The neurocognitive basis of deception: Individual differences of N2-related conflict monitoring in a social deception task

Conflict monitoring was investigated as a neuro-cognitive process of deception. To investigate individual differences of conflict monitoring during a social deception task, we employed the fronto-central N2 component of the electroencephalogram. N = 96 participants (male = 48) reported the trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of previously learned faces in two experimental conditions (affective vs. neutral) either truthfully or deceptively and completed the German BIS/BAS scales and the Conflict Monitoring Questionnaire-44. For an assessment of the robustness of the results, the N2 was quantified using three different quantification methods. Peak-to-peak N2 amplitudes were more negative following untrustworthy vs. trustworthy stimuli regardless of the truthfulness, indicating their sensitivity to negative affect. None of the investigated traits had a significant effect on the individual extent of conflict monitoring. The peak-to-peak amplitude appeared to be most suitable for quantifying the N2 in the examination of conflict monitoring during deception. Results indicated shorter response times and higher correct rates for truthful responses. Since the significance of the Picture type main effect varies with the N2 quantification method, assessing reliability data and examining paradigm parameters could clarify the impact of different N2 quantification approaches on achieving excellent reliability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioural Brain Research
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115738
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Deception detection and forensic psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The neurocognitive basis of deception: Individual differences of N2-related conflict monitoring in a social deception task

Anja Leue, Fee-Elisabeth Bertram
1 citations
Behavioural Brain Research
Deception detection and forensic psychology
2.44
article

The neurocognitive basis of deception: Individual differences of N2-related conflict monitoring in a social deception task

Anja Leue, Fee-Elisabeth Bertram
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Conflict monitoring was investigated as a neuro-cognitive process of deception. To investigate individual differences of conflict monitoring during a social deception task, we employed the fronto-central N2 component of the electroencephalogram. N = 96 participants (male = 48) reported the trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of previously learned faces in two experimental conditions (affective vs. neutral) either truthfully or deceptively and completed the German BIS/BAS scales and the Conflict Monitoring Questionnaire-44. For an assessment of the robustness of the results, the N2 was quantified using three different quantification methods. Peak-to-peak N2 amplitudes were more negative following untrustworthy vs. trustworthy stimuli regardless of the truthfulness, indicating their sensitivity to negative affect. None of the investigated traits had a significant effect on the individual extent of conflict monitoring. The peak-to-peak amplitude appeared to be most suitable for quantifying the N2 in the examination of conflict monitoring during deception. Results indicated shorter response times and higher correct rates for truthful responses. Since the significance of the Picture type main effect varies with the N2 quantification method, assessing reliability data and examining paradigm parameters could clarify the impact of different N2 quantification approaches on achieving excellent reliability.

Behavioural Brain ResearchVol. 494
Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Kiel (DE), Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (DE)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Deception detection and forensic psychology
2.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.