Notice: file_put_contents(): Write of 229028 bytes failed with errno=28 No space left on device in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php on line 36

Warning: http_response_code(): Cannot set response code - headers already sent (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 17

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 20
Effective Policing - William G. Iacono, 2008

Restricted access

Research article

First published online October 1, 2008

Request permissions

Effective Policing: Understanding How Polygraph Tests Work and Are Used

William G. IaconoView all authors and affiliations

Volume 35, Issue 10

https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808321529

Abstract
References

Abstract

Forensic applications of polygraph techniques rely primarily on the control or comparison question test (CQT). The author describes the CQT and its theoretical basis, and how it is used and evaluated by the polygraph professionals, and by scientists at arms length from the polygraph community. Because the CQT (a) has a weak theoretical foundation, making it unlikely that it can be as accurate as polygraph proponents claim, (b) is biased against the innocent, and (c) may be subject to countermeasures used by the guilty to appear truthful, CQT results cannot constitute evidence of either deception or truthfulness. In the absence of insight into brain mechanisms that underlie deception, it may be difficult to develop a valid lie detector. However, methods are available for detecting guilty knowledge, information that only the perpetrator of a crime and the police possess, which are ripe for further development as forensic applications.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

Abrams, S. (1989). The complete polygraph handbook. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Allen, J.J.B. (2002). The role of psychophysiology in clinical assessment: ERPs in the evaluation of memory. Psychophysiology, 39, 261-280.

Allen, J.J.B., & Iacono, W.G. (2001). Assessing the validity of amnesia in dissociative identity disorder: A dilemma for the DSM and the courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 311-344.

Battelle Memorial Institute. (2007). Efficacy of prototype credibility assessment technologies: PCASS final report . Ft. Jackson, SC: Department of Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment.

Ben-Shakar, G. (2002). A critical review of the control questions test (CQT). In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 103-126). San Diego, CA : Academic Press.

Fiedler, K., Schmod, J., & Stahl, T. (2002). What is the current truth about polygraph lie detection? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 313-324.

Forensic Research Incorporated. (1997). The validity and reliability of polygraph testing. Polygraph, 26, 215-239.

Grubin, D., Madsen, L., Parsons, S., Sosnowski, D., & Warberg, B. (2004). A prospective study of the impact of polygraphy on high-risk behaviors in adult sex offenders. Sex Abuse, 16, 209-222.

Honts, C.R., & Alloway, W.R. (2007). Information does not affect the validity of a comparison question test. Legal and Criminal Psychology, 12, 311-320.

Honts, C.R., Devitt, M.K., Winbush, M., & Kircher, J.C. (1996). Mental and physical countermeasures reduce the accuracy of the concealed knowledge test. Psychophysiology, 33, 84-92.

Honts, C.R., Hodes, R.L., & Raskin, D.C. (1985). Effects of physical countermeasures on the physiological detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 177-187.

Honts, C.R., Raskin, D., & Kircher, J. (2002). The scientific status of research on polygraph techniques: The case for polygraph tests. In D. L. Faigman, D. H. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony (Vol. 2, pp. 446-483). St. Paul, MN: West.

Horowitz, S.W., Kircher, J.C., Honts, C.R., & Raskin, D.C. (1997). The role of comparison questions in physiological detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 34, 108-115.

Horvath, F. (1977). The effect of selected variables on the interpretation of polygraph records. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 127-136.

Iacono, W.G. (1991). Can we determine the accuracy of polygraph tests? In J. R. Jennings, P. K. Ackles, & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Advances in psychophysiology (pp. 201-207). London: Jessica Kingsley.

Iacono, W.G. (2007). Detection of deception. In J. Cacioppo, L. Tassinary, & G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (3rd ed., pp. 688-703). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Iacono, W.G. (2008). The forensic application of "Brain Fingerprinting": Why scientists should encourage the use of P300 memory detection methods. American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 30-32.

Iacono, W.G., & Lykken, D.T. (1997). The validity of the lie detector: Two surveys of scientific opinion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 426-433.

Iacono, W.G., & Lykken, D.T. (2002). The scientific status of research on polygraph techniques: The case against polygraph tests. In D. L. Faigman, D. H. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony (Vol. 2, pp. 483-538). St. Paul, MN: West.

Iacono, W.G., & Patrick, C.J. (1987). What psychologists should know about lie detection . In I. B. Weiner & A. K. Hess (Eds.), Handbook of forensic psychology (pp. 460-489). New York: John Wiley.

Iacono, W.G., & Patrick, C.J. (2006). Polygraph ("lie detector") testing: Current status and emerging trends. In I. B. Weiner & A. K. Hess (Eds.), The handbook of forensic psychology (pp. 552-588). New York: John Wiley.

Jones, E.E., & Sigall, H. (1971). The bogus pipeline: A new paradigm for measuring affect and attitude. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 349-364.

Kleinmuntz, B., & Szucko, J. (1984). A field study of the fallibility of polygraphic lie detection. Nature, 308, 449-450.

Lefebvre, C.D., Marchand, Y., Smith, S.M., & Connolly, J.F. (2007). Determining eyewitness identification accuracy using event-related brain potentials (ERPs). Psychophysiology, 44, 894-904.

Lykken, D.T. (1959). The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 385-388.

Lykken, D.T. (1974). Psychology and the lie detector industry. American Psychologist, 29, 725-739.

Mangan, D.J., Armitage, T.E., & Adams, G.C. (2008). A field study on the validity of quadri-track zone comparison technique. Physiology & Behavior. Preprint version available from Sciencedirect Website, http://www.sciencedirect.com

Matte, J.A. (1996). Forensic psychophysiology using the polygraph: Scientific truth verification-lie detection. Williamsville, NY: J.A.M.

Meegan, D.V. (2008). Neuroimaging techniques for memory detection: Scientific, ethical, and legal issues. American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 9-20.

Meijer, E.H., Verschuere, B., Merckelbach, H.L.G.J., & Crombez, G. (in press). Sex offender management using the polygraph: A critical review. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry.

Mertens, R., & Allen, J.J. (2008). The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: Deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios. Psychophysiology, 45, 286-298.

Nakayama, M. (2002). Practical use of the concealed information test from criminal investigation in Japan. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 49-86). San Diego: Academic Press.

National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Oksol, E.M., & O'Donohue, W.T. (2003). A critical analysis of the polygraph. In W. T. O'Donohue & E. R. Levensky (Eds.), Handbook of forensic psychology: Resource for mental health and legal professionals (pp. 601-634). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Patrick, C.J., & Iacono, W.G. (1991a). A comparison of field and laboratory polygraphs in the detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 28, 632-638.

Patrick, C.J., & Iacono, W.G. (1991b). Validity of the control question polygraph test: The problem of sampling bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 229-238.

Saxe, L., Dougherty, D., & Cross, T. (1985). The validity of polygraph testing: Scientific analysis and public controversy. American Psychologist, 40, 55-366.

You currently have no access to this content. Visit the access options page to authenticate.