|
Polygraph Links Polygraph-related Sites and Pages American Polygraph
Association. Back issues of the
APA quarterly Polygraph and other APA publications may be ordered from
this site. Federation of American Scientists Polygraph Resource Page. Provides government documents as well as
commentary on polygraphs. Beijing Police
College Polygraph Center. In
Chinese. Israel Polygraph
Examiner Association. In
Hebrew. Limited English content. The James
Madison Project. Dedicated to
promoting government accountability and the reduction of secrecy, this site
includes a "polygraph documents vault." The site's important links section also contains useful information on polygraph
abuses. NoPolygraph.com. This site provides a wealth of information on
polygraph screening, especially as used by the FBI. In the process of merging
with AntiPolygraph.org Polygraph Association
of South Africa. In English. Polygraph for Screening. This web page maintained by Professor Charles R.
Honts of The Polygraph
Place. A website run by
polygraphers for polygraphers. Includes a message board, but that board is
censored. Posts that openly reject the validity of polygraphs are deleted. Sting Publications. Doug Williams' manual, "How to Sting the
Polygraph" may be ordered via this website. Mr. Williams also provides a
frequently asked questions list and testimonials from his customers. StopPolygraph.com. Provides documentation of polygraph abuse, especially
by the U.S. Department of
Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI). Located at the U.S. Department of Energy. This Department of Energy page provides the
Department's polygraph examination regulation and implementation plan, as well
as transcripts of the Department's public hearings on polygraph policy. It
also provides other government documents relevant to polygraph policy.
How to beat a sting http://archive.aclu.org/library/pbp4.html
ACLU American
Polygraph Association http://www.bccla.org/positions/privacy/84polygraph.html British Civil Liberties Association http://www.law-forensic.com/polygraph_3.htm http://truth.boisestate.edu/polygraph/CJLF.html Supreme Court 1998 http://psych.utoronto.ca/~furedy/poldil.htm International Journal of Psychophysiology DOD
Polygraph Institute http://truth.boisestate.edu/polygraph/cordoba.html Ninth
Circuit Case http://truth.boisestate.edu/polygraph/bowen.html Polygraph
in http://www.stoppolygraph.com/polygraph/index.htm Anti
Polygraph web site http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/index.html DOD
& DOE Polygraph Program http://www.apa.org/releases/liedetector.html Survey
of Psychologists on Polygraphs http://www.daubertontheweb.com/polygraphers.htm Some
Polygraph court cases http://truth.boisestate.edu/jcaawp/default.html Journal
of Credibility http://campus.umr.edu/police/cvsa/cvsamenu.htm Information
on CVSA http://campus.umr.edu/police/cvsa/compar9.htm
COMPUTER VOICE STRESS ANALYZER Comparison Study Polygraph Manufacturers PDD &
Psychology Testing Research Center, Polygraph Articles American Civil Liberties The ACLU has long favored protective legislation
against indiscriminate "lie detector" testing in the American
workplace, not only because it is unreliable, but also because it is an
extreme invasion of privacy. For example, in order to establish
"normal" physiological reactions of the person being tested,
"lie detector" examiners ask questions that purposely embarrass,
frighten and humiliate workers. An ACLU lawsuit in l987 revealed that state
employees in American Psychological Association. "Psychologists
Surveyed on Lie Detectors Say Most Are Not Valid: Not Scientifically Sound
and Can Be Easily Deceived."
News release dated 10 June 1997. Beardsley, Tim. "Truth or Consequences: A polygraph screening program
raises questions about the science of lie detection," Scientific American, October 1999. Aldrich Ames, passed routine polygraph exams as an
employee of the Central Intelligence Agency, as did another former CIA
employee and convicted spy, Harold J. Nicholson. ... He [Edward Curran, the Department of Energy's head
of counterintelligence] hotly denies that the polygraph failed to raise
suspicions about The B.C. Civil Liberties Association believes that
there is convincing evidence to suggest that the use of the polygraph is
arbitrary, subjective, biased toward accusations of guilt and claims of very
high validity are scientifically indefensible. However, even if one is not
willing to be persuaded by evidence on these matters, one must admit, at the
very least, that there is no scientific opinion whatsoever concerning the
validity of polygraph testing. In fact, there is extremely wide divergence
over the validity of the test. Budiansky, Stephen. "Lies that bind," New Scientist, 19 June 1999. EARLY THIS CENTURY, a box with a few wires sticking
out and flickering needles that jumped across a chart recorder would probably
have impressed the average person. Electric gadgets were newish inventions
back then. An uncritical enthusiasm for science was in the air. These are the
most charitable explanations for the origin of the lie detector. Faller, Kathleen Coulborn. "The
Polygraph, Its Use in Cases of Alleged Sexual Abuse: An Exploratory
Study" (74 kb PDF).
