Brain fingerprinting

Last updated

Brain fingerprinting (BF) is a lie detection technique which uses brain waves from a electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether specific information is stored in the subject's cognitive memory. It was invented by Larry Farwell, a Harvard-graduated neuroscientist, and published in 1995. [1] The technique involves presenting words, phrases, or pictures containing salient details about a crime on a computer screen, in a series with other, irrelevant stimuli to identify whether the suspect recognizes the crime-related items. [2] Although brain fingerprinting has been used in investigations, the test results themselves can not be admitted as evidence in a legal trial. [3]

Contents

The assumption underpinning the application of BF is that the culprit has concealed information about the crime stored in the brain and it can be revealed by analysing fluctuations in the brainwaves that measure a human's neurological activity. Brain fingerprinting relies on two major components, specificity and recognition, as it is assumed that the culprit of the crime will recognize certain details of the investigation whilst innocent subjects will not, based on the familiarity of the items presented. [4] For example, only a guilty individual will have concealed information about the specific gun used in a crime. [4]

P300 response

The procedure begins by attaching sensors called electrodes to the subject's scalp to form a circuit that quantifies brain activity using a test called an electroencephalogram (EEG). [5] When conducting an EEG to measure electrical activity in the brain, a distinctive surge of electrical activity may appear between 300 and 800 milliseconds – this is referred to as the P300 response, first introduced in the 1960s. [6] This psychophysiological response signals one's reaction to seeing a familiar object immediately after being exposed to the stimulus. Based on this information, scientists have argued that they can accurately convict a guilty suspect. [5] Although the origins of this neurological response are unclear, the phenomenon has been extensively studied and peer-reviewed for over 100 years.

Contrary to a traditional polygraph (also known as a lie detector) that relies on changes to sweat glands as nervous responses to determine the subject's honesty, brain fingerprinting is entirely concealed in the brain's responses to stimuli. [7] This makes the technique harder to resist or beat, making it a more reliable method of detecting lies. The P300 response is supported by at least 80 laboratory experiments that use the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT). [8] The GKT, also known as the Concealed Information Test (CIT), is an alternative method of interrogation to reveal concealed information a culprit might have about a crime. Similarly, it focuses on measuring the physiological reaction of subjects, although it prioritises electrodermal, respiratory and cardiovascular responses rather than neurological activity. [7]

History

Brain fingerprinting was first used in a criminal case in 1999, when a man named James Grinder confessed to committing a murder that happened 15 years prior. [9] In a short time after his confession, he retracted his statements. [3] The police struggled to incriminate Grinder because the evidence was outdated. The police and FBI reached out to Lawrence Farwell with the aim of using BF to obtain enough evidence to incriminate Grinder. Soon after taking the test, Grinder confessed to the murder of Julie Helton and three other people, securing him life imprisonment. [3] This case was not the last time Farwell worked in collaboration with a US Intelligence Community as the CIA went on to fund Farwell's counterterrorism research for the US Navy, which was published by Frontiers in Neuroscience . [10]

In 2001, the US Federal Agency outlined how brain fingerprinting was only to be used as an investigative tool; however, several intelligence agencies came forth saying that despite the support and funds they had provided to the development of this technology, they were not to use it at all because of its lack of applicability. [11] Following the US court's rejection of BF, Farwell redirected his resources to advertising the technology abroad. He has worked alongside several government agencies, such as in the United Arab Emirates, and justice systems in India and New Zealand. [12] [13] Nevertheless, his technology has not yet achieved a widespread presence in any criminal setting around the world, and results of brainwave analysis are often not admissible as evidence in court. [9]

Criticism

Following extensive and ongoing research on the brain fingerprinting protocol for detecting deception and its decisive contribution to several trials, the accuracy of technology has been the subject of speculation for a decade. [14] J Peter Rosenfeld found methodological problems associated with brain fingerprinting and related methods. [14] Other researchers have argued that Farwell is misleading and misrepresenting the scientific status of brain fingerprinting technology. [1] [14] Additional studies have attempted to determine the success rate of BF, given that Farwell has claimed a 100% success rate for the technology and a lack of both false positives and negatives in his research. When carrying out comparative studies between the common polygraph lie detector and brain fingerprinting, the latter appears to have fewer false positives; however, when questioned about specific details, the P300 technique seems to be less reliable. [15]

The legitimacy of brain fingerprinting is still questioned. The lack of replication of his studies is largely due to legal restrictions regarding the use of his software and apparatus appointed by the patent issued to Farwell in 1994. [16] This controversy is enhanced by discussion surrounding the patent rights and the fraudulent behaviour of the developer Larry Farwell regarding fabricated FBI reports. [17] Brainwave Sciences, the technology company that owns BF, tainted the validity of the technique when some of its board members became the focal spotlights of scandals in the US. [17] As a result, the acceptance of BF is still the subject of controversy and debate among scholars and legal institutions.

