Please help by moving some material from it into the body of the article. The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers. 2003 list of greatest inventions, described as inventions cia exam practice questions pdf “have had profound effects on human life for better or worse.
The review also warns against generalization from these findings to justify the use of polygraphs—”polygraph accuracy for screening purposes is almost certainly lower than what can be achieved by specific-incident polygraph tests in the field”—and notes some examinees may be able to take countermeasures to produce deceptive results. Polygraph testing is designed to analyze the physiological reactions of subjects. However, research has indicated that there is no specific physiological reaction associated with lying and that the brain activity and mechanisms associated with lying are unknown, making it difficult to identify factors that separate liars from truth tellers. Polygraph examiners also prefer to use their own individual scoring method, as opposed to computerized techniques, as they may more easily defend their own evaluations. The validity of polygraph testing is again called into question with the relevant-irrelevant testing technique, designed to gauge reactions of subjects against crime questions and other non-crime related questions. Studies have indicated that this questioning technique is not ideal, as many innocent subjects exert a heightened physiological reaction to the crime relevant questions.
The control question test, also known as the probable lie test, was developed to combat the issues with the relevant-irrelevant testing method. Although the relevant questions in the probable lie test are used to obtain a reaction from liars, the physiological reactions that “distinguish” liars may also occur in innocent individuals who fear a false detection or feel passionately that they did not commit the crime. Therefore, although a physiological reaction may be occurring, the reasoning behind the response may be different. Further examination of the probable lie test has indicated that it is biased against innocent subjects. Those who are unable to think of a lie related to the relevant question will automatically fail the test.
Polygraph examiners, or polygraphers, are licensed or regulated in some jurisdictions. The examiner typically begins polygraph test sessions with a pre-test interview to gain some preliminary information which will later be used to develop diagnostic questions. Then the tester will explain how the polygraph is supposed to work, emphasizing that it can detect lies and that it is important to answer truthfully. Then a “stim test” is often conducted: the subject is asked to deliberately lie and then the tester reports that he was able to detect this lie. Guilty subjects are likely to become more anxious when they are reminded of the test’s validity. However, there are risks of innocent subjects being equally or more anxious than the guilty.
Then the actual test starts. The different types of questions alternate. The test is passed if the physiological responses to the diagnostic questions are larger than those during the relevant questions. Criticisms have been given regarding the validity of the administration of the Control Question Technique. The CQT may be vulnerable to being conducted in an interrogation-like fashion. This kind of interrogation style would elicit a nervous response from innocent and guilty suspects alike. There are several other ways of administering the questions.
The administration of this test is given to prevent potential errors that may arise from the questioning style. The administrator tests the participant on their knowledge of the crime that would not be known to an innocent person. For example: “Was the crime committed with a . 45 or a 9 mm? The questions are in multiple choice and the participant is rated on how they react to the correct answer. If they react strongly to the guilty information, then proponents of the test believe that it is likely that they know facts relevant to the case.
This administration is considered more valid by supporters of the test because it contains many safeguards to avoid the risk of the administrator influencing the results. National Research Council has found no evidence of effectiveness. The utility among sex offenders is also poor, with insufficient evidence to support accuracy or improved outcomes in this population. Even using the high estimates of the polygraph’s accuracy, false positives do occur, and these people suffer the consequences of “failing” the polygraph. There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable” and “Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors’ knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion. The Supreme Court summarized their findings by stating that the use of polygraph was “no more accurate than coin flip. In 2005, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that “polygraphy did not enjoy general acceptance from the scientific community”.
Although defense attorneys often attempt to have the results of friendly CQTs admitted as evidence in court, there is no evidence supporting their validity and ample reason to doubt it. Members of scientific organizations who have the requisite background to evaluate the CQT are overwhelmingly skeptical of the claims made by polygraph proponents. Summarizing the consensus in psychological research, professor David W. A polygraph cannot differentiate anxiety caused by dishonesty and anxiety caused by something else. The polygraph is inherently subjective.
Even where the evidence seems to indicate that polygraph testing detects deceptive subjects better than chance, significant error rates are possible, and examiner and examinee differences and the use of countermeasures may further affect validity. The accuracy of the polygraph has been contested almost since the introduction of the device. The Polygraph and Lie Detection”. These studies did show that specific-incident polygraph testing, in a person untrained in counter-measures, could discern the truth at “a level greater than chance, yet short of perfection”. However, due to several flaws, the levels of accuracy shown in these studies “are almost certainly higher than actual polygraph accuracy of specific-incident testing in the field”. Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation”.