The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.

Although misjudgment is an issue of primary concern to the justice system and public safety, the response to misjudgment by the human brain remains unclear. We used fMRI to record neural activity in participants that encountered four possible judgments by the justice system with two basic components...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Qian Cui, Qinglin Zhang, Hidehiko Takahashi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3783387?pdf=render
id doaj-53318c380cd441a3a2381fcbbf1c890d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-53318c380cd441a3a2381fcbbf1c890d2020-11-24T21:54:40ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0189e7543410.1371/journal.pone.0075434The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.Qian CuiQinglin ZhangHidehiko TakahashiAlthough misjudgment is an issue of primary concern to the justice system and public safety, the response to misjudgment by the human brain remains unclear. We used fMRI to record neural activity in participants that encountered four possible judgments by the justice system with two basic components: whether the judgment was right or wrong [accuracy: right vs. wrong (misjudgment)] and whether the judgment was positive or negative [valence: positive vs. negative]. As hypothesized, the rostral ACC specifically processes the accuracy of judgment, being more active for misjudgment than for right judgment, while the striatum was uniquely responsible for the valence of judgment, being recruited to a larger extent by positive judgment compared to negative judgment. Furthermore, the activity in the rACC for positive misjudgments was positively correlated with that for negative misjudgments, which confirmed the misjudgment-specificity of the rACC. These results demonstrate that the brain can distinguish a misjudgment from a right judgment and regard a misjudgment as an emotionally arousing stimulus, independent of whether it is positive or negative, while positive judgment is considered as hedonic information, regardless of whether it is right or wrong. Our study is the first to reveal the neural mechanism that underlies judgment processing. This mechanism may constitute the basis of future studies to develop a novel marker for the detection of lies.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3783387?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Qian Cui
Qinglin Zhang
Hidehiko Takahashi
spellingShingle Qian Cui
Qinglin Zhang
Hidehiko Takahashi
The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Qian Cui
Qinglin Zhang
Hidehiko Takahashi
author_sort Qian Cui
title The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
title_short The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
title_full The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
title_fullStr The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
title_full_unstemmed The neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
title_sort neural mechanism of encountering misjudgment by the justice system.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Although misjudgment is an issue of primary concern to the justice system and public safety, the response to misjudgment by the human brain remains unclear. We used fMRI to record neural activity in participants that encountered four possible judgments by the justice system with two basic components: whether the judgment was right or wrong [accuracy: right vs. wrong (misjudgment)] and whether the judgment was positive or negative [valence: positive vs. negative]. As hypothesized, the rostral ACC specifically processes the accuracy of judgment, being more active for misjudgment than for right judgment, while the striatum was uniquely responsible for the valence of judgment, being recruited to a larger extent by positive judgment compared to negative judgment. Furthermore, the activity in the rACC for positive misjudgments was positively correlated with that for negative misjudgments, which confirmed the misjudgment-specificity of the rACC. These results demonstrate that the brain can distinguish a misjudgment from a right judgment and regard a misjudgment as an emotionally arousing stimulus, independent of whether it is positive or negative, while positive judgment is considered as hedonic information, regardless of whether it is right or wrong. Our study is the first to reveal the neural mechanism that underlies judgment processing. This mechanism may constitute the basis of future studies to develop a novel marker for the detection of lies.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3783387?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT qiancui theneuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
AT qinglinzhang theneuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
AT hidehikotakahashi theneuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
AT qiancui neuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
AT qinglinzhang neuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
AT hidehikotakahashi neuralmechanismofencounteringmisjudgmentbythejusticesystem
_version_ 1725866554475675648