Daniel D. Langleben

Daniel D. Langleben is a psychiatrist, professor, and scientific researcher at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. He pioneered a technique for using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as a means of measuring lie detection. He is currently a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. He has also studied the brain effects of packaging and advertising and how infants' cuteness motivates caretaking in adults.

He graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1982, and from the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School in 1989. He completed his internship at the Medical College of Pennsylvania and then residencies in Psychiatry and Radiology at the Mount Sinai Hospital.

2001 study

Langleben was inspired to test lie detection while he was at Stanford University studying the effects of a drug on children with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). He found that these children have a more difficult time inhibiting the truth. He postulated that lying requires increased brain activity compared to truth because the truth must be suppressed, essentially creating more work for the brain. In 2001, he published his first work with lie detection using a modified form of the Guilty Knowledge Test, which is sometimes used in polygraph tests. The subjects, right-handed, male college students, were given a card and a Yes/No handheld clicker. They were told to lie to a computer asking questions while they underwent a brain scan only when the question would reveal their card. The subjects were given $20 for participating, and told they would receive more money if they deceived the computer; however, none did.

His studies showed that the inferior and superior prefrontal and anterior cingulate gyri and the parietal cortex, showed increased activity during deception. In 2002, he licensed his methods for lie detection to the No Lie MRI company located in San Diego, California.

Critiques

Critiques of this technique point out that fMRI does not actually measure lying, only the increased brain activity that occurs when one is lying. Using fMRI for lie detection could then lead to false positives produced by anxiety or other causes.

Another concern is that a "lie" is not always clear-cut, and may be a complex concept. More complex types of deception may not be detected by imaging techniques.

• Langleben, Daniel D. (1 February 2008). "Detection of deception with fMRI: Are we there yet?". Legal and Criminological Psychology. 13 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1348/135532507X251641. 
• Moriarty, Jane C.; Langleben, Daniel D. (May 1, 2013). "Using Brain Imaging for Lie Detection: Where Science, Law and Research Policy Collide". Psychol Public Policy Law. 19 (2): 222–234. doi:10.1037/a0028841. PMC 3680134. PMID 23772173. 
• Wang, An-Li; et al. (April 2013). "Content matters: neuroimaging investigation of brain and behavioral impact of televised anti-tobacco public service announcements.". Journal of Neuroscience. 33 (17): 7420–7427. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3840-12.2013. PMC 3773220. PMID 23616548. 
• Langleben DD; Hakun JG; Seelig D; Wang AL; Ruparel K & Bilker WB (2016). "Polygraphy and functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection: a controlled blind comparison using the concealed information test.". J Clin Psychiatry. doi:10.4088/JCP.15m09785. PMID 26794034.