↓ Skip to main content

Cerebral correlates of faking: evidence from a brief implicit association test on doping attitudes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cerebral correlates of faking: evidence from a brief implicit association test on doping attitudes
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00139
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Schindler, Wanja Wolff, Johanna M. Kissler, Ralf Brand

Abstract

Direct assessment of attitudes toward socially sensitive topics can be affected by deception attempts. Reaction-time based indirect measures, such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT), are less susceptible to such biases. Neuroscientific evidence shows that deception can evoke characteristic ERP differences. However, the cerebral processes involved in faking an IAT are still unknown. We randomly assigned 20 university students (15 females, 24.65 ± 3.50 years of age) to a counterbalanced repeated-measurements design, requesting them to complete a Brief-IAT (BIAT) on attitudes toward doping without deception instruction, and with the instruction to fake positive and negative doping attitudes. Cerebral activity during BIAT completion was assessed using high-density EEG. Event-related potentials during faking revealed enhanced frontal and reduced occipital negativity, starting around 150 ms after stimulus presentation. Further, a decrease in the P300 and LPP components was observed. Source analyses showed enhanced activity in the right inferior frontal gyrus between 150 and 200 ms during faking, thought to reflect the suppression of automatic responses. Further, more activity was found for faking in the bilateral middle occipital gyri and the bilateral temporoparietal junction. Results indicate that faking reaction-time based tests alter brain processes from early stages of processing and reveal the cortical sources of the effects. Analyzing the EEG helps to uncover response patterns in indirect attitude tests and broadens our understanding of the neural processes involved in such faking. This knowledge might be useful for uncovering faking in socially sensitive contexts, where attitudes are likely to be concealed.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 13 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,756,606
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,410
of 3,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,460
of 265,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#71
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.