Brain scan experiment detects guilt, opens the way for pre-crime tech
Being able to detect that someone feels guilty could be used to detect the likelihood of a crime happening, as well as assign blame after the event.
Key takeaways
- While this might seem like a small distinction to make it’s an important one, for a few reasons, and it has implications both today, and on the future.
- The participants were given a thought experiment in which they had to decide whether or not to carry a suitcase across a border, and all of them were given varying probabilities that the suitcase contained illicit drugs.
- By monitoring which parts of the brain were activated in each scan, the researchers were then able to determine which participants knew they were carrying drugs, and which participants were simply acting recklessly.
Cite or link to this article
Griffin, M. (2017) 'Brain scan experiment detects guilt, opens the way for pre-crime tech', 311 Institute, 22 March. Available at: https://www.311institute.com/brain-scan-experiment-detects-guilt-opens-the-way-for-pre-crime-tech/ (Accessed: 1 October 2026).
Neuroscientists around the world have been trying to decipher the brain and all of its beautiful complexity for centuries, but now, a team of researchers from Virginia Tech have discovered that brain images can reveal whether someone committed a crime knowingly or recklessly. While this might seem like a small distinction to make it’s an important one, for a few reasons, and it has implications both today, and on the future.
The first reason is that in a court of law the distinction can make the difference on whether you go to jail, and if so for how long. Secondly, and more intriguingly, however, if you are able to tell that someone committed a crime knowingly, post the event, then it could also be theorised that their brainwaves will give them away before the crime even takes place, unless they’re a psychopath and display no guilt at all. In that case, let’s face it the technology’s probably as good as useless…
During their experiment Read Montague, a neuroscientist at Virginia Tech who led the study, and his team scanned the brains of 40 volunteers and used artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms to study the images to determine culpability and guilt.
The participants were given a thought experiment in which they had to decide whether or not to carry a suitcase across a border, and all of them were given varying probabilities that the suitcase contained illicit drugs. This allowed the team to differentiate between the volunteers who knowingly committed a crime and those who simply accepted the risk associated with the act. By monitoring which parts of the brain were activated in each scan, the researchers were then able to determine which participants knew they were carrying drugs, and which participants were simply acting recklessly.
“People can commit exactly the same crime in all of its elements and circumstances, and depending on their mental states, the difference could be one would go to jail for 14 years and the other would get probation,” Read Montague, a neuroscientist at Virginia Tech who led the study, said in a press release. “Predicated on which side of the boundary you are on between acting knowingly and recklessly, you can differentially be deprived of your freedom.”
The research, which was published last week in the journal Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first neurobiological evidence of the difference between knowledgeable and reckless mental states. And even though the study is currently confined to the laboratory it’s conceivable that someday it might head into the courtrooms, or beyond, where it could be used to more accurately determine guilt.
Taking a step back from the experiment though, now think about this for a moment. If I ask you to go and shoplift something, by the way don’t do that I’m giving you an example here, duh, and, if you’re a “normal” person who displays “normal” emotions, then it’s likely that before you commit the crime you’ll have pangs of guilt, the same can be said for many situations.
This new breakthrough, albeit a nascent one, means that I now, have a way to measure not just if you’re guilty, but just how guilty you are. And arguably the guiltier you’re feeling then, potentially, the bigger the crime.
At some point in the future it’s inevitable that the Brain Machine Interface (BMI) skull caps that the researchers used, which are also used widely across a mix of industries nowadays, will be miniaturised and put into a sensor, or most likely a device. And if that device happens to be a security system, which let’s face it is a way off, but still technically feasible, it could be used to figure out who might be up to no good.
A great example of a use case might be an airport where everyone looks like they’re behaving normally, having a technology like this in your security kit bag, along with a few other pre-crime technologies, such as the ability to pull movies out of people’s heads, or just their innermost secrets, could be a great asset in the fight against terrorists and terrorism. Imagine not just being able to identify who’s feeling guilty but also what they’re about to do before they do it… it’s not as big a leap as you think it is.
What this means for your organisation
Intent may soon be measurable.
