Countering Countermeasures

Countering Countermeasures: Detecting Identity Lies by Detecting Conscious Breakthrough

Howard Bowman , Marco Filetti, Abdulmajeed Alsufyani, Dirk Janssen, Li Su


One major drawback of deception detection is its vulnerability to countermeasures, whereby participants wilfully modulate their physiological or neurophysiological response to critical guilt-determining stimuli. One reason for this vulnerability is that stimuli are usually presented slowly. This allows enough time to consciously apply countermeasures, once the role of stimuli is determined. However, by increasing presentation speed, stimuli can be placed on the fringe of awareness, rendering it hard to perceive those that have not been previously identified, hindering the possibility to employ countermeasures. We tested an identity deception detector by presenting first names in Rapid Serial Visual Presentation and instructing participants to lie about their own identity. We also instructed participants to apply a series of countermeasures. The method proved resilient, remaining effective at detecting deception under all countermeasures.

In the Figure: difference waves for all participants that applied a specific countermeasure against our Concealed Information Test(CIT). Clear difference can be seen for all participants, despite their attempt to apply countermeasures.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.