Who This Guide Is For
This guide is written for three distinct audiences — and the investigation looks different depending on which one you are.
Commissioning an investigation
You have a claim or internal fraud situation that warrants investigation. You want to understand what you are commissioning, what it costs, how long it takes, and what the output looks like.
Being investigated
You have been asked to participate in a P300 EEG investigation as part of a claims or HR process. You want to understand exactly what will happen and what it involves.
Both perspectives are covered in the stage-by-stage walkthrough below. The process is the same — but what it means and what you should know is different depending on your position in it.
The Investigation Stage by Stage
-
1Initial referral and case briefing Day 1 — 1 to 2 hours
Every investigation begins with a briefing. The instructing party — the insurer, business, or solicitor — provides us with a structured account of the case: what the claim or allegation is, what evidence exists, what has already been said by the subject in interviews or correspondence, and what specific questions need to be answered.
This stage is more important than most commissioning parties expect. The quality of the briefing directly determines the quality of the probe design — and therefore the accuracy of the result. We use a structured intake process to make sure we capture everything relevant.
For subjects: At this stage the investigation is being scoped without your involvement. You will be notified separately and given the opportunity to consent before anything proceeds. -
2Case suitability assessment Day 1 — same session
Not every fraud situation is suitable for P300 EEG investigation. We assess the case against three criteria before proceeding.
- Specificity — is there a clearly defined factual question that can be answered by whether the subject recognises specific information?
- Probe integrity — is there information in the case that only someone involved in the fraud would know, and that has not been disclosed to the subject through any prior interview, letter, or legal correspondence?
- Subject suitability — does the subject have any neurological or cognitive conditions that would affect EEG validity? Is there any reason to believe consent cannot be genuinely voluntary?
If any of these criteria cannot be met, we advise accordingly. We do not proceed with investigations where the probe design is compromised or the result would not be reliable. This protects the instructing party as much as the subject.
For insurers: If a case is not suitable for EEG investigation, we will tell you why and what alternative investigative approaches may be more effective. -
3Probe stimulus design Day 1 to Day 2 — 2 to 4 hours
This is the most technically demanding stage of the investigation — and the stage that most distinguishes an experienced P300 examiner from an inexperienced one. Probe stimuli are the specific items of information that the subject's brain will be tested for recognition of during the session.
Probes must satisfy strict criteria. They must contain information that only a person who was involved in the fraud — who staged the accident, fabricated the injury, submitted the false claim — would have stored in memory. They must not contain information that could have been encountered innocently, that has been disclosed in any prior contact, or that could be guessed from general knowledge.
In a staged RTA investigation, for example, probe stimuli might include specific details about the location of the staged impact, the sequence of events, communications between participants, or arrangements made before the incident — details that a genuine innocent victim would not recognise, but that everyone involved in the staging would have encoded in memory.
Why this matters: Poorly designed probes are the single most common cause of unreliable P300 results. A probe set that contains contaminated information — information the subject could have encountered innocently — produces results that cannot be acted upon. We take the design phase seriously because everything downstream depends on it. -
4Subject notification and consent Day 2 — prior to session
The subject must be formally notified that a P300 EEG investigation is taking place and must consent voluntarily before the session proceeds. This notification includes a clear description of what the test involves, what the results will be used for, and who will have access to them.
In an insurance fraud context, the notification and consent process is typically managed through the insurer's or solicitor's standard communications. The subject is informed that EEG testing has been commissioned as part of the claims investigation and is invited to attend a session. They are not required to attend — but they are made aware that this is part of the investigation process.
For subjects: Consent is genuine. If you have questions about the process before agreeing to attend, you can speak with us directly before the session is confirmed. Nothing about the test changes between what we describe in advance and what happens on the day. -
5Pre-session briefing with the subject Testing day — first 20 minutes
When the subject arrives, the examiner conducts a pre-session briefing. This is not a confrontation or an interview. It is a practical, calm explanation of exactly what is going to happen — the headband, how the stimuli will appear on screen, what the button responses mean, how long the session will take, and when the result will be delivered.
All question categories are reviewed and confirmed before the test begins. The subject knows what areas are being tested. There are no surprise questions. The pre-session briefing is also used to confirm subject suitability — to identify any new factors that might affect result validity, such as significant fatigue, recent medication changes, or extreme emotional distress.
For subjects: If you have genuine concerns about anything in the pre-session briefing, raise them before the test begins — not during. The examiner will address them. Once the test starts, the stimuli sequence is fixed and cannot be interrupted without invalidating the data. -
6The P300 EEG test session Testing day — 60 to 90 minutes per subject
The subject puts on the BrainBit EEG headband — a lightweight wireless device with dry electrodes. There is no gel, no skin preparation, and no discomfort. The headband captures EEG data from eight channels simultaneously as the subject views stimuli on a screen.
