• Science of Emotion and Sensibility
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.227-234
• /
• 2011

The purpose of present study was to examine brain functions associated with intention to conceal information. Kubo & Nittono(2009) and Verschuere et al.(2009) studied the intention to conceal information using P300 amplitude. On the basis of these two studies, present study attempted to identify brain area while participants were performing concealed information test. 19 healthy college students participated in fMRI-based concealed information test. Participants' name were used as concealed information. The test was performed in two conditions. In the intention condition, participants were instructed to try leaving their names undetected by suppressing their brain response to it. In the no intention condition, participants performed the test without intention to conceal. The fMRI results showed that the right anterior cingulated cortex (Rt. ACC), and left orbito-frontal cortex (Lt. OFC) activations were greater in the deceptive condition than the truth condition. These finding confirmed that ACC is area a deception-specific process as shown in the previous fMRI study. The OFC activation was also observed in the deceptive condition. The OFC is an area known as associated with emotional response such as anxiety, fear, and guilty. The anxiety induced while participants were intended to conceal information might be related to the OFC activation.

• Science of Emotion and Sensibility
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.179-186
• /
• 2010

The present study is a partial extension of the Duncan-Johnson and Donchin (1979) and Soskins, Rosenfeld, and Niendam (2001) studies that found some effects of high pass filter (HPF) setting on P300 waveform. EEGs were recorded while the subjects performed a visual three-stimulus oddball task, and the Fz and Pz EEG signals were passed through 0.01 Hz, 0.3 Hz, and 1.0 Hz HPFs. P300 amplitudes at Fz and Pz were reduced at 1.0 Hz HPF compared to 0.01 Hz and 0.3 Hz HPFs. The negative peaks post P300 at Fz and Pz were not observed at 0.01 Hz HPF, but observed at 0.3 Hz and 1.0 Hz HPFs. The combination of 0.3 Hz HPF and peak-to-peak P300 measures was more useful than that of 0.01 Hz, 0.3 Hz, or 1.0 Hz HPF and baseline-to-peak P300 measures to discriminate between non-target and standard stimuli. The peak-to-peak P300 measures were more useful than the baseline-topeak P300 measures at 1.0 Hz HPF setting.