Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Truth serum drugs

Truth serum drugs:
What are truth serum drugs, do they work, and how?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

You have been convicted of a murder you did not commit. All evidence points to you and your alibi is unprovable. The jury is convinced you are the murderer and a life in prison awaits you. However, a physician offers one last piece of hope to aid in your trial. With your consent, he will administer truth serum. Largely untested and with inconclusive results, the truth serum may not assist in the prosecution. Do you consent to take the truth serum? Do you believe it will help your case? Will there be adverse effects from the serum? Should the jury take your statement as true? These are all questions that surrounded the initial use of truth serum (Minor, 1995)

Truth serum is a colloquial term for various psychoactive substances that are administered in an attempt to elicit information from individuals who are unwilling or unable to provide it. Some examples of these substances include ethanol, scopolamine, and various barbiturates like sodium thiopental (Pentothal) and amobarbital. These drugs are presumed to lower inhibitions and reduce a subject’s capacity to lie or resist interrogation.

Figure 1: Truth Serum has been used as evidence in court before

The use of truth serums raises serious scientific, ethical, and legal concerns. Research on the effectiveness and reliability of truth serums is inconclusive, and there's no scientific consensus that any drug can consistently or predictably enhance truth telling (Rinde, 2015). Critics argue that individuals under the influence of such drugs are highly suggestible as their memories can be easily manipulated, leading to unreliable information (Brown, 2006).

Furthermore, the use of truth serums in investigations and legal proceedings faces significant ethical considerations. Western legal systems typically reject truth serums as conclusive evidence due to the lack of reliability and the potential for coercion (Zonta, 2020). The use of these drugs also raises significant ethical concerns, being widely accepted as torture and inhumane treatment, with arguments that the use of truth serum violates fundamental human rights, particularly the right to remain silent and the right to be free from degrading treatment (Winter, 2005).

Focus questions 1. What does research say about the efficacy of truth serums in eliciting truthful information? 2. How do these drugs affect motivation and emotion during interrogation? 3. What are the primary drugs classified as truth serums and how do they work? 4. What are the ethical considerations surrounding the use of truth serum drugs?

Efficacy

The efficacy of truth serum drugs is a subject of ongoing debate. While these drugs can lead to a relaxation state, lower inhibitions, and more talkative behavior, there is still no precise proof that they can make a person confess (Worrell, 2006). The primary concern is that these drugs would need to have a consistent and predictable effect. In reality, the truth serum's action and the way the individual is affected are different for each subject, depending on the dose given, their health, and the environment in which they encountered the truth serum. For example, while some subjects might become more talkative and prepared to share information, others might endure hallucinations, become unsociable, or create fabricated statements (Rinde, 2015). This unpredictability makes it difficult to trust any information obtained from subjects under the influence of these drugs (Kala, 2007).

The truth serum efficacy debate heavily depends on the fact that there is no supporting solid scientific evidence for their use for eliciting truthfulness. Supporters maintain that truth serums, by reducing inhibition and cognitive control, allow access to repressed or concealed memories and thoughts. To support the claims, they emphasise stories of people who, when under the influence of truth serum, disclosed information which has later been proven to be true (Rinde, 2015).

Critics argue that the anecdotal accounts obtained from the truth serum do not have the scientific rigour and hence cannot be taken as the truth. In particular, critics emphasise suppressibility and confabulation, lack of scientific evidence and ethical and legal concerns:

• Suppressibility and Confabulation: The persons under the influence of truth serum are overwhelmed with suggestions and can undertake confabulation, which is when the subject unintentionally creates new, false memories or pictures of the event. Any information becomes less reliable as it is difficult for the interrogators to determine truth and lies (Kala, 2007).
• Ethical and Legal Concerns: The use of truth serums is a source of both ethical and legal issues and has quite often been related to torture and coercion. Researchers believe that the acquisition of data from a person under the effect of certain drugs is the breach of one of the primary human rights, that of staying silent and having the right to a fair trial. This can, in turn, lead to false confessions and an abuse of human rights in dispensing justice (Rinde, 2015).
• Lack of Scientific Process: As research of truth serum arose in 1903, the initial research on truth serums were scientifically less rigorous since they lacked the basic methodology, controls, and objective measures which were needed for drawing the right conclusions concerning the reliability of truth serum (Winter et al., 2005). Additionally, less research has been conducted in modern scenarios because of the ethical and legal concerns.

History

Figure 2: member of the nightshade family - similar to Scopolamine

Initial Use

For centuries, the practice of bringing out truth using substances is not new and has in the past included the use of alcohol and local roots included in the preparations to make individuals speak more (Rinde, 2015). However, in the early twentieth century, the modern "truth serum" emerged. Scopolamine, a pharmaceutical member of the nightshade family (figure 2), was discovered to produce a chemically induced sleep which suppresses the recall memory (Rahman, 2020).

A Virginia obstetrics surgeon, Ernest House played a significant part in developing the role of scopolamine as a truth drug in the 1920s. The surgeon administered scopolamine to women after childbirth to put the women in a scopolamine narcosis referred to as ‘twilight sleep’. The women had reduced inhibitions and often answered questions more freely (Winter et al., 2005). House interpreted that this state of scopolamine narcosis lowered inhibition allowed for the retrieval of otherwise inaccessible memories. House started to use scopolamine in criminal investigations, using the scopolamine on suspects. House would ask the suspects questions, and in their reduced inhibitory state, the suspects responses would indicate their innocence of guilt. House's study was well received, there was great excitement amongst the general public for the potential implications with justice, and consequently the term "truth serum" was commonly used.

Modern research

Despite ongoing debate, scientists continue to study truth serums, though ethical worries and a move to other fields of neuroscience methods often overshadow this work.

Current studies tend to investigate different substances such as barbiturates like sodium thiopental. While doctors often use sodium thiopental as a sleep drug, it can make people feel calm and less guarded (Barnwal, 2016). However, researchers debate how well it works to make people tell the truth. There has also been a shift away from truth serum, now more scientists tend to investigate the localisation of lying. Scientists who study brain scans like fMRI use localisation to pinpoint which parts of the brain has increased blood oxygen flow when someone lies. They hope this will lead to better ways to tell if someone is honest (Rinde, 2015).

Though there are possible uses in controlled environments such as psychotherapy or forensic psychiatry, the idea of a reliable truth serum drug still faces problems. This is because there's no widespread acceptance or solid proof that these drugs can make people tell the truth. The way human psychology, memory, and individual reactions to these substances interact is complex (Barnwal, 2016). This highlights the need to keep studying and to be careful when thinking about using these drugs in any situation.

Multi-crore Fake Rupee Stamp Scam This was one of the major financial frauds of India, based on counterfeiting and selling stamp papers. The stamp paper scam was discovered in the year 2002 and was masterminded by a group led by Abdul Karim Telgi. According to officials, he sold the fake stamp papers to several banks, real estate firms, and other businesses, causing huge losses. The Bombay High Court allowed narcoanalysis in this case within the precincts of "certain physical tests involving minimal bodily harm." Telgi consented to the use of truth serum and the findings from Telgi in his truth serum induced state were used in the investigation. However, whatever convictions Telgi faced were based on other information gathered in the investigation and not necessarily on any statements conducted during narco-analysis (Kala, 2007).

How do they work?

The name 'truth serum' is misleading. Unlike serums, they do not act against specific antibodies and they do not provide immunity. Instead, truth serums are central nervous system depressants, acting to alter the activity of the brain and induce a range of effects that, while potentially exploitable, are no guarantee of the truth. Most research focuses on barbiturates, specifically referencing sodium pentothal as the drugs most associated with truth serum. These medications act upon the central nervous system, inducing everything from light sedation to deep anesthesia to even death, if the dosage is large enough.

Biological Explanations

Truth serums work through the depression of the central nervous system. This depresses the communications between the brain and the body. It would mean that they generally slow down the activity of the brain and interfere with communications between the brain and the rest of the body. The depression is nonspecific; it extends to all types of physiological processes, creating a cascade of effects (Close, 2022).

Neurotransmitter mechanism: barbiturates work on one neurotransmitter type, GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid), an inhibitory neurotransmitter which reduces neuronal excitability throughout the nervous system. By facilitating the action of GABA, barbiturates dampen neuronal excitability, which culminates in generalised brain activity slowing (Zonta, 2020).

Reduced Anxiety and Inhibition: barbiturates reduce the activity of the brain's response to stress and fear, promoting relaxation and reduction in inhibitions. This is due to the fact that regions of the brain responsible for processing fear and anxiety are under the influence of neurotransmitter GABA and therefore excitability of neurons is reduced (GABAergic modulation). Suppression of these regions causes the brain's innate defense mechanisms, which might otherwise lead to withholding information, to become less active. Such reduced anxiety lowers emotional barriers that may restrain individuals from disclosing of information (Zonta, 2020).

Impaired Cognitive Abilities: As the central nervous system is depressed, there is a loss of effective memory, judgment, and rational thinking due to the general effect of the drug in the brain. Different parts of the brain that might have coordinated such cognitive functions do so less efficiently, hence an individual cannot think clearly, remember accurately, and this means they might be less likely to keep to a lie or withstand interrogation methods (Close, 2022).

Increased Suggestibility: The combined effects of lowered inhibition and impaired cognition make patients highly suggestible under the influence of barbiturates. They may easily and uncritically accept interrogator cues or interpretations that are in contradiction to their actual knowledge or beliefs (Rahman, 2020).

Figure 3: Lie detector - what motivates lies? Motivation and Concealing Secrets Truth serums serve as an interesting perspective through which to explore the motivation, particularly in the context of truth-telling. While intrinsic motivation involves doing things for personal satisfaction or interest in something, and extrinsic motivation is influenced by receiving rewards or pressures from outside sources, the effect of truth serum can supersede these in motivating the truthfulness of a person. For instance, the state induced by truth serum may lead people to disclose information unrestricted by conventional filters of social norms, fear of consequences, or personal biases, blurring the lines between self interest and obligation. The motives for the truth could arise from a desire to see clarity, a yearning for connection, or even a subconscious urge to rid oneself of cognitive dissonance, that might come when hiding the truth. This complexity brings forth the fact that the urge to be truthful might not fall squarely within intrinsic or extrinsic factors: it can be for situational contexts, emotional states, or hardwiring of human beings for authenticity. Thus, truth serum prompts a deeper examination of what drives individuals to share their truths, to expose motivations that can be complex, and fit neither into intrinsic or extrinsic decision making (Morris et al., 2022).

Common Truth Serums

Figure 4. A vial of Sodium Amytal

	Mechanism	Effect	History
Scopolomine (Geis et al., 1959)	Blocks acetylcholine receptors in the brain, inducing patients into "Twilight Sleep"	Causes sedation, relaxation, and amnesia. Can lower inhibitions and lead to spontaneous verbalisations	Used as an anesthetic and for motion sickness. Discovered by Dr House in the initial conceptualisation of truth serum
Sodium Pentothal (Fraser et al., 1950)	Enhances the inhibitory effects of GABA leading to CNS depression, sedation, and amnesia	Reduces anxiety and inhibition, and impairs cognitive abilities. May facilitate free speech but can lead to unreliable information	Developed in the 1930s as an anesthetic, later popularized as a "truth serum"starting in the 1940s where it was used in a select few court cases
Sodium Amytal (figure 4) (Zonta, 2020)	Similar to sodium pentothal but longer acting and longer lasting	Similar to sodium pentothal, it causes sedation and can impair memory, potentially leading to more open responses	Introduced as an anaesthetic in the 1920s, gained traction in World War 2 as it can be given orally and is easy to mask the flavour

Ethical considerations

While the search for truth is at the heart of any notion of justice systems, in actual practice, it cannot be completely divorced from ethics. As the sources state, "truth serums", despite their name, operate in gray areas that border legitimate interrogation techniques and violation of human rights.

Human rights concerns

Truth serums are a violation of fundamental human rights. The effort for justice from the coercion and violation of human rights can never be successful.

The UN Convention Against Torture, underpinning international law, has directly forbidden truth serums. This convention represents an agreement reached worldwide to protect individuals from any methods that might override their capability for autonomous and free decisions, especially in courts of law. It stresses the right of every individual to bodily integrity and self-determination. This right encompasses both physical and mental realms, in that individuals have the right to be free from any unwanted or coerced intrusion upon their person, including the administration of substances that alter their mental state (Kala, 2007). Truth serums violate this basic right by their very nature. Subjecting an individual to substances that reduce cognitive functionalities and heighten susceptibility to suggestion, further placing them in an inherently coercive setting such as an interrogation, sets the stage for abuse and extraction of information that is unreliable (Zonta, 2020).

Some argue that truth serums can be framed as a more humane alternative to physical torture, but this is a fragile stance to take. They point to a historical pattern where even seemingly less brutal methods of interrogation, when used in an attempt to circumvent legal and ethical boundaries, can easily slide into more heinous human rights abuses (Close, 2022).

Figure 5: Declassified documents of MKUltra

A good example of how this slippery slope can look is the CIA program known as Project MKUltra (figure 5). This was an extremely secret program during the Cold War in which LSD and other substances that change the mind were administered to unsuspecting subjects many times under the guise of national security. MKUltra is still a grim example of what happens when the urge for information oversteps respect for ethics and, more so, human rights (Rahman, 2020). In less extreme cases, the application of truth serums normalises an idea that it is okay to elicit information by chemically manipulating people. This normalisation is dangerous, as it sets a precedent for the application of increasingly intrusive interrogation techniques that are increasingly ethically questionable.

Informed consent

The use of truth serums, whether for criminal investigations or intelligence, can under certain circumstances give the illusion of consent. The nature of the use of such substances renders an individual incapable of giving true informed consent, an integral principle in medical ethics and courts of law (Zonta, 2020).

One underlying argument is that for informed consent to take place, a person must have the capacity to appreciate all risks and benefits likely to occur from a certain procedure or action before voluntarily giving consent. However, there has been an emphasis on the fact that truth serums blunt this capacity directly by impairing cognition, clouding judgment, and enhancing susceptibility to suggestion (Patel et al., 2022).

For example, Close (2022) explains that under the influence of scopolamine, the subjects were set to passively accept any suggestions given before them and interweave those suggestions in their answers; even when such suggestions were known to be contrary to the victim's experiences or beliefs. It is this advanced state of suggestibility itself that renders an individual incapable of truly considering the implications of their disclosures or of invoking their right to silence.

It is further possible that the use of medical persons during "truth serum" interrogations can give reinforce an illusion of consent. The use of a doctor or psychiatrist figures, usually commanding respect and authority, may make the suspect feel that they are undergoing a medical rather than a coercive interrogation technique (Kala, 2007). This perceived legitimacy is a dangerous facade disguising the coercive reality of truth serum use, further weakening an individual's attempt to assert their rights or resist interrogation. This constitutes a clear contravening of ethical policies and legal standards requiring genuine, voluntary, and informed consent, especially when an individual's liberty and well-being hang in the balance.

Conclusion

In exploring the efficacy and ethical implications of truth serums, it is clear that the pursuit of truth through pharmacological means raises significant challenges. Through studies, it is realized that the truth serums, such as sodium pentothal and sodium amytal, though they reduce inhibitions and alter the way one thinks, do not provide a reliable method through which truthful information may be elicited. Confessions of success via anecdotal evidence have usually fallen short of scientific rigour, hence creating a mismatch between expectation and reality on the effectiveness of the truth serums.

Aside from some historical interest, the scientific community views truth serums as ineffective for reliably obtaining the truth. The primary drugs used, including scopolamine and barbiturates, depress the central nervous system and cause impairments of memory and increased suggestibility rather than any guarantee of honesty. Furthermore, interrogational uses of such substances raise deep ethical concerns: particularly human rights violations and issues of informed consent, since under the influence, subjects may not be capable of giving truly informed consent.

Practical take-home messages emphasise caution on legal and psychological grounds. Serums of truth, sensationalised in popular media, should not be used as absolute instruments in getting to the truth. Instead, the complex interplay of human psychology, memory, and emotional state calls for more ethical and scientifically sound methods of obtaining information. Ultimately, the flawed premise of truth serums points to the need to protect individual rights in the pursuit of justice, with ethics kept supreme in the search for truth.

See also

• Truth Serum (Wikipedia)
• Drugs violence nexus and motivation (Wikiversity)

References

Barnwal, Ajay Kumar. “Development of Narco Analysis Test as Investigation Technique in the Criminal Justice System: An Indian Perspective.” IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 21, no. 07, July 2016, pp. 97–102, https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-21070897102

Brown, David. “Some Believe “Truth Serums” Will Come Back.” Washingtonpost.com, 20 Nov. 2006, www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/19/AR2006111900891.html. Accessed 1 Oct. 2024.

Geis, Gilbert. “Sociology, Criminology, and Criminal Law.” Social Problems, vol. 7, no. 1, July 1959, pp. 40–47, https://doi.org/10.2307/798759.

Kala, AK. “Of Ethically Compromising Positions and Blatant Lies about “Truth Serum.”” Indian Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 49, no. 1, 2007, p. 6, https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.31512.

Lam, C., Badiwala, M. V., & Froeschl, M. (2002). Truth Serum. University of Toronto Medical Journal, 79(2), 136-141.

Morris, Laurel S., et al. “On What Motivates Us: A Detailed Review of Intrinsic v. Extrinsic Motivation.” Psychological Medicine, vol. 52, no. 10, 7 July 2022, pp. 1–16, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9340849/, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291722001611.

Patel, Rushikumar, et al. “Purpose, Method, Drugs Used and Health Risks of the Narco Test.” Open Access Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, vol. 4, no. 2, 7 Dec. 2022, pp. 062–067, https://doi.org/10.53022/oarjms.2022.4.2.0108.

Pepp, Jessica. Truth Serum, Liar Serum, and Some Problems about Saying What You Think Is False. Oxford University Press EBooks, Oxford University Press, 22 Nov. 2018.

Sheedy, Charles E. “The “Truth Drug” in Criminal Investigation.” Theological Studies, vol. 20, no. 3, 1 Sept. 1959, pp. 396–408, https://doi.org/10.1177/004056395902000302. Accessed 8 Aug. 2023.

Winter, Alison. “The Making of “Truth Serum,” 1920-1940.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, vol. 79, no. 3, 2005, pp. 500–533, https://doi.org/10.1353/bhm.2005.0136.

External links

• Can a drug make you tell the truth? (BBC.com)
• What is Truth Serum (McGill.ca) Schwarz, 2017
• What Is Truth Serum? (Scientific American) Brown, 2006
• How Intelligence Agencies Use Barbiturates as Truth Serums. (Sunrise House) Freedman, 2022
• The Evolution of Truth Serum: Narcoanalysis from Twilight Sleep to MK-ULTRA Mind Control.(The Science of Memory, Lies and Pain) Rahman, 2020
• “Stranger than Fiction.” (Science History Institute) Rinde, 2015
• Truth drugs in interrogation (Bathtub bulletin) Zonta, 2024