Professional Examiners Trained to APA Standards
140+ Professional Testing Locations Across the U.S. & Canada
Trusted by 10,000+ Clients, Attorneys & Organizations
LieDetectorTest.com Private & Confidential Polygraph Provider

HomePolygraph ResearchResearchers › Jane Campbell Moriarty

Researcher file

Jane Campbell Moriarty

Legal scholar examining neuroimaging lie detection, scientific evidence admissibility, and neuroscience in law

5Studies
2008–2018Active period
1Co-authors
1Research areas
5Journals

Researcher record

NameJane Campbell Moriarty
AffiliationDuquesne University School of LawUnited States
Publications5 peer-reviewed studies in this database
Active period2008–2018
Research focusLegal scholar examining neuroimaging lie detection, scientific evidence admissibility, and neuroscience in law

About Jane Campbell Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty is the Carol Los Mansmann Chair in Faculty Scholarship Emerita and Professor of Law Emerita at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University, where she continues to teach Evidence and formerly taught Professional Responsibility, Law & Neuroscience, Remedies, and other courses. Previously she was a professor at The University of Akron School of Law for nearly 15 years. Her expertise spans scientific evidence, neuroscience and law, and professional responsibility.

Moriarty's contribution to deception detection science bridges law and neuroscience, analyzing the admissibility and reliability of fMRI-based lie detection evidence in courts. Her 2009 article "Visions of Deception: Neuroimaging and the Search for Truth" in Akron Law Review examined neuroimaging evidence for detecting deception, while her 2008 article "Flickering Admissibility" analyzed neuroimaging evidence admissibility trends in U.S. courts. Her 2013 interdisciplinary collaboration with neuroscientist Daniel D. Langleben, "Using Brain Imaging for Lie Detection: Where Science, Law and Research Policy Collide," identified the missing pieces of the scientific puzzle that need to be completed if fMRI-based lie detection is to meet the standards of either legal reliability or general acceptance. The article emphasized that Daubert's "known error rate" is the key concept linking legal and scientific standards, and posited that properly-controlled clinical trials are necessary to determine error rates.

Moriarty has established herself as a leading authority on scientific evidence and the intersection of neuroscience and law. She is a frequent speaker on scientific evidence, neuroscience and law, and legal and judicial ethics and served as president of the Evidence Section of the Association of American Law Schools. She later collaborated again with Langleben on "Who Speaks for Neuroscience? Neuroimaging Evidence and Courtroom Expertise" (2018), published in the Case Western Reserve Law Review. Her publications include the treatise Scientific Evidence (6th ed. 2020) and Scientific and Expert Evidence (3d ed. 2020, Aspen/Wolters Kluwer).

Moriarty's work on brain-based deception detection connects to her broader scholarship examining the use of novel forensic technologies in criminal justice. She co-authored a chapter "Detecting Deception" in Neuroimaging in Forensic Psychiatry: From the Clinic to the Courtroom (2012), and contributed to Law and Mind: At the Intersection of Law and the Cognitive Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 2021). Her scholarship consistently emphasizes the importance of rigorous scientific validation before admitting neuroscience evidence in legal proceedings, advocating for careful judicial gatekeeping of forensic science.

Research methodology profile

Neuroimaging · 4 Field Study · 1

Research areas

Legal & Policy Studies 5

Co-author network

Researchers who have co-authored studies with Jane Campbell Moriarty.

Publications [5]

All peer-reviewed studies by Jane Campbell Moriarty in our database.

[001] 2018 Case Western Reserve Law Review

Who Speaks for Neuroscience? Neuroimaging Evidence and Courtroom Expertise

The paper identifies that no clear standard exists for determining which medical or scientific professionals are qualified to interpret neuroimaging evidence in court, creating risks for legal fairness and scientific… Legal & Policy Studies Field Study Neuroimaging
[002] 2013 • REVIEW Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Using Brain Imaging for Lie Detection: Where Science, Law and Research Policy Collide

Reviewed 76–90% accuracy range under controlled conditions but noted substantial translational gaps between lab and forensic settings. Called for more robust research before courtroom use. Legal & Policy Studies Neuroimaging
[003] 2012 Neuroimaging in Forensic Psychiatry: From the Clinic to the Courtroom

Detecting Deception (book chapter)

The chapter concludes that while fMRI studies identified consistent neural correlates of deception in controlled laboratory settings, the technology in 2012 remained insufficiently validated for individual-level forensic application, and courts… Legal & Policy Studies Neuroimaging
[004] 2009 Akron Law Review

Visions of Deception: Neuroimages and the Search for Truth

Neither fMRI-based lie detection nor Brain Fingerprinting/BEOS meets general acceptance or reliability standards for admissibility in U.S. courts; courts are urged to exercise restraint and await further scientific development before… Legal & Policy Studies Neuroimaging
[005] 2008 Behavioral Sciences & the Law

Flickering Admissibility: Neuroimaging Evidence in the US Courts

U.S. courts routinely admit structural neuroimaging (CT, MRI) but apply significantly greater skepticism to functional technologies such as PET, SPECT, and fMRI; neither fMRI lie detection nor brain fingerprinting had… Legal & Policy Studies

Explore all research.

Browse our complete database of 3493 peer-reviewed polygraph studies.

Need to book now? Our online booking system is open 24/7. Speak directly with our team about your test or booking.