Abstract:Sophisticated deception refers to the deception of others based on inferences of their mental states (e.g., answering honestly when inferring that the other will not believe their answer). Studying the brain mechanism of sophisticated deception in junior middle school students can provide physiological evidence for deception detection and deceptive ability measurement. Sixteen junior middle school students were asked to engage in different trial types (i.e., instructed truth/lie and chosen truth/lie), during which we recorded their response times (RT) along with electroencephalographic data to calculate event-related potentials (ERPs). We observed significant differences in amplitude [N2, P3, N450, and medial frontal negativity (MFN)] between chosen reactions (sophisticated deception and simple deception) and instructed reactions (instructed truth and instructed lie) in both the stimulus presentation and feedback stages. In the former, the task scores of participants in the chosen condition were significantly and positively correlated with the N2 amplitude over the central brain area during sophisticated deception. In the latter, the task scores of participants in the chosen condition were negatively correlated with the MFN amplitude over the left frontal and left frontocentral regions. Overall, deception intention, rather than simply making counterfactual statements, appears to underlie the increased demand for cognitive control in deceivers. This can be attributed to deceivers' need to strongly consider their opponent's mental state-the better the deceivers' deceptive ability, the more they will make conjectures about the mental state of their opponent with sophisticated deception and monitor conflict; the less conflict they experience while answering honestly with the intention to deceive, the more conflict may arise when the results of their deception are inconsistent with these conjectures.

A meta-analysis of the P3 amplitude in tasks requiring deception in legal and social contexts

Individual differences in ERPs during deception: Observing vs. demonstrating behavior leading to a small social conflict

An Event-Related Potential Study of Deception to Self Preferences

P300 in detecting concealed information and deception: A review.

Reliability of the P3 component in a 3-stimulus concealed information test with known and unknown stimuli

The Processes Leading to Deception: ERP Spatiotemporal Principal Component Analysis and Source Analysis

Cortical oscillations and event‐related brain potentials during the preparation and execution of deceptive behavior

Single-trial discrimination of truthful from deceptive responses during a game of financial risk using alpha-band MEG signals

The Cognitive Processes Related to Deceptive Responding

The P300 and MFN as indicators of concealed knowledge in situations with negative and positive moral valence

When Pinocchio’s Nose Does Not Grow: Belief Regarding Lie Detectability Modulates Production of Deception.

Neurocognitive Mechanisms Underlying Deceptive Hazard Evaluation: an Event-Related Potentials Investigation

Gender difference in spontaneous deception: A hyperscanning study using functional near-infrared spectroscopy

The Electrocortical Signature of Successful and Unsuccessful Deception in a Face-to-Face Social Interaction

Cognitive Load and Deception Detection Performance

The role of anterior prefrontal cortex (area 10) in face-to-face deception measured with fNIRS

Does Gender Make a Difference in Deception? the Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex

Neural mechanisms of deception in a social context: an fMRI replication study

Internal cost of spontaneous deception revealed by ERPs and EEG spectral perturbations

Sophisticated Deception in Junior Middle School Students: an ERP Study

(MIS)measuring cognitive load and arousal in deception: A multitrait–multimethod analysis