Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Lie of fMRI: An Examination of the Ethics of a Market in Lie Detection Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that companies who use functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) scans for lie detection encounter the same basic ethical stumbling blocks as commercial companies that market traditional polygraphs. Markets in traditional voluntary polygraphs are common and fail to elicit much uproar among ethicists. Thus, for consistency, if markets in polygraphs are ethically unproblematic, markets using fMRIs for lie detection are equally as acceptable. Furthermore, while I acknowledge two substantial differences between the ethical concerns involving polygraphs and fMRI lie detection, I argue that these concerns can be overcome and do not lead to the conclusion that markets in fMRI lie detection are ethically dubious. It is my conclusion that voluntary markets in fMRI lie detection can be justified by consumer autonomy and should be allowed to persist.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although we often believe we are (see Ekman and O’Sullivan 1991).

  2. I found seven outlets for commercial polygraphs in the Columbus, Ohio area.

  3. From the Greek words poly and grapho.

  4. The frequency that humans lie is rather disturbing. Some studies have concluded that humans lie in roughly 1/3 of all social interactions (DePaulo et al. 1996).

  5. In the 1981 California case of People v. Berry it states “Among the factors that can adversely affect the reliability of the polygraph test are the emotional upset of the subject, fatigue, drunkenness, drugs, bad physical or emotional condition, high blood pressure, hardening of the arteries, obesity, feeble-mindedness, amnesia, a psychotic condition, being a pathologic liar, lack of fear or concern at being caught in a lie, surreptitious nervous stimulation, use of antidepressants, hypnosis and extraneous noise or abnormal temperature” (People v. Berry, 173 Cal. Rpr. 137, 143 (Cal Ct. App 1981)).

  6. An example is an examiner noticing an elevated heart rate in a subject.

References

  • (2006). Special report lure of lie detectors spook ethicists. Nature, 441, 918–919.

  • Abe, N., et al. (2006). Dissociable roles of prefrontal and anterior cingulated cortices in deception. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 192–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boire, R. G. (2000). On cognitive liberty. Journal of Cognitive Liberties, 1(1), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boire, R. G. (2003). Mind matters. Journal of Cognitive Liberties, 4(1), 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boire, R. G. (2005). Searching the brain: The fourth amendment implications of brain-based deception detection devices. American Journal of Bioethics, 5, 62–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bok, S. (1978). Moral choice in public and private life. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chervenak, F., & McCullough, L. B. (2005). An ethical critique of boutique fetal imaging: A case for the medicalization of fetal imaging. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 192, 31–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, W., et al. (2004). Separable neural components in the processing of black and white faces. Psychological Science, 15(12), 806–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B., et al. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 979–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, J. E., & Chen, A. (2002). Ethical issues in the clinical application of FMRI: Factors affecting the validity and interpretation of activation. Brain and Cognition, 50, 482–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., & O’Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar? American Psychology, 46, 912–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, C. C. (1996). Lies, lies, lies! The psychology of deceit. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganis, G., et al. (2003). Neural correlates of different types of deception. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 830–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greely, H. T. (2005). Pre-market approval regulation for lie detections: An idea whose time may be coming. American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2), 50–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, R. (2005). Spy versus spy. American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2), 53–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henig, R. M. (2006, February 5). Looking for the lie. The New York Times Magazine.

  • Illes, J., et al. (2002). Ethical and practical considerations in managing incidental findings in functional magnetic resonance imaging. Brain and Cognition, 50, 358–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Illes, J., Racine, E., & Kirschen, M. (2005). A picture is worth a 1000 words, but which 1000? In J. Illes (Ed.), Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice and policy (pp. 149–168). New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaposy, C. (2008). Ethical muscle and scientific interests: A role for philosophy in scientific research. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 83(1), 77–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinmuntz, B., & Szucko, J. J. (1984). Lie detection in ancient and modern times: A call for contemporary scientific study. American Psychologist, 39(7), 766–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klingberg, T., et al. (2000). Microstructure of temporo-parietal white matter as a basis for reading ability: Evidence from diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Neuron, 25(2), 257–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandrigal, A. (2009, March 16). MRI lie detection to get first day in court. Wired. Accessed May 20, 2009, from www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/noliemrt.

  • McKenna, P. (2007, February 10). Can a brain scan prove you’re telling the truth? New Scientist, p. 13.

  • Meijer, E. H., & van Koppen, P. J. (2008). Lie detectors and the law: The use of the polygraph in Europe. In D. Canter & R. Zukauskiene (Eds.), Psychology and law: Bridging the gap (p. 262). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyle, C. (1985). Asking the wrong questions. Society, 22(6), 54–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, A. C., & Gur, R. C. (2002). Ethical considerations for neuropsychologists as functional magnetic imagers. Brain and Cognition, 50, 469–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegle, G., et al. (2007). Increased amygdala and decreased dorso-lateral prefrontal BOLD responses in unipolar depression: Related and independent features. Biological Psychiatry, 61, 198–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. R. (2008). Functional MRI lie detection: Too good to be true? Journal of American Psychiatry Law, 36(4), 491–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, S. A., et al. (2004). A cognitive neurobiological account of deception: Evidence from functional neuroimaging. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 359, 1755–1762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tovino, S. A. (2005). Currents in contemporary ethics. The Journal of Law Medicine and Ethics, 33, 844–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). West Sussex: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, M. T., & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Controlling racial prejudice and stereotyping: Social-cognitive goals affect amygdala and stereotype activation. Psychological Science, 16(1), 56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolpe, P., Foster, K. R., & Langleben, D. D. (2005). Emerging neurotechnologies for lie-detection: Promises and perils. The American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Ohio University-Zanesville, 1425 Newark Road, Zanesville, OH, 43701, USA

    Amy E. White

Authors
  1. Amy E. White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy E. White.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

White, A.E. The Lie of fMRI: An Examination of the Ethics of a Market in Lie Detection Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. HEC Forum 22, 253–266 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-010-9141-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-010-9141-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation