The functional anatomical distinction between truth telling and deception is preserved among people with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: A recently emergent functional neuroimaging literature has described the functional anatomical correlates of deception among healthy volunteers, most often implicating the ventrolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices. To date, there have been no such imaging studies of people with severe mental illness. AIMS: To discover whether the brains of people with schizophrenia would manifest a similar functional anatomical distinction between the states of truthfulness and deceit. It is hypothesised that, as with healthy people, persons with schizophrenia will show activation in the ventrolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices when lying. METHOD: Fifty-two people satisfying Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T while responding truthfully or with lies to questions concerning their recent actions. Half the sample was concurrently experiencing delusions. RESULTS: As hypothesised, patients exhibited greater activity in ventrolateral prefrontal cortices while lying. Truthful responses were not associated with any areas of relatively increased activation. The presence or absence of delusions did not substantially affect these findings, although subtle laterality effects were discernible upon post hoc analyses. CONCLUSIONS: As in healthy cohorts, the brains of people with schizophrenia exhibit a functional anatomical distinction between the states of truthfulness and deceit. Furthermore, this distinction pertains even in the presence of delusions.

If brain scans really detected deception, who would volunteer to be scanned?

Recent neuroimaging studies investigating the neural correlates of deception among healthy people, have raised the possibility that such methods may eventually be applied during legal proceedings. Were this so, who would volunteer to be scanned? We report a "natural experiment" casting some light upon this question. Following broadcast of a television series describing our team's investigative neuroimaging of deception in 2007, we received unsolicited (public) correspondence for 12 months. Using a customized template to examine this material, three independent assessors unanimously rated 30 of an initial 56 communications as unequivocally constituting requests for a "scan" (to demonstrate their author's "innocence"). Compared with the rest, these index communications were more likely to originate from incarcerated males, who were also more likely to engage in further correspondence. Hence, in conclusion, if neuroimaging were to become an acceptable means of demonstrating innocence then incarcerated males may well constitute those volunteering for such investigation.