, 4(6), 465–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gouvier, W. D., Lees-Haley, P. R., & Hammer, J. H. (2003). The neuropsychological examination in the detection of malingering in the forensic arena: Costs and benefits. In G. P. Prigatano & N. H. Pliskin (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychology and cost outcome research (pp. 405–424). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhouse, S., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analyses of profile data. Psychometrika, 6, 95–112.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, W. G. (2008). The forensic application of “brain fingerprinting”: Why scientists should encourage the use of P300 memory detection methods. American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 30–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., Jr. (1986). A triarchic model of P300 amplitude. Psychophysiology, 23, 367–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., Jr., Barnhardt, J., & Zhu, J. (2004). The contribution of executive processes to deceptive responding. Neuropsychologia, 42, 878–901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., Jr., Barnhardt, J., & Zhu, J. (2005). Differential effects of practice on the executive processes used for truthful and deceptive responses: An event-related brain potential study. Brain Research, Cognitive Brain Research, 24(3), 386–404.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karis, D., Fabiani, M., & Donchin, E. (1984). “P300” and memory: Individual differences in the von Restorff effect. Cognitive Psychology, 16(2), 177–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, C. D., Marchand, Y., Smith, S. M., & Connolly, J. F. (2007). Determining eyewitness accuracy using event-related brain potentials (ERPs). Psychophysiology, 44, 894–904.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, C. D., Marchand, Y., Smith, S. M., & Connolly, J. F. (2009). Use of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to assess eyewitness accuracy and deception. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73(3), 218–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lui, M., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2008). Detection of deception about multiple, concealed, mock crime items, based on a spatial-temporal analysis of ERP amplitude and scalp distribution. Psychophysiology, 45(5), 721–730.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lykken, D. T. (1991). Why (some) Americans believe in the lie detector while others believe in the Guilty Knowledge Test. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 26(3), 214–222.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meijer, E. H., Smulders, F. T., Merckelbach, H. L., & Wolf, A. G. (2007). The P300 is sensitive to concealed face recognition. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 66(3), 231–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mertens, R., & Allen, J. J. (2008). The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: Deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios. Psychophysiology, 45(2), 286–298.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miyake, Y., Mizutani, M., & Yamaura, T. (1993). Event-related brain potentials as an indicator of detecting information in field polygraph examinations. Polygraph, 22, 131–149.
   Google Scholar
• Picton, T. W. (1992). The P300 wave of the human event-related potential. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 9(4), 456–479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P. (2002). Event-related potentials in detection of deception, malingering, and false memories. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P. (2011). Theory and application of the Concealed Information Test. In B. Verschuere, G. Ben-Shakhar, & E. Meijer (Eds.), Memory detection (pp. 63–89). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Biroschak, J. R., & Furedy, J. J. (2006). P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical versus incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60, 251–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Ellwanger, J. W., Nolan, K., Wu, S., Bermann, R., & Sweet, J. (1999). P300 scalp amplitude distribution as an index of deception in a simulated cognitive deficit model. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 33, 3–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Winograd, M., Lui, A. M., Vandenboom, C., & Chedid, E. (2008). The Complex Trial Protocol (CTP): A new, countermeasure-resistant, accurate P300-based method for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 45, 906–919.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Shue, E, & Singer, E. (2007). Single versus multiple probe blocks of P300-based concealed information tests for self-referring versus incidentally obtained information. Biological Psychology, 74(3), 396–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Soskins, M., Bosh, G., & Ryan, A. (2004). Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 41, 205–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, J. P., Tang, M., Meixner, J., Winograd, M., & Labkovsky, E. (2009). The effects of asymmetric vs. symmetric probability of targets following probe and irrelevant stimuli in the complex trial protocol for detection of concealed information with P300. Physiology & Behavior, 98(1–2), 10–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vagnini, V. L., Berry, T. R., Clark, J. A., & Jiang, Y. (2008). New measures to detect malingered neurocognitive deficit: Applying reaction time and event-related potentials. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30(7), 766–776.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Hooff, J. C., Sargeant, E., Foster, J. K., & Schmand, B. A. (2009). Identifying deliberate attempts to fake memory impairment through the combined use of reaction time and event-related potential measures. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73(3), 246–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman, S., & Bockenholt, U. (1989). Bootstrapping: Applications to psychophysiology. Psychophysiology, 26, 208–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2003). Eyewitness testimony. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 277–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S. J., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603–647.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar