Magnetic Resonance Imaging, or MRI, is not a truth serum.
But researchers are saying it’s a top notch lie detector that far surpasses the polygraph in determining whether or not a person is telling a lie.
The polygraph just measures physiological responses to stress – your pulse rate, sweating, irregular breathing – and has largely been discredited as a scientific tool.
The MRI goes straight to the source.
The MRI measures what’s happening in your brain. Researchers are using what’s called functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), to watch localized brain activity, to look inside heads and see what your brain does when it lies.
According to Dr. K. Luan Phan, a psychiatrist at the University of Chicago, lying causes changes in your brain that you can see with a functional MRI because lying makes your brain work harder in the pre-frontal cortex, where reasoning occurs.
Guess who’s interested?
MRI lie-detection has already gone commercial. A California company, No Lie MRI says that, for a price (around $10,000), it can identify lies with 90% accuracy. Its website claims that it “provides unbiased methods for the detection of deception and other information stored in the brain,” and that their MRI technology “represents the first and only direct measure of truth verification and lie detection in human history!”
Meanwhile, federal dollars are pouring into this research. According to an article in The Scientist, since September 11, 2001, grants from US agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, have “burst open the field.” Jon Gabrieli’s group at Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology has funding from the Central Intelligence Agency. No Lie MRI’s technology is based on the results of Daniel Langleben’s research at the University of Pennsylvania, which was partially funded by the Department of Defense.
How to trick an MRI
Researchers say the only way to trick the MRI is to convince yourself you’re telling the truth. If you really believe something is true, your brain won’t register enough changes to be conclusive.
We all know there are many different kinds of lying: “I love your haircut!” versus “I found the money in a trash heap.” Is telling the truth about whether a card is red or black the same as telling the truth about whether you are a terrorist? So far, researchers have had only willing subjects.
Is this the ultimate invasion of our privacy? Or is it a great new way to identify terrorists and serial killers?
This seems scary to me.
I think it’s great to know who is lying. we should use this on terrorists.
I, too, think it’s great to be able at last to know who is lying.
I think we should use this technology as standard screening protocol on all manner of terrorists^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H candidates for High Public Office, from State Rep all the way up thru President and every Supreme Court nominee etc. It has been forty-odd years now of Truth-in-Labeling Law non-enforcement in the field. The resulting four-decades-long Veracity Gap has hurt all the Rest of Us quite badly, I think.
So with THIS tech, *appropriately* applied and nopt squandered on making more terrists out of more innocents (Google “TSA No-Fly” for stats – a MILLION of us are THAT BAD NOW? Oh, C’MON!) we might just get a “Change we can BELIEVE IN!” at last. Neither Bush nor Cheney (let alone Obama nor Biden) could have *ever* pulled off even *half* the crimes against trugh (and humanity, and conscience, and truth, did I mention truth?) that we KNOW they committed while in office had we but hooked ‘em up to the MIT machines first imvho.
Of course, we’d have had to keep ‘em jacked-in for the Duration, just for safety’s sake. Listen well as the RICH ELITE types all shriek out for the restoration of Good Old Habeas Corpus and Presumption of Innocence for a change, should this abovementioned American Dream ever be brought to pass. ;)
I, too, think it’s great to be able at last to know who is lying. I am also of the strongly heartfelt opinion that any person that ever sets a million innocent civilians up for mayhem+slaughter and/or ever releases thousands of tons of radioactive (Depleted Uranium, yes) bomb-and-bullet dust upon the Human Genome /en/ /masse/ (which is now a 4.5 BILLION-year half-life /fait/ /accompli/) is surely a Global Terrorist of Five Star Proportions.
Also, such as those make a sickening mockery of the Rome Treaty. So:
I think we should use this technology as standard screening protocol on all manner of terrorists^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H candidates for High Public Office, from State Rep all the way up thru President and every Supreme Court nominee etc. It has been forty-odd years of Truth-in-Labeling Law “deregulation” in the field. The resulting four-decades-long Official Veracity Gap has hurt all the Rest of Us quite badly, I think.
So with THIS tech, *appropriately* applied and not squandered on making more terrists out of more innocents we might just get a “Change we can BELIEVE IN!” at last. (Google “TSA No-Fly” for stats – a MILLION of us are suddenly THAT BAD NOW? Oh, C’MON!)
Listen well as the RICH ELITE types all shriek out for the restoration of Good Old Habeas Corpus and Presumption of Innocence for a change, should this abovementioned Sweet American Dream ever be brought to pass. ;)
OMG. That is an unique point of view. I am not sure I have the same view.
Well, this wouldn’t work on hard core criminals such as terrorists, because they obviously beleive whole heartedly into their cause and fight for freedom.So the MRI wouldn’t work on them because they’re convinced they’re action are not dishonest in any way, we wouldn’t be able to get information from them, since they can easily make themselves believe the lie is true as well.
I think Bonnie is right, terrorists & criminale are heartedly into their cause (bad cause) & the MRI in that case id not the best method for get proper information. When the MRI evolved, in the future I think, become one of the best standard screening protocol for the police.
I think it’s great to know who is lying. we should use this on terrorists.
Hmmm. If the MRI is 90% accurate then, ergo, it is wrong 10% of the time. That sort of accuracy level is no where near good enough to use this as a tool to convict someone. And at around $10,000 a shot it is way too expensive. Interesting, but I suggest of little practical use.
I agree with Tony. 90% accuracy is not good enough to convict someone of a crime. however, this technology would be an improvement over what we have now i.e. the polygraph machine that has plenty of available courses on how to beat it.
Once this new technology becomes a bit more affordable I’ll bet it will replace the polygraph as the test of choice for both the government and local law informant.
Like the article states if you believe something to be true then this should not show up on the scan but this is a step in the right direction and it is good that modern technology is taking on the obsolete polygraph.
Like the article states if you believe something to be true then this should not show up on the scan but this is a step in the right direction and it is good that modern technology is taking on the obsolete polygraph.
Finally! There a much more reliable method of telling whether or not the person is lying. Sweating, heart rate and other physiological responses are still enacted by the brain so we might as well go straight to the source and point out the truth!
Great work of the art, thanks to the technology criminals and terrorists can no longer escape and make an excuses. Thanks for the sharing.