Many studies on concealed knowledge involve mock-thefts. The present study compares ERPs of participants concealing knowledge of a morally negative behavior (mock-theft) with ERPs of participants concealing knowledge of a morally positive behavior. Some participants (n= 33) stole a candy box out of an office, whereas others (n= 28) put the candy box into an office as a present. During a concealed information test, participants concealed knowledge of the candy box and a key they had seen in the office (probe stimuli) and honestly indicated not knowing similar irrelevant stimuli. P300s were enlarged for probe, compared to irrelevant stimuli in both conditions, revealing that probe stimuli were more salient than irrelevant stimuli regardless of their moral valence. Likewise, medial frontal negativities were enlarged for probe versus irrelevant stimuli in both conditions, indicating response conflicts when answering deceptively to probe items in both situations.

关于隐性知识的许多研究涉及盗窃。本研究比较了隐瞒道德不良行为（盗窃）知识的参与者的ERPs与隐瞒道德正面行为知识的参与者的ERPs。一些参与者（n = 33）从办公室偷走了一个糖果盒，而其他参与者（n =28）把糖果盒作为礼物放到办公室里。在隐蔽的信息测试中，参与者隐瞒了他们在办公室看到的糖果盒和钥匙的知识（探针刺激），并诚实地表示不知道类似的无关刺激。与两种情况下的无关刺激相比，P300s都扩大了探针的探测范围，表明无论其道德水平如何，探针刺激比无关刺激更为显着。同样，在两种情况下，对于探测刺激和无关刺激，内侧额叶阴性均增大，表明在两种情况下对探测项目进行欺骗性回答时，反应冲突。