↓ Skip to main content

When Pinocchio's nose does not grow: belief regarding lie-detectability modulates production of deception

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
When Pinocchio's nose does not grow: belief regarding lie-detectability modulates production of deception
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamila E. Sip, David Carmel, Jennifer L. Marchant, Jian Li, Predrag Petrovic, Andreas Roepstorff, William B. McGregor, Christopher D. Frith

Abstract

Does the brain activity underlying the production of deception differ depending on whether or not one believes their deception can be detected? To address this question, we had participants commit a mock theft in a laboratory setting, and then interrogated them while they underwent functional MRI (fMRI) scanning. Crucially, during some parts of the interrogation participants believed a lie-detector was activated, whereas in other parts they were told it was switched-off. We were thus able to examine the neural activity associated with the contrast between producing true vs. false claims, as well as the independent contrast between believing that deception could and could not be detected. We found increased activation in the right amygdala and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), as well as the left posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), during the production of false (compared to true) claims. Importantly, there was a significant interaction between the effects of deception and belief in the left temporal pole and right hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus, where activity increased during the production of deception when participants believed their false claims could be detected, but not when they believed the lie-detector was switched-off. As these regions are associated with binding socially complex perceptual input and memory retrieval, we conclude that producing deceptive behavior in a context in which one believes this deception can be detected is associated with a cognitively taxing effort to reconcile contradictions between one's actions and recollections.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
United States 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Slovakia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Unknown 94 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 9%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 14 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Neuroscience 8 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 20 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2013.
All research outputs
#6,961,098
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,700
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,764
of 293,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#362
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 293,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.