http://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=1968069&cid=42406&categoryId=42406
fMRI 거짓말 탐지기의 현재와 미래 (뇌과학 경계를 넘다, 2012.11.5, 바다출판사)
My Topic:
The lie detector is not always accurate.
What I hope to learn from this source:
1. I already knew the fact that there is another type of lie detector except polygraph lie detector which is famous for public.
So I want to find the difference between the FMRI lie detector and polygraph lie detector.
2. I think FMRI is also not incomplete.
So I want to know FMRI's limit.
Notes:
I think this is really useful and fantastic research!!!!!
Because it has a lot of information that I needed.
1. Through FMRI(Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging), we can distinguish the lie like the polygraph.
However there is difference. polygraph lie detector record the physical features like person's breathing rate, pulse or blood pressure. But FMRI is different. There are several ways to detect. First one is using BOLD(blood oxygenation level dependant). This way's point is measure the oxygen amount in the blood of brain. Second one is cognitive subtraction(인지적 뺄셈). This process compares the picture of brain that telling lie and telling truth.
2. limit1
FMRI of cognitive subtration is just relative. According to various study, there are some part that are vitalize in FMRI but have no relative with lie. We can't know exactly why the part is vitalized, because if the brain tend to keep the balance in the brain, also it is vitalized.
limit2 (I think it is for both polygraph and FMRI)
We can't remember all the thing exactly. There can be false memory. And Many lies are from this false memory unintentionally. So we cannot distinguish the true memory and false memory ourselves. Also there is no accuracy that the true memory is really true.
limit3 (It is also for both)
The way to measure is easy to interrupt from environment. The recent study found that interruption movement like moving the finger is let the credibility decrease about 33 percent.
+ I accidently know the backgound of the making FMRI.
Polygraph has limit that recorders have to skilled at Polygraph observation. It means it is hard to distinguish lie through polygraph for normal people.(I suppose that normal people cannot know how to read the polygraph)And i don't know it will be helpful for my essay, so I just record it.
+ I also find the information about change the standard to accept evidence in the court. Before the making the principle of the Dovert(도버트), the lie detector's result didn't accept in the court as the evidence. But After making that principle, the frequency of acceptance the result of lie detector as evidence increase. From the making the principle to 2003, 19 states in the United States of America accept the evidence in the court(Grubin and Madsen 2005).
Final Thoughts:
I think limit 2 is really useful, because It is really serious limit for lie detector.
And I figure out adequate example to help understanding. If the spy repeat and remember lie, the lie can be true for the spy.
And I want to give shape to my argument because now I know the information about change the standard to accept evidence in the court. So I want to change my argument to the 'The lie detector is not accurate to use in the court as the evidence'.
Polygraph has limit that recorders have to skilled at Polygraph observation. It means it is hard to distinguish lie through polygraph for normal people.(I suppose that normal people cannot know how to read the polygraph)And i don't know it will be helpful for my essay, so I just record it.
+ I also find the information about change the standard to accept evidence in the court. Before the making the principle of the Dovert(도버트), the lie detector's result didn't accept in the court as the evidence. But After making that principle, the frequency of acceptance the result of lie detector as evidence increase. From the making the principle to 2003, 19 states in the United States of America accept the evidence in the court(Grubin and Madsen 2005).
I think limit 2 is really useful, because It is really serious limit for lie detector.
And I figure out adequate example to help understanding. If the spy repeat and remember lie, the lie can be true for the spy.
And I want to give shape to my argument because now I know the information about change the standard to accept evidence in the court. So I want to change my argument to the 'The lie detector is not accurate to use in the court as the evidence'.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기