Journal Archive

The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 32 , No. 2

[ Original Article ]
The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 145-160
Abbreviation: KCBPA
ISSN: 1226-9654 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Apr 2020
Received 28 Oct 2019 Revised 04 Mar 2020 Accepted 10 Mar 2020

문장을 이용한 복합 시행 프로토콜 P300-기반 유죄지식검사: 대응책 사용 관련 P900 요인
고은진1 ; 김영윤1,
1경기대학교 범죄심리학과

The P300-Based, Complex Trial Protocol for Guilty Knowledge Test Using Sentences: P900 Component Related to Countermeasure Use
Eun Jin Go1 ; Young Youn Kim1,
1Department 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


대응책이란 유죄지식검사를 왜곡시키고 무효화하기 위한 개인이 할 수 있는 노력이라고 정의된다. 이러한 대응책에 저항성을 보인다고 알려진 복합 시행 프로토콜(complex trial protocol)은 한 시행에 유죄지식을 포함하는 탐침자극과 그렇지 않은 무관련자극을 우선적으로 제시하고, 이후 숫자로만 구성되어 특정 반응을 요구하는 목표자극 혹은 비목표자극을 제시함으로써 대응책 사용으로 인해 발생하는 주의 자원의 분산을 최소화한다고 알려져 있다. 본 연구에서는 대응책에 저항성을 보인다고 알려진 복합 시행 프로토콜을 사용함으로써, 문장을 이용한 P300-기반 유죄지식검사(guilty knowledge test)에서 대응책을 시도하였을 때에도 유죄지식의 탐지가 가능한지 알아보았다. 또한 대응책 사용의 지표라고 보고되는 전두영역의 P900 요인을 확인함으로써 대응책 사용 여부가 유죄지식 판별에 미치는 영향을 검증하고자 하였다. 유죄집단(n=15)과 대응책집단(n=15)은 특정 우편물을 파손하는 모의 범죄를 수행하였고, 무죄집단(n=15)은 우편물 목록을 작성하는 시나리오를 수행하였다. 모의 범죄 후 유죄지식 여부를 검증하기 위해 사건관련전위를 측정하였으며, 모의 범죄에서 파기된 문서의 발송처가 담긴 ‘주어-목적어-서술어’ 형태의 문장을 자극으로 제시하였다. 유죄집단은 탐침자극의 목적어가 제시되었을 때 무관련자극에 비해 두정영역에서 더 큰 P300 진폭을 보였다. 이러한 결과는 무죄집단과 대응책집단에서 나타나지 않았다. 탐침자극의 서술어가 제시되었을 때, 유죄집단과 대응책집단에서 무관련자극 보다 더 큰 진폭의 P300이 전두영역에서 가장 크게 관찰된 반면, 서술어에서의 이러한 결과는 무죄집단에서 나타나지 않았다. P900의 경우, 대응책집단에서 서술어가 제시되었을 때 탐침과 무관련자극 간 P900 진폭 차가 전두영역에서 유의미하게 나타났다. 문장을 이용한 복합 시행 프로토콜 P300-기반 유죄지식검사를 시행했을 때, 목적어에서는 대응책 사용으로 인해 대응책집단의 유죄지식탐지가 어려우나 서술어에서 관찰되는 대응책집단의 P300과 P900 요인으로 각각 유죄지식탐지와 대응책 사용 식별이 가능함을 보여준다.


The Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) presents the implicit probe-irrelevant recognition task first and the explicit target-nontarget discrimination task followed the next in each trial. It is also known to be resistant to countermeasure, which is an effort that individual made in order to defeat a polygraph test. This study investigated the possibility of detecting guilty knowledge in the P300-based, CTP for Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) using Korean sentences when guilty subjects use countermeasures. The effect of countermeasure use on P900 at Fz and Cz, which is recently found to be an indicator of countermeasure use, was also examined in this study. Simple guilty group (n=15) and countermeasure group (n=15) performed a mock crime scenario that included stealing and ripping off a certain mail, whereas innocent group (n=15) was simply instructed to make a list of mails. The sentence stimuli used in this study were presented in subject-object-predicate (verb) order, in which the object containing where the stolen mail came from changed depending on stimuli types (probe and irrelevants), while the predicate (verb) did not. Simple guilty group showed larger P300 amplitude to probe for object element than to the irrelevant in the parietal region as compared with the other two groups. Probe for predicate (verb) element in simple guilty and countermeasure groups elicited larger P300 amplitude than irrelevants in the frontal area; however, innocent group did not show such result. For P900 component, countermeasure group showed larger P900 amplitude to probe for predicate (verb) element in the frontal region as compared with irrelevants. The finding indicates that, due to the use of countermeasures, the guilty knowledge in countermeasure group is less likely to be detected with P300 component in object element; however, with P300 and P900 components found in predicate (verb) element in countermeasure group, it is possible to detect the guilty knowledge and the countermeasure use respectively.

