A patient goes into an fMRI Machine. (Creative Commons)

Retinal scanners, thermal monitors and polygraphs could soon be the archaic lie-detecting technology of outdated spy thrillers. 

Scientists at Stanford University have been working to extract and understand the memories locked in the mind. Through the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the brain, researchers have found methods to detect the presence or absence of an individual memory.

An fMRI scan could prove instrumental in determining the accuracy of legal testimonies in the future. 

Instead of Jason Bourne sitting firmly strapped at a dimly lit interrogation room table with polygraph cables across his chest, he’ll slowly be slid into the claustrophobia-inducing tube of a massive superconducting magnet. The evil scientists will then probe him will a series of questions while the MRI machine whirs away analyzing the magnetic properties of his blood.  

Dr. Jesse Rissman and his colleagues at Stanford’s department of psychology created a study in which participants were tested on their ability to accurately remember a certain set of faces.

As the participants responded to questions based on recollection, researchers scanned the brain using an fMRI machine for patterns of activation. The team then used the scans to identify “neural signatures”, or unique patterns of brain activation, induced by memories. 

The researchers trained the software to understand the unique patterns of memory recollection. The software could predict whether or not the subject had seen a certain face simply by analyzing the brain patterns of a subject, effectively creating neural lie-detecting software. 

Rissman divided the experiment into two test groups: one testing explicit memory and the other testing implicit memory.

• Explicit memories are consciously, intentionally remembered facts such as an appointment time or a name of a person.

• Implicit memories are subconsciously recorded experiences that can be recalled such as the skill of driving.

To test implicit memory, subjects rated a set of 200 faces on a scale of attractiveness. As a result, the subjects unconsciously recorded the faces to memory. The subjects then determined whether they recognized an old face from the original 200 in a set a 400 faces. 

The computer correctely predicted 83 percent of the time whether or not the subject had seen a face using explicit, or consciously recorded memory. However, when subjects were prompted using implicit memory, or unconsciously recorded memory, the results were correct only 56 percent of the time. 

Although Rissman’s results represent a major step in analyzing memories using fMRI technology, the complexity of the mind still qualifies all data as unreliable.

Rissman acknowledges, “The brain scans are only as good as a person’s memory. All we could identify was a person’s belief that he or she had seen a particular face before, but this belief could sometimes be strong even for faces the person had never encountered.”

He echoes many warnings from the neuroscience field today that fMRI memory detection is highly unreliable in a court setting. The scientific, legal, and ethical debate about this technology has gained more attention as brain analysis has found its way into courts recently. 

In 2009, lawyers attempted to use fMRI data from No Lie MRI, a California company specializing in MRI “truth verification technology”. They eventually withdrew their request to admit the data as evidence.

This year, a psychologist in a federal court case in Tennessee brought forth evidence obtained from another MRI truth verifying organization, Cephos Corp. A lawyer in Brooklyn also attempted to use fMRI scans as evidence earlier this year. Judges in both cases rejected to admit the evidence.

Notably however, in 2008, a woman in India was convicted of killing her ex-fiance based on the results of a Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) test as evidence. The test monitors brain waves as a defendant reacts to a description of the crime. 

 Despite the inadequacy of current fMRI technology and the lack of a complete understanding of the mechanisms of memories, law firms and tech companies continue to push MRI evidence in the courtroom. It is likely we will see a ruling in the courts based off an fMRI before a significant progression is made in lie detection neuroscience. 

Reach reporter Tommy Sander here. 

Sign up for our weekly e-mail newsletter.