Abstract
Deceptive abilities have long been studied in relation to personality traits. More recently, studies explored the neural substrates associated with deceptive skills suggesting a critical role of the prefrontal cortex. Here we investigated whether non-invasive brain stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) could modulate generation of untruthful responses about subject’s personal life across contexts (i.e., deceiving on guilt-free questions on daily activities; generating previously memorized lies about past experience; and producing spontaneous lies about past experience), as well as across modality responses (verbal and motor responses). Results reveal that real, but not sham, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the DLPFC can reduce response latency for untruthful over truthful answers across contexts and modality responses. Also, contexts of lies seem to incur a different hemispheric laterality. These findings add up to previous studies demonstrating that it is possible to modulate some processes involved in generation of untruthful answers by applying non-invasive brain stimulation over the DLPFC and extend these findings by showing a differential hemispheric contribution of DLPFCs according to contexts.
Highlights
IntroductionDeception is generally defined as deliberately intending to mislead another person by falsification of truthful information (Vrij, 2001; DePaulo et al, 2003; Spence et al, 2004)
Results from this work revealed that non-invasive brain stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) can modulate production of untruthful answers about subject’s personal life
(2008), tDCS over the right DLPFC coupled with anodal/cathodal reduced response latency when subjects had to report through a motor response that they had not seen a picture when they had been previously presented with the picture
Summary
Deception is generally defined as deliberately intending to mislead another person by falsification of truthful information (Vrij, 2001; DePaulo et al, 2003; Spence et al, 2004). Verbal (e.g., increased pauses; Mann et al, 2002; DePaulo et al, 2003; Vrij, 2005), vocal (e.g., higher pitch; DePaulo et al, 2003), and non-verbal cues (e.g., reduced bodily movements, increased gaze aversion; Vrij and Mann, 2001; Mann et al, 2002; DePaulo et al, 2003; Nunez et al, 2005) have been noted during false statements. Reliability of these cues to discriminate deceptive from truthful responses remain very poor (Vrij, 2001; DePaulo et al, 2003; Masip et al, 2003; Vrij et al, 2006, 2007, 2008)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