The test protocol presents stimuli in randomised sequences — probe items interleaved with control items the subject would not recognise. The subject responds to each stimulus with a simple button press. The response itself is not what is being measured. The EEG data captured in the 300 milliseconds following each stimulus is what matters — specifically, whether the P300 component fires in response to the probe items.
A standard insurance fraud investigation covers two to four question set areas. Each set runs for approximately 12 to 18 minutes. The session is calm and structured. There is no confrontational questioning, no raised voices, and no interrogation dynamic.
For subjects: Nervousness does not affect the result. The P300 fires before anxiety can reach it — at 300 milliseconds, before conscious thought forms. An innocent person's brain will not produce a recognition response to probe stimuli they genuinely have no knowledge of. You cannot fail this test through nervousness. -
7Same-day verbal result Testing day — immediately following session
At the close of the session the examiner delivers a verbal result directly to all relevant parties present: deception indicated or no deception indicated, for each question set tested.
The verbal result is based on the P300 waveform data captured during the session and assessed against established probability thresholds. It is a clear, binary outcome — not a probability range or a "probably" statement. Where the EEG data does not meet the threshold for a definitive result in either direction, this is communicated clearly, along with the reason and any recommended next steps.
For insurers: The verbal result is the basis for immediate next steps — whether that is initiating repudiation, suspending payment, or clearing the claim for processing. The written report follows within 24 hours and provides the documented evidence base for any formal action. -
8Full written report — within 24 hours Day after testing
The written report is delivered within 24 hours of the testing session. It is the document that carries evidential weight — structured for use in legal, civil, or insurance dispute contexts and produced to the standard required for a qualified examiner's report.
The report contains everything needed to understand, verify, and act on the result. Below is what every report includes as standard.
What the Written Report Contains
The written report is not a summary letter. It is a fully documented evidential package. Here is what is included in every report as standard.
Case reference and subject identification
Full case reference, subject identification details, session date and location, and the name and qualifications of the examining researcher.
Methodology documentation
A complete description of the P300 EEG methodology used, the probe design rationale, the stimulus presentation protocol, and the analysis thresholds applied. This section is what allows the report to withstand legal scrutiny.
Raw EEG waveform data
The complete EEG waveform data for each question set, presented graphically. The P300 component is clearly marked on the waveform for each probe and control item. This is the raw scientific evidence behind the result.
Probability scores per question set
A documented probability score for each question set tested — the statistical confidence level at which the P300 response to probe stimuli exceeds the recognition threshold. Expressed as a percentage confidence figure alongside the deception indicated / no deception indicated determination.
Examiner's conclusions
The examiner's documented conclusions for each question set, written in clear plain English and supported by the data. This section is what legal teams, HR professionals, and insurance handlers use in their decision-making.
QR-verified result certificate
A tamper-evident QR code linking to the verified result record. Scannable by any party in a legal or dispute context to confirm the result is genuine, unmodified, and traceable to the specific session.
The written report is the deliverable that matters in a legal or insurance dispute context. A verbal result ends the uncertainty the same day — but it is the written report that a solicitor uses, that a tribunal considers, and that an insurer presents in a repudiation dispute. Every investigation produces both.
What Happens After the Report
If the result is deception indicated
A deception-indicated result means the subject's brain produced a statistically significant P300 recognition response to the probe stimuli — stimuli that only someone involved in the fraud would recognise. This is the basis for action.
For insurers, a deception-indicated result typically supports initiating formal claim repudiation, suspending payment pending further investigation, or referring the case to the insurer's special investigations unit or fraud team. The written report provides the documented evidence base for each of these steps.
For employment or HR investigations, a deception-indicated result supports the disciplinary process as documented supporting evidence — not as the sole basis for action, but as a significant contributing factor in a fair and documented investigation.
If the result is no deception indicated
A clear result — no deception indicated — means the subject's brain did not produce a recognition response to the probe stimuli. The claim or allegation, as tested, is not supported by neurological evidence of involvement.
For insurers, this outcome supports processing the claim through normal channels. It also provides documented protection against any subsequent allegation that the claimant was treated unfairly — the investigation was conducted, the result was clear, and the claim was processed accordingly.
For claimants, a clear P300 EEG result is one of the most powerful pieces of evidence available to support a genuine claim — because it is objective, scientific, and not dependent on anyone choosing to believe anyone's account.
Post-investigation support
We provide ongoing support to the instructing party following report delivery — including interpreting results for legal teams, preparing documentation for civil proceedings, and where required, providing expert witness testimony. This is available as part of the investigation package or as a separately scoped engagement depending on the complexity of the matter.
Commission an Insurance Fraud EEG Investigation
We work with insurers, solicitors, and businesses across the UK. The initial consultation is free — we will tell you honestly whether P300 EEG is the right tool for your case before anything is committed to.