When you think of lie detector tests, it's likely that you visualize an episode of CSI in which investigators use the device to solve a crime. However, these tests actually have significant real-world utility, and their acceptance in the courts has been widely debated for many years. A new form of technology known as fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) uses neuroscience to perform lie detection tests. Although researchers boast of the immense power of fMRI, problems within the device and the research done on it justify why it should not be used in courtrooms at this time. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay fMRI works by tracking blood flow to activated brain areas. When people lie, it is assumed that their brains must work harder. Thus, more blood flows to these regions of the brain, which is indicated in fMRI reports. A few published articles have claimed that the device's accuracy rates range between 70 and 90 percent. Additionally, eight different laboratories have published twelve peer-reviewed articles on fMRI lie detection. Similar to fMRI, the polygraph is an older lie detection test that you are probably more familiar with. This device has been around for almost a hundred years and has been widely used to assess the honesty of countless people. The polygraph measures the signs of anxiety that appear when a person lies by checking for elevated levels of blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and galvanic skin response. Currently, the polygraph is used by government agencies such as the FBI as a job screening technique. However, because the device is not entirely accurate (70%) and could lead to a false conviction or acquittal of a defendant, it has been deemed inadmissible in the courtroom in almost all cases. Since fMRI uses newer technology and potentially works with a higher accuracy rate than the polygraph, you may be wondering why it hasn't surpassed it as the go-to lie detection test. The short answer is that several flaws lie in the research. fact on fMRI which diminishes its credibility. None of the eight labs publishing fMRI research have replicated their work. Thus, it is unclear whether their results are accurate since their tests have not been repeated by others to obtain a consistent result. Additionally, the studies were conducted on a sample of people who are not representative of the population on which fMRI testing will likely be used, showing that there is no known error rate for detection based on fMRI in real-world contexts. Finally, the results of an fMRI test can easily be skewed. If subjects move their head or tongue even slightly, the fMRI will produce poor quality and unreliable data. Thus, a solution must be found to this problem to ensure that the data is always accurate. Since 2006, only two companies, No Lie MRI and Sephos, have offered fMRI lie detection services to the public. The latter company closed its doors in 2010 after the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee ruled in US v. Semrau that the device could not be used in court. The judge in the case said the lack of a known true error rate for fMRI makes it impossible to.