Search

The Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) is a P300-based Concealed Information Test (CIT). The theoretical underpinnings of the CIT in the context of law enforcement usage are sound. The CTP is said to effectively discriminate individuals who recognize novel and meaningful stimuli and to be countermeasure resistant. Forty-five undergraduate students were assigned to three groups and instructed to perform a computer task using autobiographical data in connection to a mock burglary script. P300 peak-to-peak amplitude differences between probe (surname) and irrelevant (patronymic foils) items accurately identified 100% (14/14) of Innocent Controls (IC), 94% (15/16) of Simply Guilty (SG) participants, and 93% (14/15) of Guilty Countermeasure (GCM) subjects who were asked to counter all stimuli by mentally counting backwards continuously during their test presentation. Increased number of mistakes during the test, from combined cognitive erroneous responses to pop quizzes and behavioral errors with button presses, significantly discriminated GCM from IC and SG individuals. GCM participants committed more errors than IC and SG which did not differ from one another. Reaction Time (RT) was only significant between GCM and IC groups. Implications for forensic issues are discussed.

Instructions to voluntarily suppress memories of a mock crime have been reported to result in decreased P300 amplitude during a P300-based concealed information test (CIT) and reduced autobiographical Implicit Association Test (aIAT) D scores, supporting successful suppression. However, one such study, (Hu et al., Psychological science 26(7):1098-1106, 2015) used the P300-based Complex Trial Protocol with a 50-50 target to nontarget ratio, which could impose much response switching and thereby drain cognitive resources, also resulting in reduced P300. The present study replicated Hu et al. (Psychological science 26(7):1098-1106, 2015) with one major variation-a less intrusive 20-80 target to nontarget ratio that required less response switching. Detection rates were high using both the brainwave-based CIT (90% accuracy) and the aIAT (87% accuracy). However we found no significant differences between the suppression and simple guilty groups on the major indices of concealed information detection, which compare probe and irrelevant P300 responses. While we did find that overall P300 amplitude was reduced in the suppression group, this reduction was not specific to probe responses. Additionally, while there were group differences in aIAT hit rates, there were no differences in aIAT D scores. Taken together, these findings suggest that the previously demonstrated reductions in P300 are a reflection of task demand rather than of effective voluntary memory suppression.

In this study, we introduced familiarity-related inducer items (expressions referring to the participant’s self-related, familiar details: “mine,” “familiar”; and expressions referring to other, unfamiliar details, e.g., “other,” “irrelevant”) to the Complex Trial Protocol version of the P300-based Concealed Information Test (CIT), at the same time using different item categories with various levels of personal importance to the participants (forenames, birthdays, favorite animals). The inclusion of inducers did not significantly improve the overall efficiency of the method as we would have expected considering that these inducers should increase awareness of the denial of the recognition of the probes (the true details of the participants), and hence the subjective saliency of the items (Lukács, Kleinberg, & Verschuere, 2017). This may be explained by the visual similarity of inducers to the probe and irrelevant items and the consequent distracting influence of inducers on probe-task performance. On the other hand, the CIT effect (probe-irrelevant P300 differences) was always lower for less personally important (low-salient) and higher for more personally important (high-salient) items.

In the first of two experiments, we compared the accuracy of the P300 concealed information test protocol as a function of numbers of trials experienced by subjects and ERP averages analyzed by investigators. Contrary to Farwell et al. (Cogn Neurodyn 6(2):115-154, 2012), we found no evidence that 100 trial based averages are more accurate than 66 or 33 trial based averages (all numbers led to accuracies of 84-94 %). There was actually a trend favoring the lowest trial numbers. The second study compared numbers of irrelevant stimuli recalled and recognized in the 3-stimulus protocol versus the complex trial protocol (Rosenfeld in Memory detection: theory and application of the concealed information test, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 63-89, 2011). Again, in contrast to expectations from Farwell et al. (Cogn Neurodyn 6(2):115-154, 2012), there were no differences between protocols, although there were more irrelevant stimuli recognized than recalled, and irrelevant 4-digit number group stimuli were neither recalled nor recognized as well as irrelevant city name stimuli. We therefore conclude that stimulus processing in the P300-based complex trial protocol-with no more than 33 sweep averages-is adequate to allow accurate detection of concealed information.

Two mock guilty groups had either pictorial or verbal initial exposure to crime items (probes) on which they were told they would later be tested. Then each subject was tested in two sessions on two successive days with both verbal and pictorial presentation, one test modality per session/day. The three dependent variables analyzed were three different estimates of the same basic measurement: the difference between P300s evoked by key (probe) and irrelevant stimuli. All three indexes were significantly increased more by both initial pictorial exposure, as well as by pictorial presentation modality, than by verbal exposure and presentation. We saw no main effect of exposure–presentation modality congruence, as congruence interacted with exposure: The largest probe–irrelevant differences were evoked by congruent pictorial exposure and presentation modality, and the smallest by congruent verbal exposure and presentation modality.

We previously tested the P300-based Complex Trial protocol for deception detection against 2 and 4 countered of 4 irrelevant stimuli. The protocol detected 90–100% of these subjects with

We recently introduced an accurate and countermeasure resistant P300-based deception detection test called the complex trial protocol (Rosenfeld et al. in Psychophysiology 45(6):906-919, 2008). When subjects use countermeasures to all irrelevant items in the test, the probe P300 is increased rather than reduced (as it was in previous P300-based deception protocols), allowing detection of countermeasure users. The current experiment examines the role of task demand on the complex trial protocol by forcing the subject to make countermeasure-like response to stimuli. Subjects made either a simple random button response to both probe and irrelevant stimuli (experiment 1) or a more complex, assigned, button response to probe and irrelevant stimuli (experiment 2). We found that an increase in task demand reduced the effectiveness of the test. Using random responses we found a simple guilty hit rate of 11/12 with no false positives, but only a 4/11 hit rate for countermeasure-users. Using assigned responses we found a simple guilty hit rate of 8/15 with no false positives, and a 7/16 hit rate for countermeasure-users. We herein suggest that the high level of task demand associated with these countermeasure-like responses causes reduced hit rates.