INTRODUCTION
This report describes new and potentially revolutionary technology for the detection of concealed information in ones brain and this technology is based on non-invasive recording of electrical brain activity. The electrical brain activity pattern recorded and of interest is a specific multifaceted electroencephalographic response (MER) that occurs within less than one second after an examinee is visually presented (via a computer screen) with words, short phrases, acronyms, or pictures that are recognized and cognitively processed by that subject. This phenomenon, coupled with its absence following the presentation of the same information to a subject for whom the material is unknown or irrelevant, is the basis for discriminating between a subject with “information present” and “information absent.” This would potentially allow for the determination of a whole host of issues of interest to the law enforcement and intelligence communities, e.g.,
• Does a suspect have knowledge connecting him to specific investigated criminal activity?
• Does an intelligence source have knowledge of the internal workings of a hostile intelligence agency that would indicate that he was an intelligence officer of that agency rather than who he claimed to be?
• Has an informant, a debriefed spy, or a suspected member of a criminal organization accurately described the entirety of his actions and knowledge?
The potential benefit of this program extends to a broad range of law enforcement applications, including organized crime, violent crime, white-collar crime, drug-related crime, foreign counterintelligence, non-traditional targets, and other categories of casework as well. This new technology promises to be of tremendous benefit both at the national level and for state and local law enforcement agencies.
When a crime is committed, traces of the event are left at the scene of the crime and elsewhere. The task of the investigators is to reconstruct what has happened and who has been involved, based on the collection of such evidence. In addition to the physical and circumstantial evidence that can be obtained, there is one place where an extensive record of the crime is stored — in the brain of the perpetrator. If this record could be tapped, criminal investigation and counterintelligence could be revolutionized.
Until recently, the only method of attempting to discern what information regarding a crime or other situation of interest was stored in the brain of a suspect or witness has been (1) to interrogate the subject, and (2) to attempt to determine whether or not the subject is lying.
In a conventional polygraph test, emotion-driven physiological responses to relevant questions (regarding the situation under investigation) are compared to responses to control questions, which are invasive, personal questions not relevant to the issue at hand that are designed to be emotionally and physiologically disturbing to the subject. A greater response to the relevant questions leads to a deceptive ("guilty") determination; a greater response to the control questions leads to a non-deceptive ("innocent") determination. In an attempt to avoid a false positive result (non-deceptive subject falsely found deceptive), the examiner must ask penetrating questions in the pre-test interview to find personal material sufficiently disturbing and stress-producing to produce effective control questions. Thus, in conventional polygraphy, innocent subjects — even if they are correctly determined to be innocent and truthful — are deceived and subjected to a highly invasive and stressful situation both during the pre-test interview and during the test.
This shortcoming is generally justified by the correct end result of finding an innocent subject non-deceptive to the relevant questions, but could be avoided altogether with Brain Fingerprinting technology, which depends entirely on information processing brain activity (i.e., recognition and processing of significant information) rather than an artful and disturbing manipulation designed to produce emotional and physiological responses to control question material. In fact, the pre-test interview for a Brain Fingerprinting technology exam is a very clinical, emotionally neutral experience for all subjects, whether or not they have specific information relevant to the situation under investigation. The in-test portion of the Brain Fingerprinting technology exam does not involve the asking of any questions, only the non-invasive recording of brain electrical activity as subject views verbal or pictorial information on a computer screen.
Dr. Farwell, the Director and Chief Scientist of Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., Fairfield, Iowa, and his colleagues have been conducting research on this new technique for several years. Results have shown this technique to be capable of producing an "information absent" or "information present" determination, with a strong statistical confidence, in approximately 90% of the cases studied. All of the determinations were accurate: there were no false positives and no false negatives. In the other 10% of cases the mathematical algorithm determined that there was insufficient information to make determination.
Another study conducted by Dr. Farwell in collaboration with SSA Drew C. Richardson, Ph.D., FSRTC, FBI Laboratory, has also shown Brain Fingerprinting testing to be capable of detecting whether or not an individual has participated in FBI new agent training at the Academy. New FBI agents in training at the FBI Academy at Quantico were correctly identified as such, and individuals unfamiliar with the FBI were also correctly classified. The application of this technique in foreign counterintelligence is obvious: if this technology can be utilized to detect an FBI agent, it can also be used to detect agents of other organizations, including intelligence organizations, international criminal organizations, and terrorist groups.
The far-reaching implications of possessing technology to accomplish this end are obvious. With the potential availability of such technology, it is felt imperative that this methodology be further tested as soon as possible, that the research and development necessary to make this a practical technique for field use be undertaken immediately, and that the technique be implemented as soon as possible by law enforcement agencies, if and when found valid and feasible.