Current research

A research team in New Zealand conducted an examination of Farwell's technology and found that current forensic brainwave analysis (FBA) methods did not meet standards for foundational validity (validity in lab settings) set in the Report to the President on Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods. [9] However, they argued that the technique has the potential to serve as a useful tool in civil and criminal justice if its validity can be conclusively established. [9] Two pilot studies exploring FBA have been conducted, and preliminary results suggest the need for further research to determine the accuracy, validity and reliability of FBA. [9]

A recent review by Rosenfeld found that the P300 response has proven resistant and accurate. [18]

Brain fingerprinting has made appearances in the media. In 2018, Larry Farwell's technique made a brief appearance in the second season of Netflix's Making a Murderer ; however, his findings were not considered during the trial as he was using unauthorized software. [17]

Since 2020, the application of brain fingerprinting has changed. Most recently, the term "brain fingerprinting" referred to the uniqueness of brains from a functional neuroimaging context. This new field of study aims to predict patterns of brain connectivity to hopefully prognosticate mental disorders in the future. [19] [20]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polygraph</span> Device that attempts to infer lying

A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test, is a junk science device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions. The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers; however, there are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying, making it difficult to identify factors that separate those who are lying from those who are telling the truth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Event-related potential</span> Brain response that is the direct result of a specific sensory, cognitive, or motor event

An event-related potential (ERP) is the measured brain response that is the direct result of a specific sensory, cognitive, or motor event. More formally, it is any stereotyped electrophysiological response to a stimulus. The study of the brain in this way provides a noninvasive means of evaluating brain functioning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brain–computer interface</span> Direct communication pathway between an enhanced or wired brain and an external device

A brain–computer interface (BCI), sometimes called a brain–machine interface (BMI), is a direct communication pathway between the brain's electrical activity and an external device, most commonly a computer or robotic limb. BCIs are often directed at researching, mapping, assisting, augmenting, or repairing human cognitive or sensory-motor functions. They are often conceptualized as a human–machine interface that skips the intermediary component of the physical movement of body parts, although they also raise the possibility of the erasure of the discreteness of brain and machine. Implementations of BCIs range from non-invasive and partially invasive to invasive, based on how close electrodes get to brain tissue.

Neurotechnology encompasses any method or electronic device which interfaces with the nervous system to monitor or modulate neural activity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Metabolomics</span> Scientific study of chemical processes involving metabolites

Metabolomics is the scientific study of chemical processes involving metabolites, the small molecule substrates, intermediates, and products of cell metabolism. Specifically, metabolomics is the "systematic study of the unique chemical fingerprints that specific cellular processes leave behind", the study of their small-molecule metabolite profiles. The metabolome represents the complete set of metabolites in a biological cell, tissue, organ, or organism, which are the end products of cellular processes. Messenger RNA (mRNA), gene expression data, and proteomic analyses reveal the set of gene products being produced in the cell, data that represents one aspect of cellular function. Conversely, metabolic profiling can give an instantaneous snapshot of the physiology of that cell, and thus, metabolomics provides a direct "functional readout of the physiological state" of an organism. There are indeed quantifiable correlations between the metabolome and the other cellular ensembles, which can be used to predict metabolite abundances in biological samples from, for example mRNA abundances. One of the ultimate challenges of systems biology is to integrate metabolomics with all other -omics information to provide a better understanding of cellular biology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">P300 (neuroscience)</span> Event-related potential

The P300 (P3) wave is an event-related potential (ERP) component elicited in the process of decision making. It is considered to be an endogenous potential, as its occurrence links not to the physical attributes of a stimulus, but to a person's reaction to it. More specifically, the P300 is thought to reflect processes involved in stimulus evaluation or categorization.

Lie detection is an assessment of a verbal statement with the goal to reveal a possible intentional deceit. Lie detection may refer to a cognitive process of detecting deception by evaluating message content as well as non-verbal cues. It also may refer to questioning techniques used along with technology that record physiological functions to ascertain truth and falsehood in response. The latter is commonly used by law enforcement in the United States, but rarely in other countries because it is based on pseudoscience.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electronic nose</span> Electronic sensor for odor detection

An electronic nose is an electronic sensing device intended to detect odors or flavors. The expression "electronic sensing" refers to the capability of reproducing human senses using sensor arrays and pattern recognition systems.

The Collaborative Studies on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA) is an eleven-center research project in the United States designed to understand the genetic basis of alcoholism. Research is conducted at University of Connecticut, Indiana University, University of Iowa, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Washington University in St. Louis, University of California at San Diego, Rutgers University, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Virginia Commonwealth University, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and Howard University.

Brain-reading or thought identification uses the responses of multiple voxels in the brain evoked by stimulus then detected by fMRI in order to decode the original stimulus. Advances in research have made this possible by using human neuroimaging to decode a person's conscious experience based on non-invasive measurements of an individual's brain activity. Brain reading studies differ in the type of decoding employed, the target, and the decoding algorithms employed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neurolaw</span>

Neurolaw is a field of interdisciplinary study that explores the effects of discoveries in neuroscience on legal rules and standards. Drawing from neuroscience, philosophy, social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and criminology, neurolaw practitioners seek to address not only the descriptive and predictive issues of how neuroscience is and will be used in the legal system, but also the normative issues of how neuroscience should and should not be used.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electroencephalography</span> Electrophysiological monitoring method to record electrical activity of the brain

Electroencephalography (EEG) is a method to record an electrogram of the spontaneous electrical activity of the brain. The biosignals detected by EEG have been shown to represent the postsynaptic potentials of pyramidal neurons in the neocortex and allocortex. It is typically non-invasive, with the EEG electrodes placed along the scalp using the International 10–20 system, or variations of it. Electrocorticography, involving surgical placement of electrodes, is sometimes called "intracranial EEG". Clinical interpretation of EEG recordings is most often performed by visual inspection of the tracing or quantitative EEG analysis.

The oddball paradigm is an experimental design used within psychology research. Presentations of sequences of repetitive stimuli are infrequently interrupted by a deviant stimulus. The reaction of the participant to this "oddball" stimulus is recorded.

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

A liquid biopsy, also known as fluid biopsy or fluid phase biopsy, is the sampling and analysis of non-solid biological tissue, primarily blood. Like traditional biopsy, this type of technique is mainly used as a diagnostic and monitoring tool for diseases such as cancer, with the added benefit of being largely non-invasive. Liquid biopsies may also be used to validate the efficiency of a cancer treatment drug by taking multiple samples in the span of a few weeks. The technology may also prove beneficial for patients after treatment to monitor relapse.

John J. Furedy was a Hungarian-born Australian and Canadian psychophysiologist and distinguished research professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, noted for his extensive empirical research into the unreliability of the polygraph test in lie detection and similar problems associated with biofeedback, as well as addressing contemporary issues concerning academic freedom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature Profiling</span> Technique to detect a suspects participation in a crime

Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature Profiling is an EEG technique by which a suspect's participation in a crime is detected by eliciting electrophysiological impulses.

Neuroprivacy, or "brain privacy," is a concept which refers to the rights people have regarding the imaging, extraction and analysis of neural data from their brains. This concept is highly related to fields like neuroethics, neurosecurity, and neurolaw, and has become increasingly relevant with the development and advancement of various neuroimaging technologies. Neuroprivacy is an aspect of neuroethics specifically regarding the use of neural information in legal cases, neuromarketing, surveillance and other external purposes, as well as corresponding social and ethical implications.

fMRI lie detection is a field of lie detection using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). FMRI looks to the central nervous system to compare time and topography of activity in the brain for lie detection. While a polygraph detects anxiety-induced changes in activity in the peripheral nervous system, fMRI purportedly measures blood flow to areas of the brain involved in deception.

James B. Grinder (1945–2010) was an American serial killer and rapist who murdered three teenage girls in Arkansas and a woman in Missouri between 1976 and 1984. Grinder was not apprehended until his confession in March 1998. However, authorities still had little evidence tying Grinder to the murders, so they used a technique known as brain fingerprinting to help prove his guilt. In 1999, Grinder was convicted of the four murders and sentenced to life imprisonment. He remained imprisoned until his death in 2010.

References

  1. 1 2 Meijer, Ewout; Ben-Shakhar, Gershon; Verschuere, Bruno; Donchin, Emanuel (April 2013). "A comment on Farwell (2012): brain fingerprinting: a comprehensive tutorial review of detection of concealed information with event-related brain potentials". Cognitive Neurodynamics. 7 (2): 155–158. doi:10.1007/s11571-012-9217-x. PMC   3595430 . PMID   23493984.
  2. ↑ Farwell, Lawrence (2012-02-17). "Brain Fingerprinting". Cognitive Neurodynamics. 6 (2): 115–154. doi:10.1007/s11571-012-9192-2. PMC   3311838 . PMID   23542949.
  3. 1 2 3 Javaid, Arfa (2020-12-02). "What is Brain Fingerprinting?".
  4. 1 2 Meegan, Daniel V. (2008-01-25). "Neuroimaging Techniques for Memory Detection: Scientific, Ethical, and Legal Issues". The American Journal of Bioethics. 8 (1): 9–20. doi:10.1080/15265160701842007. ISSN   1526-5161. PMID   18236327.
  5. 1 2 Farwell, Lawrence A. (April 2012). "Brain fingerprinting: a comprehensive tutorial review of detection of concealed information with event-related brain potentials". Cognitive Neurodynamics. 6 (2): 115–154. doi:10.1007/s11571-012-9192-2. ISSN   1871-4080. PMC   3311838 . PMID   23542949.
  6. ↑ Sutton, Samuel; Braren, Margery; Zubin, Joseph; John, E. R. (1965-11-26). "Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty". Science. 150 (3700): 1187–1188. Bibcode:1965Sci...150.1187S. doi:10.1126/science.150.3700.1187. ISSN   0036-8075. PMID   5852977.
  7. 1 2 Staunton, Ciara; Hammond, Sean (June 2011). "An Investigation of the Guilty Knowledge Test Polygraph Examination". Journal of Criminal Psychology. 1 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1108/20093829201100001. ISSN   2009-3829.
  8. ↑ Iacono, William G. (2008-01-25). "The Forensic Application of "Brain Fingerprinting:" Why Scientists Should Encourage the Use of P300 Memory Detection Methods". The American Journal of Bioethics. 8 (1): 30–32. doi:10.1080/15265160701828550. ISSN   1526-5161. PMID   18236333.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 Palmer, Robin (2017). "Time to Take Brain-Fingerprinting Seriously? A Consideration of International Developments in Forensic Brainwave Analysis (FBA), in the Context of the Need for Independent Verification of FBA's Scientific Validity, and the Potential Legal Implications of its Use in New Zealand". Te Wharenga - New Zealand Criminal Law Review. 6. University of Canterbury New Zealand: 330–356. hdl: 10092/101246 .
  10. ↑ Farwell, Lawrence A.; Richardson, Drew C.; Richardson, Graham M.; Furedy, John J. (2014-12-23). "Brain fingerprinting classification concealed information test detects US Navy military medical information with P300". Frontiers in Neuroscience. 8: 410. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00410 . ISSN   1662-453X. PMC   4274905 . PMID   25565941.
  11. ↑ United States General Accounting Office (2001). "Investigative Techniques: Federal agency views on the potential application of "Brain Fingerprinting"" (PDF) (Government Document). United States General Accounting Office.
  12. ↑ "Dr. Purshottam Swaroopchand Soni vs The State Of Gujarat on 5 April, 2007". indiankanoon.org. Retrieved 2024-03-18.
  13. ↑ "'Brain fingerprinting' may soon serve NZ justice". www.thelawyermag.com. Retrieved 2024-03-18.
  14. 1 2 3 Rosenfeld, J Peter (Jan 2005). "'Brain fingerprinting': A critical analysis". The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice. 4 (1): 20–37.
  15. ↑ Meijer, Ewout H.; Selle, Nathalie Klein; Elber, Lotem; Ben-Shakhar, Gershon (September 2014). "Memory detection with the Concealed Information Test: A meta analysis of skin conductance, respiration, heart rate, and P300 data". Psychophysiology. 51 (9): 879–904. doi:10.1111/psyp.12239. ISSN   0048-5772. PMID   24916920.
  16. ↑ US5363858A,Farwell, Lawrence A.,"Method and apparatus for multifaceted electroencephalographic response analysis (MERA)",issued 1994-11-15
  17. 1 2 3 Tahir, Raymond (17 April 2023). "Steven Avery Defense Expert, and Former Brainwave Science, Inc. Scientific Advisor, Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell, Apologizes for "Deceitful" Conduct in Wake of Permanent Injunctions and $1,125,000 in Punitive Damages Awards". Business Wire. Retrieved 1 March 2024.
  18. ↑ Rosenfeld, J. Peter (July 2020). "P300 in detecting concealed information and deception: A review". Psychophysiology. 57 (7): e13362. doi:10.1111/psyp.13362. ISSN   0048-5772. PMID   30859600.
  19. ↑ Finn, Emily S; Shen, Xilin; Scheinost, Dustin; Rosenberg, Monica D; Huang, Jessica; Chun, Marvin M; Papademetris, Xenophon; Constable, R Todd (November 2015). "Functional connectome fingerprinting: identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity". Nature Neuroscience. 18 (11): 1664–1671. doi:10.1038/nn.4135. ISSN   1097-6256. PMC   5008686 . PMID   26457551.
  20. ↑ Hermens, Daniel F.; Russo, Colin; Shan, Zack; Lagopoulos, Jim (September 2023). "Brain fingerprinting: A promising future application for predicting mental illness". Futures. 152: 103211. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2023.103211.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.