Current Issue

The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 33, No. 3

[ Original Article ]
The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 33, No. 3, pp.201-220
Abbreviation: KCBPA
ISSN: 1226-9654 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Jul 2021
Received 20 Jan 2021 Revised 22 Jul 2021 Accepted 25 Jul 2021

정보 노출 상황에서의 P300-기반 숨김정보검사
황슬기 ; 김영윤
경기대학교 범죄심리학과

The P300-based Concealed Information Test in the situation of Information Leakage
Seul Ki Hwang ; Young Youn Kim
Department of Forensic Psychology, Kyonggi University
Correspondence to : 김영윤, 경기대학교 일반대학원 범죄심리학과, (16227) 경기도 수원시 영통구 광교산로 154-42 E-mail:

ⓒ The Korean Society for Cognitive and Biological Psychology


본 연구는 정보 노출에 대한 P300-기반 숨김정보검사의 한계점을 극복하고자 허위정보(misleading information)와 문장을 사용하여 실험을 진행하였다. 허위정보는 피험자에게 범죄와 관련되어 있다고 고의로 노출시킨 정보로, 실제로는 범죄와 관련이 없는 정보를 의미한다. 피험자는 크게 모의 범죄를 수행함으로써 범죄관련정보를 습득하거나(유죄집단, n=58), 모의 범죄를 설명한 동영상을 시청함으로써 범죄관련정보를 습득하는(정보노출-무죄집단, n=53) 두 개의 집단으로 나누어졌다. 각 집단은 다시 뇌파 검사가 진행되기 전에 허위정보에 노출되는 지에 따라 통제조건, 한 개의 허위정보에 노출되는 조건, 두 개의 허위정보에 노출되는 조건의 세 가지 조건으로 분류되었다. 뇌파검사가 진행되는 동안 주어/목적어/동사 구조의 문장이 자극으로 제시되었다. 유죄집단은 목적어와 서술어에서 허위정보 조건에 상관없이 탐침자극과 무관련자극 간에 유의미한 P300 진폭 차이가 나타났다. 정보노출-무죄집단의 경우 목적어와 서술어에 대해 통제조건에서만 탐침자극에 대한 높은 P300 진폭이 나타났으며, 허위정보에 노출되었을 때에는 탐침자극의 P300 진폭이 감소하였다. 본 연구의 결과는 허위정보가 P300-기반 숨김정보검사에서 정보노출-무죄집단에 대한 허위긍정오류(false positive)를 감소시키는데 효과적임을 나타내며, 허위정보의 개수가 증가하여도 효과적임을 보여준다.


This study investigated the method resistant to information leakage in P300-based concealed information test using misleading information and Korean sentences. The misleading information is intentionally introduced to participants as a crime-related item. Participants acquired crime-related knowledge either by committing mock crime (guilty group, n=58) or watching a video that describes a mock crime (informed-innocent group, n=53). Each group was divided into three conditions by exposing to misleading information before the concealed information test : control, 1-misleading information, 2-misleading information. During the concealed information test, the sentence stimuli were presented in subject-object-verb order. There was a significant difference in P300 amplitude between the probe and irrelevant stimuli for object and verb elements regardless of misleading information condition in the guilty group. In the informed-innocent group, the probe stimulus elicited larger P300 amplitude compared to irrelevant stimuli for object and verb elements only in the control condition, but not in the 1-misleading information and 2-misleading information condition. These results suggest that the misleading information in the P300-based concealed information test is effective in reducing false positive outcomes of informed-innocents, even that the number of misleading information increases.

Keywords: Concealed Information Test, P300, misleading information, constituent of sentence, CIT effect
키워드: 숨김정보검사, 정보노출, 허위정보, 문장 분석

1. Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 56(6), 893.
2. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). Clinical judgment and decision-making in CQT-polygraphy. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 26(3), 232-240.
3. Bradley, M. T., Barefoot, C. A., & Arsenault, A. M. (2011). 10 Leakage of information to innocent suspects. Memory detection: Theory and application of the Concealed Information Test. Cambridge University Press.
4. Bull, R. (1988). What is the lie-detection test. The polygraph test: Lies, truth and science, 10-19.
5. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (2013). Studies in machiavellianism. Academic Press.
6. Farwell, L. A., & Donchin, E. (1991). The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event‐related brain potentials. Psychophysiology, 28(5), 531-547.
7. Ford, E. B. (2006). Lie detection: Historical, neuropsychiatric and legal dimensions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 29(3), 159-177.
8. Go, E. J., & Kim, Y. Y. (2020). The P300-Based, Complex Trial Protocol for Guilty Knowledge Test Using Sentences: P900 Component Related to Countermeasure Use. Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 32(2), 145-160.
9. Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24(2), 95-112.
10. Grubin, D., & Madsen, L. (2005). Lie detection and the polygraph: A historical review. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 16(2), 357-369.
11. Happel, M. D. (2005). Neuroscience and the Detection of Deception. Review of Policy Research, 22(5), 667-685.
12. Hong, S. U., (2011). The Accuracy and Legal Effects of fMRI Lie-detection Evidence. Seoul Law Journal, 52(3), 511-540.
13. Jung, E. K., Kang, K. Y., & Kim, Y. Y. (2013). Frontoparietal activity during deceptive responses in the P300-based guilty knowledge test: An sLORETA study. Neuroimage, 78, 305-315.
14. Jung, E. K., & Kim, Y. Y. (2013). A Comparison of Detection Accuracy of P300-based Guilty Knowledge Test: Based on Bootstrap Approach. Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 25(1), 75-92.
15. Kang, K. Y., & Kim, Y. Y. (2010). P300-Based GKT(Guilty Knowledge Test) Using Sentences. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 24(4), 19-41.
16. Kim, H. T. (2018). EEG analysis technique that can be tested even in information leakage situations. Paper presented at Supreme Prosecutors’ Office & Rhetoric Society of Korea academic Conference, pp.11-31. Seoul.
17. Kim, S. C., Chang, E. H., Lee, S. H., B, C., Kim, S. O., & Kim, H. T. (2015). The comparison of polygraph results with legal decisions depending on test components: A field study in the Korean Prosecutors’ Office. Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology, 6(1), 13-31.
18. Kim, Y. H., Kim, J. H., Kim, J. S., Noh, M. R., Shin, D. G., Yeom, T. H., & Oh, S. U. (1994). An implementation of the MMPI-2 (a revised edition), Seoul:Guidance.
19. Kim, Y. Y. (2009). P300-based Studies in Detection of Deception. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 23(1), 111-129.
20. Kwon, S. M. (1997). Assessment of Psychopathology in Anxiety Disorder. The Korean Journal of Psychopathology, 6(1), 37-51.
21. Labkovsky, E., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2014). A novel Dual Probe Complex Trial Protocol for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 51(11), 1122-1130.
22. Lee, Y. H., & Song, J. Y. (1991). A Study of the Reliability and the Validity of the BDI, SDS, and MMPI-D Scales. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology, 10(1), 98-113.
23. Lui, M., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2008). Detection of deception about multiple, concealed, mock crime items, based on a spatialtemporal analysis of ERP amplitude and scalp distribution. Psychophysiology, 45(5), 721-730.
24. Lukacs, G., Grządziel, A., Kempkes, M., & Ansorge, U. (2019). Item Roles Explored in a Modified P300-Based CTP Concealed Information Test. Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback, 44(3), 195-209.
25. Olson, J., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Perrault, E. (2019). Deleterious effects of probe‐related versus irrelevant targets on the “CIT effect” in the P300‐and RT‐based three‐stimulus protocol for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 56(12), e13459.
26. Peth, J., Sommer, T., Hebart, M. N., Vossel, G., Buchel, C., & Gamer, M. (2015). Memory detection using fMRI—Does the encoding context matter?. NeuroImage, 113, 164-174.
27. Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical neurophysiology, 118(10), 2128-2148.
28. Polich, J., & Martin, S. (1992). P300, cognitive capability, and personality: A correlational study of university undergraduates. Personality and individual differences, 13(5), 533-543.
29. Rosenfeld, J. P., Cantwell, B., Nasman, V. T., Wojdac, V., Ivanov, S., & Mazzeri, L. (1988). A modified, event-related potential-based guilty knowledge test. International Journal of Neuroscience, 42(1-2), 157-161.
30. Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Winograd, M., Lui, M. A., Vandenboom, C., & Chedid, E. (2008). The Complex Trial Protocol (CTP): A new, countermeasure‐resistant, accurate, P300‐based method for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 45(6), 906-919.
31. Rosenfeld, J. P., Shue, E., & Singer, E. (2007). Single versus multiple probe blocks of P300-based concealed information tests for self-referring versus incidentally obtained information. Biological psychology, 74(3), 396-404.
32. Rosenfeld, J. P., Soskins, M., Bosh, G., & Ryan, A. (2004). Simple, effective countermeasures to P300‐based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 41(2), 205-219.
33. Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 30(4), 526.
34. Song, I. U., Kim, H. M., Lee, K. E., Chang, E. H., & Kim, H. T. (2018). The comparison of Bootstrapping analyses in P300-CIT. Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology, 9(2), 75-99.
35. Song, I. U., Kim, H. M., Lee, K. E., Chang, E. H., & Kim, H. T. (2019). Can virtual mock crime replace actual mock crime? An event-related potential study. Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology, 10(2), 89-109.
36. Winograd, M. R., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2014). The impact of prior knowledge from participant instructions in a mock crime P300 Concealed Information Test. International journal of psychophysiology, 94(3), 473-481.