View full metadata
Cite as
-
Full Title (English)
Academicus International Scientific Journal
-
Publisher
Academicus International Scientific Journal
-
ISSN
20793715 (Printed Journal)
23091088 (Online Journal)
-
Journal Volume Number
19
-
Journal Issue Date(YYYY/MM)
2019/03
-
Full Title (English)
Polygraph Tests - Benefits and Challenges
-
By (author)
Affiliation
Higher Colleges of Technology Madinat Zayed Colleges, Abu Dhabi, UAE, Dr.
-
Number of Pages
10
-
First Page
146
-
Last Page
155
-
Language of text
English
-
Publication Date
2019/03
-
Copyright
2019Academicus
Main description
This research describes the working, benefits and challengers of polygraph tests. Polygraph tests are lie-detecting devices that help ascertain individuals’ honesty based on physiological indicators. The heart rate/blood pressure, respiration, and skin responses are the three indicators measured in the test to assess honest/deceitful behavior. The underlying assumption behind the working of polygraph tests is that the autonomic responses of dishonest individuals are distinctively different from those of honest people because the liars will be more nervous than truth tellers. Control Question Test (CQT), Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) or Concealed Information Test (CIT) and Neuroscience-Based Advanced Polygraph Tests are the important types of polygraph tests used today. Polygraph tests are used to detect truthfulness of individuals in such important fields as crime investigation departments, national security agencies, and business and industry. However, accuracy of polygraph tests and ethical issues associated with the tests are highly debated.
Reference list of
10.7336/academicus.2019.19.10
Unstructured Citation
Ben-Shakhar, G., Bar-Hillel, M., & Lieblich, I. (1986). Trial by polygraph: Scientific and juridical issues in lie detection.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 4(4), 459- 479. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2370040408
Unstructured Citation
Brown, T., & Murphy, E. (2010). Through a scanner darkly: Functional neuroimaging as evidence of a criminal defendant’s past mental states. Stanford Law Review, 62(4), 1119-1208. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/224079289?
Unstructured Citation
Gibson, M. (2001). The truth machine: Polygraphs, popular culture and the confessing body. Social Semiotics, 11(1), 61-73.
doi:10.1080/10350330120010966.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330124540
Unstructured Citation
Grubin, D., & Madsen, L. (2005). Lie detection and the polygraph: A historical review. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology,
16(2), 357-369. doi:10.10 80/14789940412331337353.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14789940412331337353
Unstructured Citation
Happel, M. D. (2005). Neuroscience and the detection of deception. Review of Policy Research, 22(5), 667-685. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00166.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00166.x
Unstructured Citation
Jensen, M. L., Meservy, T. O., Burgoon, J. K., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2010). Automatic, multimodal evaluation of human interaction.
Group Decision and Negotiation, 19(4), 367-389. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10726-009-9171- 0.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-009-9171-0
Unstructured Citation
Kaste, M. (2015). Trial of polygraph critic renews debate over tests’ accuracy. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2015/01/02/371925732/trial-ofpolygraph-critic-renews-debate-over-tests-accuracy.
Unstructured Citation
Kumar, S. (2012). Impact of galvanic skin response on emotional intelligence and psychological wellbeing of criminals. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 463-466. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1614160474?
Unstructured Citation
Meijer, E. H., Smulders, F. Y., Johnston, J. E., & Merckelbach, H. J. (2007). Combining skin conductance and forced choice
in the detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 44(5), 814-822. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00543.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00543.x
Unstructured Citation
Metzinger, T. (2006). Exposing LIES. Scientific American Mind, 17(5), 32-37. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier.
https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamericanmind1006-32
Unstructured Citation
Mitchell, G. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Security Management, 47(7), 158. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/231172659?
Unstructured Citation
Saxe, L. (1994). Detection of deception: Polygraph and integrity tests. Current Directions in Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell),
3(3), 69-73. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770416.
Unstructured Citation
Saxe, L., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1999). Admissibility of polygraph tests: The application of scientific standards post-daubert.
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5 (1), 203-223. DOI: 10.1037//1076-8971.5.1.203.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.5.1.203
Unstructured Citation
The truth about lie detectors (aka Polygraph tests). (2004). American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/research/ action/polygraph.aspx.
Unstructured Citation
Walczyk, J. J., Schwartz, J. P., Clifton, R., Adams, B., & et.al. (2005). Lying personto-person about life events: A cognitive
framework for lie detection. Personnel Psychology, 58(1), 141-141+. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/220137704?
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00484.x
Unstructured Citation
White, D. Jr. (2001). Ask me no questions, tell me no lies: Examining the uses and misuses of the polygraph. Public Personnel
Management, 30(4), 483-493. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/215929568?
https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600103000405