Should brain scans be used in the courtroom for lie detection? Not until we have better evidence on their reliability, says Stanford law expert Hank Greely, JD. In this week's Scientific American, he writes about the issue and explains why we still have so much to learn:
About 25 published studies have found correlations between when experimental subjects were telling a lie and the pattern of blood flow in their brains. The trouble is that different studies, using different methods, have drawn conclusions based on the activity of different brain regions. And all the studies so far have taken place in the artificial environment of the laboratory, using people who knew they were taking part in an experiment and who were following instructions to lie. None of the studies examined lie detection in real-world situations. No government agency has found that this method works; no independent bodies have tested the approach. Yet people are buying lie-detection reports, wrapped in the glamour of science, to try to prove their honesty.
Previously: Stanford professor on the ethical and legal implications of brain research and Functional magnetic resonance imaging could serve as lie-detector test in civil trial