Download Full Project Report
This report describes new and potentially revolutionary technology for the detection of concealed information in ones brain and this technology is based on non-invasive recording of electrical brain activity. The electrical brain activity pattern recorded and of interest is a specific multifaceted electroencephalographic response (MER) that occurs within less than one second after an examinee is visually presented (via a computer screen) with words, short phrases, acronyms, or pictures that are recognized and cognitively processed by that subject. This phenomenon, coupled with its absence following the presentation of the same information to a subject for whom the material is unknown or irrelevant, is the basis for discriminating between a subject with “information present” and “information absent.” This would potentially allow for the determination of a whole host of issues of interest to the law enforcement and intelligence communities, e.g.,
• Does a suspect have knowledge connecting him to specific investigated criminal activity?
• Does an intelligence source have knowledge of the internal workings of a hostile intelligence agency that would indicate that he was an intelligence officer of that agency rather than who he claimed to be?
• Has an informant, a debriefed spy, or a suspected member of a criminal organization accurately described the entirety of his actions and knowledge?
The potential benefit of this program extends to a broad range of law enforcement applications, including organized crime, violent crime, white-collar crime, drug-related crime, foreign counterintelligence, non-traditional targets, and other categories of casework as well. This new technology promises to be of tremendous benefit both at the national level and for state and local law enforcement agencies.
When a crime is committed, traces of the event are left at the scene of the crime and elsewhere. The task of the investigators is to reconstruct what has happened and who has been involved, based on the collection of such evidence. In addition to the physical and circumstantial evidence that can be obtained, there is one place where an extensive record of the crime is stored — in the brain of the perpetrator. If this record could be tapped, criminal investigation and counterintelligence could be revolutionized.
Until recently, the only method of attempting to discern what information regarding a crime or other situation of interest was stored in the brain of a suspect or witness has been (1) to interrogate the subject, and (2) to attempt to determine whether or not the subject is lying.
In a conventional polygraph test, emotion-driven physiological responses to relevant questions (regarding the situation under investigation) are compared to responses to control questions, which are invasive, personal questions not relevant to the issue at hand that are designed to be emotionally and physiologically disturbing to the subject. A greater response to the relevant questions leads to a deceptive ("guilty") determination; a greater response to the control questions leads to a non-deceptive ("innocent") determination. In an attempt to avoid a false positive result (non-deceptive subject falsely found deceptive), the examiner must ask penetrating questions in the pre-test interview to find personal material sufficiently disturbing and stress-producing to produce effective control questions. Thus, in conventional polygraphy, innocent subjects — even if they are correctly determined to be innocent and truthful — are deceived and subjected to a highly invasive and stressful situation both during the pre-test interview and during the test.
This shortcoming is generally justified by the correct end result of finding an innocent subject non-deceptive to the relevant questions, but could be avoided altogether with Brain Fingerprinting technology, which depends entirely on information processing brain activity (i.e., recognition and processing of significant information) rather than an artful and disturbing manipulation designed to produce emotional and physiological responses to control question material. In fact, the pre-test interview for a Brain Fingerprinting technology exam is a very clinical, emotionally neutral experience for all subjects, whether or not they have specific information relevant to the situation under investigation. The in-test portion of the Brain Fingerprinting technology exam does not involve the asking of any questions, only the non-invasive recording of brain electrical activity as subject views verbal or pictorial information on a computer screen.
Dr. Farwell, the Director and Chief Scientist of Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., Fairfield, Iowa, and his colleagues have been conducting research on this new technique for several years. Results have shown this technique to be capable of producing an "information absent" or "information present" determination, with a strong statistical confidence, in approximately 90% of the cases studied. All of the determinations were accurate: there were no false positives and no false negatives. In the other 10% of cases the mathematical algorithm determined that there was insufficient information to make determination.
Another study conducted by Dr. Farwell in collaboration with SSA Drew C. Richardson, Ph.D., FSRTC, FBI Laboratory, has also shown Brain Fingerprinting testing to be capable of detecting whether or not an individual has participated in FBI new agent training at the Academy. New FBI agents in training at the FBI Academy at Quantico were correctly identified as such, and individuals unfamiliar with the FBI were also correctly classified. The application of this technique in foreign counterintelligence is obvious: if this technology can be utilized to detect an FBI agent, it can also be used to detect agents of other organizations, including intelligence organizations, international criminal organizations, and terrorist groups.
The far-reaching implications of possessing technology to accomplish this end are obvious. With the potential availability of such technology, it is felt imperative that this methodology be further tested as soon as possible, that the research and development necessary to make this a practical technique for field use be undertaken immediately, and that the technique be implemented as soon as possible by law enforcement agencies, if and when found valid and feasible.
Download Full Project Report
0 comments:
Post a Comment