Keywords: event-related potentials, guilty knowledge test, concealed information test, P300, complex trial protocol, countermeasure, P900
키워드: 사건관련전위, 유죄지식검사, P300, 복합 시행 프로토콜, 대응책, P900

1. Bekker, E. M., Kenemans, J. L., Koeksma, M. R., Talsma, D., & Verbaten, M. N. (2005). The pure electrophysiology of stopping. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 55, 191-198.
2. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Dolev, K. (1996). Psychophysiological detection through the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of mental countermeasures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 273-281.
3. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Elaad, E. (2003). The validity of psychophysiological detection of information with the Guilty Knowledge Test: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 131.
4. Bull, R. (1988). What is the lie-detection test? In A. Gale, (Ed.), The polygraph test: Lies, truth, and science (pp. 10-19). London: Sage publications.
5. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, NY: Academic Press.
6. Dimoska, A., Johnston, S. J., & Barry, R. J. (2006). The auditory-evoked N2 and P3 components in the stop-signal task: Indices of inhibition, response-conflict or error-detection?. Brain and Cognition, 62, 98-112.
7. Ekman, P. (1992). Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics and marriage. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
8. Farwell, L. A., & Donchin, E. (1991). The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology, 28, 531-547.
9. Farwell, L. A., & Smith, S. S. (2001). Using brain MERMER testing to detect knowledge despite efforts to conceal. Journal of Forensic Science, 46, 135-143.
10. Faulkner, P. (2007). What is wrong with lying?. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 75, 535-557.
11. Ford, E. B. (2006). Lie detection: Historical, neuropsychiatric and legal dimensions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 29, 159-177.
12. Greenhouse, W. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95-112.
13. Han. K. H., Lim. J. Y., Min. B. B., Lee. J. H., Moon. K. J., & Kim. Z. S. (2006). Korean MMPI-2 standardization study. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25, 533-564.
14. Honts, C. R., Devitt, M. K., Winbush, M., & Kircher, J. C. (1996). Mental and physical countermeasures reduce the accuracy of the concealed knowledge test. Psychophysiology, 33, 84-92.
15. Honts, C. R., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (1994). Mental and physical countermeasrues reduce the accuracy of polygraph tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 252-259.
16. Hu, X., Hegeman, D., Landry, E., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2012). Increasing the number of irrelevant stimuli increases ability to detect countermeasures to the P300‐based Complex Trial Protocol for concealed information detection. Psychophysiology, 49, 85-95.
17. Johnson Jr, R. A. Y. (1993). On the neural generators of the P300 component of the event‐related potential. Psychophysiology, 30, 90-97.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. Kim, Y. Y. (2009). P300-based studies in detection of deception. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 23(1), 111-129.
21. Kok, A., Ramautar, J. R., DeRuiters, M. B., Band, G. P. H., & Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2004). ERP components associated with successful and unsuccessful stopping in a stop-signal task. Psychophysiology, 41, 9-20.
22. Kwon. S. M. (1997). Assessment of psychopathology in anxiety disorder. The Korean Journal of Psychopathology, 6, 37-51.
23. 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, 98-113.
24. Labkovsky, E., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2012). The P300-based, complex trial protocol for concealed information detection resists any number of sequential countermeasures against up to five irrelevant stimuli. Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback, 37, 1-10.
25. MacLaren, V., & Taukulis, H. (2000). Forensic identification with event related potentials. Polygraph, 29, 330-343.
26. Meixner, J. B., Labkovsky, E., Rosenfeld, J. P., Winograd, M., Sokolovsky, A., Weishaar, J., & Ullmann, T. (2013). P900: a putative novel ERP component that indexes countermeasure use in the P300-based concealed information test. Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback, 38, 121-132.
27. Mertens, R., & Allen, J. J. (2008). The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: Deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios. Psychophysiology, 45, 286-298.
28. Olson, J., Rosenfeld, J. P., Kim, T., & Perrault, E. (2018). The effect of countermeasures against the reaction time based concealed information test on the P300 index of knowledge recognition: A combined RT and P300-based test. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 134, 9-14.
29. Rosenfeld, J. P., Biroschak, J. R., & Furedy, J. J. (2006). P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical versus incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60, 251-259.
30. 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, 157-161.
31. Rosenfeld, J. P., & Labkovsky, E. (2010). New P300‐based protocol to detect concealed information: Resistance to mental countermeasures against only half the irrelevant stimuli and a possible ERP indicator of countermeasures. Psychophysiology, 47, 1002-1010.
32. 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, 906-919.
33. Rosenfeld, J. P., Nasman, V. T., Whalen, R., Cantwell, B., & Mazzeri,L (1987). Late vertex positivity as a guilty knowledge indicator: A new method of lie detection. International Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 125-129.
34. Rosenfeld, J. P., Soskins, M., Bosh, G., & Ryan, A. (2004). Simple, effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 41, 205-219.
35. Rosenfeld, J. P., Tang, M., Meixner, J., Winograd, M., & Labkovsky, E. (2009). The effects of asymmetric vs. symmetric probability of targets following probe and irrelevant stimuli in the complex trial protocol for detection of concealed information with P300. Physiology & Behavior, 98, 10-16.
36. Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526-537.
37. Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
38. Winograd, M. R., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2011). Mock crime application of the Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) P300‐based concealed information test. Psychophysiology, 48, 155-161.