Jump to content

Daniel D. Langleben

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Daniel Langleben is an American psychiatrist, professor, and scientific researcher. He pioneered a technique for using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as a means of lie detection.[1] He has also studied the brain effects of packaging and advertising[2] and how infants' cuteness motivates caretaking in adults.[3]

Biography

[edit]

He received his Doctor of Medicine degree in 1989 and had his postgraduate training in Psychiatry, Addiction Psychiatry, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at the Medical College of Pennsylvania, the Mount Sinai Hospital, UCSF and Stanford University Hospital.[4]

fMRI and lie detection

[edit]
Main article: FMRI lie detection

2001 study

[edit]

Langleben was inspired to test lie detection while he was at Stanford University studying the effects of a drug on children with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD).[5] He found that these children have a more difficult time inhibiting the truth.[6] He postulated that lying requires increased brain activity compared to truth because the truth must be suppressed, essentially creating more work for the brain. In 2001, he published his first work with lie detection using a modified form of the Guilty Knowledge Test, which is sometimes used in polygraph tests.[7] The subjects, right-handed, male college students, were given a card and a Yes/No handheld clicker.[8] They were told to lie to a computer asking questions while they underwent a brain scan only when the question would reveal their card.[9][10] The subjects were given $20 for participating, and told they would receive more money if they deceived the computer; however, none did.[11]

His studies showed that the inferior and superior prefrontal and anterior cingulate gyri and the parietal cortex showed increased activity during deception.[12] In 2002, he licensed his methods for lie detection to the No Lie MRI company located in San Diego, California.

Critiques

[edit]

Critiques of this technique point out that fMRI does not actually measure lying, only the increased brain activity that occurs when one is lying. Using fMRI for lie detection could then lead to false positives produced by anxiety or other causes.[13]

Another concern is that a "lie" is not always clear-cut, and may be a complex concept. More complex types of deception may not be detected by imaging techniques.[14]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Dennis Coon; John Mitterer (1 January 2013). Psychology: A Journey. Cengage Learning. p. 72. ISBN 978-1-133-95782-9.
  2. ^ Wang, AL; Ruparel, K; Loughead, JW; Strasser, AA; Blady, SJ; Lynch, KG; Romer, D; Cappella, JN; Lerman, C; Langleben, DD (2013). "Content matters: neuroimaging investigation of brain and behavioral impact of televised anti-tobacco public service announcements". J Neurosci. 33 (17): 7420–7427. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3840-12.2013. PMC 3773220. PMID 23616548.
  3. ^ Glocker, ML; Langleben, DD; Ruparel, K; Loughead, JW; Valdez, JN; Griffin, MD; Sachser, N; Gur, RC (June 2009). "Baby schema modulates the brain reward system in nulliparous women". Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 106 (22): 9115–9119. Bibcode:2009PNAS..106.9115G. doi:10.1073/pnas.0811620106. PMC 2690007. PMID 19451625.
  4. ^ "Daniel D. Langleben". University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved 9 July 2014.
  5. ^ Silberman, Steve (2006). "Don't Even Think About Lying". Wired. pp. Issue 14.01. Retrieved 9 July 2014.
  6. ^ Prospect: Politics, Essay, Review. C. Seaford. October 2009.
  7. ^ Zack Lynch; Byron Laursen (21 July 2009). The Neuro Revolution: How Brain Science Is Changing Our World. St. Martin's Press. pp. 29. ISBN 978-1-4299-8823-0.
  8. ^ Bonnier Corporation (August 2002). "Popular Science". The Popular Science Monthly. Bonnier Corporation: 58. ISSN 0161-7370.
  9. ^ Boy Scouts of America, Inc. (January 2005). "Boys' Life". Boys' Life. Inkprint Edition. Boy Scouts of America, Inc.: 11. ISSN 0006-8608.
  10. ^ Committee on Science, Technology, Law; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on the Development of the Third Edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence; Federal Judicial Center; National Research Council (26 September 2011). Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence:: Third Edition. National Academies Press. p. 803. ISBN 978-0-309-21421-6. {{cite book}}: |author2= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. ^ Allan Pease; Barbara Pease (1 January 2004). Why Men Don't Have a Clue and Women Always Need More Shoes: The Ultimate Guide to the Opposite Sex. Broadway Books. pp. 272. ISBN 978-0-7679-1610-3.
  12. ^ Langleben, Daniel (2002). "Brain activity during simulated deception: an event-related functional magnetic resonance study". NeuroImage. 15 (3): 727–32. doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.1003. PMID 11848716. S2CID 14676750.
  13. ^ Spence, Sean A. (February 2008). "Playing Devil's Advocate: The case against fMRI lie detection". Legal and Criminological Psychology. 12 (1): 11–25. doi:10.1348/135532507X251597.
  14. ^ National Academy of Engineering (2 September 2004). Emerging Technologies and Ethical Issues in Engineering:: Papers from a Workshop, October 14-15, 2003. National Academies Press. p. 61. ISBN 978-0-309-16572-3.

Selected publications

[edit]
[edit]
  • UPenn profile, contains various links to relevant media and publications
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_D._Langleben&oldid=1226971374"