Two groups of participants committed the same mock crime in which one of two items, a watch or a ring, was removed from a drawer and concealed. One group, the crime-familiar group next experienced a three-stimulus protocol (3SP), a Concealed Information Test (CIT), in which they were tested on the stolen (probe) item presented in a random series of five irrelevant (unseen) stimuli from the same jewelry category. A left-hand button press, meaning "I don't recognize" was to follow each of these six items. A right-hand press ("I do recognize") was to follow the one other presented item, the target item, which in the case of the crime-familiar group was the other, not-stolen item in the drawer at the mock crime scene. For the other crime-unfamiliar group, the target was a sixth unseen irrelevant item as in the original P300 CIT. In terms of P300 latency and reaction time (RT), crime-familiar participants processed all stimuli faster than crime-unfamiliar participants. The CIT effects (probe-minus-irrelevant differences) for crime-familiar group members were inferior to those of crime-unfamiliar group members for RT and P300 amplitude measures. Thus, familiar targets negatively impact the 3SP.