The same act can lead to 14 years in jail or probation, depending on the mental state behind it. The Virginia Tech work offers the first neurobiological evidence of the gap between knowing and reckless states. It is confined to the lab, but courts and regulators may start to ask for this kind of proof.
Sensors will leave the lab.
The skull caps used in the study are already used widely across industries. The source expects them to shrink into a sensor or a device, perhaps a security system. Brain to machine interfaces have a first product date of 2025 and wide use by 2045, and brain mapping has a first product date of 2024.
Treat guilt readings as a weak signal.
A person who feels no guilt, such as a psychopath, would not be flagged, so the method has clear limits. Guilt is also not proof of a crime. Machine learning on 40 volunteers in a thought experiment is a long way from an airport, so set rules on consent and use before the tools arrive.
Three questions for your next leadership meeting
- Who in our organisation owns policy on reading brain data from staff or customers?
- Which of our decisions depend on proving intent, and could scans change that?
- What safeguards would we demand before any guilt-detecting sensor enters our security systems?
The trends and technologies behind this story
From the 311 Starburst, the 311 Strategic Intelligence Unit’s map of the technologies and trends shaping the next 50 years.
Analysis by the 311 Strategic Intelligence Unit, from Matthew Griffin’s article and 311 data. First published on Fanatical Futurist.
FAQ
Why does this matter?
Being able to detect that someone feels guilty could be used to detect the likelihood of a crime happening, as well as assign blame after the event.

About the author
Matthew Griffin Founder, 311 Institute
Matthew Griffin is a multi-award winning Futurist and expert in Disruption and Innovation, Geopolitics, Leadership, and Technology, who NASA have described as a "walking encyclopaedia of the future" and a "futurist Polymath."
Read full bio
Matthew Griffin is a multi-award winning Futurist and expert in Disruption and Innovation, Geopolitics, Leadership, and Technology, who NASA have described as a "walking encyclopaedia of the future" and a "futurist Polymath." 17-time best selling author of the "Codex of the Future" series, Matthew is the Founder and Futurist in Chief of the 311 Institute, a global Futures and Deep Futures advisory firm working with royal households, world leaders, G7, G20, and G77 governments, NGOs, and multi-national mid and mega cap firms to help them explore, shape, and lead the next 50 years of business and society.
An award-winning YouTube creator with over a million followers, with an unrivalled global reach and impact, Matthew is a highly sought-after international keynote speaker, lecturer, and mentor who collaborates with global leaders through the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) and United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to shape pivotal initiatives such as the UN’s AI for Humanity program, the United Nations Conference of the Parties (UN COP), and the World Economic Forum in Davos.
As the former Global Head of Cloud, National Security, and Enterprise Sales for companies including Atos, Dell-EMC, and IBM, Matthew has a proven track record of building multi-billion dollar business units and turning failing divisions into market leaders. His ability to identify, analyse, and communicate the implications of hundreds of emerging technologies and trends is unparalleled, and his insights are trusted by many of the world’s most respected organisations, including ABB, Accenture, Adidas, AON, ARM, BCG, Centrica, Citi, Coca-Cola, Dentons, Deloitte, Dow Jones, EY, Google, KPMG, Lego, Legal & General, LinkedIn, Microsoft, PepsiCo, Qualcomm, RWE, Samsung, Siemens AG and Siemens Energy, T-Mobile, UBS, VISA, Walmart, Workday, Worldpay and many others.
Regularly featured in the global media including the AP, BBC, Bloomberg, CNBC, Discovery, Forbes, Khaleej Times, Telegraph, TIME, ViacomCBS, WIRED, and the WSJ, Matthews mission is to help organisations create a fair and sustainable future whose benefits are shared by everyone irrespective of their ability, background, or circumstances.
What future do you need to see?
Choose one to get started on connected society and the future of your organisation.
Sources and further reading
- knowingly or recklessly vtnews.vt.edu
Source: first published by the 311 Institute on 22 March 2017. Cite as: Griffin, M. (2017). Brain scan experiment detects guilt, opens the way for pre-crime tech. 311 Institute. https://www.311institute.com/brain-scan-experiment-detects-guilt-opens-the-way-for-pre-crime-tech/
You are welcome to quote this article with credit and a link to the original.