Medical Brain scans might be better lie detectors

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa!
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Brain Detectors
AI Thread Summary
Brain scans may offer a more reliable method for detecting lies compared to traditional polygraphs, but concerns remain about their effectiveness in cases where individuals believe their own falsehoods. The ability to control brain activity through practices like meditation raises questions about the accuracy of brain scans in detecting deception. Additionally, the complexity of lying, including how rehearsed a lie is or the presence of partial truths, could affect the brain's activity patterns. There is a consensus that while brain scans might not be foolproof, they could still provide more promising results than current lie detection methods. Overall, the discussion highlights the nuanced nature of truth and belief in the context of deception detection.
Lisa!
Gold Member
Messages
650
Reaction score
99
http://www.livescience.com/041129_lie_detection.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Biology news on Phys.org
That's interesting. Hasn't it been shown scientifically though that people are capable of controling their brain activity when meditating? And what about people who truly believe what they are saying even if they are lying? I don't think that this device would help with that would it?
 
TheStatutoryApe said:
That's interesting. Hasn't it been shown scientifically though that people are capable of controling their brain activity when meditating? And what about people who truly believe what they are saying even if they are lying? I don't think that this device would help with that would it?
I don't know. The only thing I know is, I usually don't need a lie detector to know whether someone's lying or not. I just look at people's eyes and well it's clear. Of course I should say fortunately people around me aren't professional liars like politicians or criminals! :-p
 
Lisa! said:
I don't know. The only thing I know is, I usually don't need a lie detector to know whether someone's lying or not. I just look at people's eyes and well it's clear. Of course I should say fortunately people around me aren't professional liars like politicians or criminals! :-p

Let's hope you never run into a smooth talking sociopath.
 
TheStatutoryApe said:
That's interesting. Hasn't it been shown scientifically though that people are capable of controling their brain activity when meditating? And what about people who truly believe what they are saying even if they are lying? I don't think that this device would help with that would it?
I don't know about meditation, though I'd expect even that would show up as a characteristic pattern of activity if it were studied (I don't know if it has or hasn't...just a guess here), and while it might not show if someone was being truthful, if you could tell they were doing something that altered their brain activity patterns, you could at least count the results as inconclusive.

As for someone believing a lie, that's not so much being untruthful as delusional and would be more of a pathology than just lying.

I wonder if it would also make a difference how well rehearsed a lie is. If you're fabricating a story while the recording is done, I would think it would show up as a different activity pattern than if you've committed a lie to memory through much repetition so that you use a different part of your brain to recall the lie rather than to actively fabricate it. Or what if you mix in partial lies and partial truths...an embelleshment rather than a total lie.

Nonetheless, I would think it would have more promise than a polygraph test.
 
I know that some of my friends and I agree that when we were kids and lied a lot we practically believed what it was that we were saying. I remember lying to my parents and genuinely breaking down in tears because they didn't believe me. I was a terrible little brat.
So I'm just wondering what difference something like that might make. Or even just a person who is mentally imbalanced.
Like you said it would probably be better than a polygraph at any rate.


By the way, congrats on your new Super Mentor status Moonie!
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
Back
Top