Cargando…
Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study
Event-related potential (ERP) studies about deception often apply recognition tasks. It remains questionable whether reported ERP patterns and cognitive processes can be generalized to other contexts. As the study by Johnson et al. (2008) fills this gap by investigating deception regarding attitudes...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7543939/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32820342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa107 |
_version_ | 1783591757569589248 |
---|---|
author | Scheuble, V Beauducel, A |
author_facet | Scheuble, V Beauducel, A |
author_sort | Scheuble, V |
collection | PubMed |
description | Event-related potential (ERP) studies about deception often apply recognition tasks. It remains questionable whether reported ERP patterns and cognitive processes can be generalized to other contexts. As the study by Johnson et al. (2008) fills this gap by investigating deception regarding attitudes, we tried to replicate it. Participants (N = 99) were instructed to lie or tell the truth about their attitudes. We obtained the same results as Johnson et al. (2008): lies were accompanied by enhanced medial frontal negativities (MFN) and suppressed late positive components (LPCs) indicating that lying relied on stronger cognitive control processes and response conflicts than being honest. The amplitudes of pre-response positivities (PRP) were reduced for lies implying that lies about attitudes were accompanied by strategic monitoring. MFN amplitudes increased and LPC amplitudes decreased for lies about positively valued items revealing that lying about positively valued items is cognitively more challenging than lying about negatively valued items. As a new finding, MFN, LPC and PRP components were neither moderated by Machiavellianism nor by changes in the attitude ratings. The results indicate that LPC, MFN and PRP components are reliable indicators of the cognitive processes used during deception and that it is worthwhile to investigate them in further deception contexts. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7543939 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75439392020-10-15 Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study Scheuble, V Beauducel, A Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Original Manuscript Event-related potential (ERP) studies about deception often apply recognition tasks. It remains questionable whether reported ERP patterns and cognitive processes can be generalized to other contexts. As the study by Johnson et al. (2008) fills this gap by investigating deception regarding attitudes, we tried to replicate it. Participants (N = 99) were instructed to lie or tell the truth about their attitudes. We obtained the same results as Johnson et al. (2008): lies were accompanied by enhanced medial frontal negativities (MFN) and suppressed late positive components (LPCs) indicating that lying relied on stronger cognitive control processes and response conflicts than being honest. The amplitudes of pre-response positivities (PRP) were reduced for lies implying that lies about attitudes were accompanied by strategic monitoring. MFN amplitudes increased and LPC amplitudes decreased for lies about positively valued items revealing that lying about positively valued items is cognitively more challenging than lying about negatively valued items. As a new finding, MFN, LPC and PRP components were neither moderated by Machiavellianism nor by changes in the attitude ratings. The results indicate that LPC, MFN and PRP components are reliable indicators of the cognitive processes used during deception and that it is worthwhile to investigate them in further deception contexts. Oxford University Press 2020-08-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7543939/ /pubmed/32820342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa107 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Manuscript Scheuble, V Beauducel, A Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title | Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title_full | Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title_fullStr | Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title_full_unstemmed | Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title_short | Cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
title_sort | cognitive processes during deception about attitudes revisited: a replication study |
topic | Original Manuscript |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7543939/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32820342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa107 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT scheublev cognitiveprocessesduringdeceptionaboutattitudesrevisitedareplicationstudy AT beauducela cognitiveprocessesduringdeceptionaboutattitudesrevisitedareplicationstudy |