Excerpt: Results: Polygraph findings were unrelated to other
evidence of likelihood of sexual abuse, that is to the child's statements or
demonstrations of sexual abuse, medical evidence, psychological symptoms, or
indicators of sexual abuse from sources other than the child. When alleged
offenders passed polygraphs, criminal prosecution was not sought. However,
failing polygraphs was not predictive of criminal prosecution. Decisions by
child protective services to substantiate or not were not consistently
related to any indicators of possible sexual abuse. Decisions by professional
evaluators about sexual abuse were best predicted by children's psychological
symptoms. Fitzpatrick, Robert B. "Lie Detectors Belong in Museums, Not in Sexual
Harassment Trials" (188 kb
PDF file). From the conclusion: The use of polygraph results should not be
permitted in civil trials. In this regard, even if both parties agree to
stipulate as to the polygraph results, courts should not admit the results
into evidence due to issues concerning inaccuracy and prejudicial effects. In
particular, there is a tremendous potential for abuse in sexual harassment
trials. Although the typical sexual harassment case may result in a swearing
match between the alleged victim and the alleged harasser, the introduction
of polygraph results as evidence would be an invitation to disaster for many
plaintiffs. While at first blush plaintiffs' attorneys may salivate at the
thought of putting a polygrapher on the stand to testify that the plaintiff
is a truth teller, one can foresee that, given the imbalance of resources,
defendants will trot out polygrahers, more often than plaintiffs. Furedy, John J. "The CQT Polygrapher's Dilemma: Logico-Ethical
Considerations for Psychophysiological Practitioners and Researchers," International Journal of Psychophysiology,
Vol. 15 (1993), pp. 263-67. Abstract: The so-called "control" question
"test" (CQT) has been criticized on methodological and ethical
grounds by psychophysiologists. The ethical analyses have focussed on the
possibility that the CQT's interrogative features may elicit false
confessions, but an empirical problem is that the rate of these false
confessions is difficult to establish. In this conceptual note I raise a *logico-*
ethical problem for the CQT, called The Polygrapher's Dilemma (PD). The two
horns of PD are damage the innocent examinee classified as deceptive, and
damage to those examinee's psychological well being who are classified as
non-deceptive to the relevant questions, and who are not even debriefed
concerning their feelings of unease about issues raised by the comparison,
so-called "control" questions. Although there may be arguments
about which of the PD's two horns are more serious, there is no doubt that
both are, in an absolute sense, ethically negative. Nor is there an ethically
justifiable third alternative available. It is also contended that not only
practitioners but also researchers (who use the CQT in laboratory,
"mock-crime" situations) are affected by PD. Finally, I note that
PD exists only for the CQT procedure, and not for the more standardized and
scientifically based Guilty Knowledge Technique. Furedy, John J. "Some elementary distinctions among, and comments
concerning, the 'control' question 'test' (CQT) polygrapher's many problems:
A reply to Honts, Kircher, and Raskin ," International Journal of Psychophysiology,
Vol. 21 (1996), No. 2-3 (spring/summer). From the abstract: Although the title of Honts et al.'s paper suggests that it will be a reply to the specific, logico-ethical
problem of the CQT polygraph (the Polygrapher's Dilemma), the text deals only
tangentially with this logico-ethical problem, and engages, instead, in a
diffuse discussion of related, but different, ethical, methodological, and
empirical problems of the CQT polygraph. This paper seeks to restore some
clarity to the discussion by reminding us of certain basic distinctions among
logico-ethical, ethical, methodological, and empirical problems. In the light
of these distinctions, the *relevant* literature, and the essential
characteristics of the CQT (which continue to be obscured by the use of
systematically misleading terminology), I stand by my claim that, on the
ethico-logical grounds (i.e., the CQT Polygrapher's Dilemma formulated in my
1993 paper [1]), as well as ethical, methodological, and evidential grounds
(which have been detailed elsewhere), the CQT should be abandoned as a
serious method of *detecting* deception, no matter how useful it may be to
practitioners as an interrogatory prop. Furedy, John J. "The North American Polygraph and Psychophysiology:
Disinterested, Uninterested, and Interested Perspectives," International Journal of Psychophysiology,
Vol. 21 (1996), No. 2-3 (spring/summer). Abstract: From both a scientific and an applied
psychophysiological point of view, the related but different ideas of using
physiological measures to differentiate and detect deception are of
considerable potential interest. This paper's primary concern is with
psychophysiological detection, and it is mainly focussed on the North
American "Control" Question "Test" (CQT). The treatment
is disinterested in the sense that there is an insistence on employing
fundamental terms in a logically consistent way. Following a detailed
description of the CQT, and an analysis of it and related psychophysiological
deception procedures, it is suggested that, by and large, the North American
research psychophysiological community has failed to measure up to the
standards of disinterestedness with respect to the psychophysiological detection
of deception. Instead it has adopted an _uninterested_ perspective, which has
allowed the _interested_ community of professionals who employ the CQT to
hood-wink both themselves and others (including the American Psychological
Association) that the CQT is a controversial, but scientifically-based, test
for detecting deception. As the most cognate organization, the international
psychophysiological research community needs to take a more active and
disinterested role in this salient purported application of
psychophysiology--the detection of deception. Government Executive Magazine. "Agencies, employees spar over lie detector
tests."11 September 2000.
An unusually well-researched article on polygraph security screening. Within a few days of each other in June, Energy
Secretary Bill Richardson and Attorney General Janet Reno had to respond to
internal security breaches. Both were faced with the option of hooking their
employees up to polygraph equipment that would measure their blood pressure,
pulse, respiration, and sweat gland activity-and ostensibly would uncover
guilt. Honts, Charles R., Kircher, John C., & Raskin,
David C. "Polygrapher's Dilemma or Psychologist's Chimaera: A
Reply to Furedy's Logico-ethical Considerations for Psychophysiological
Practitioners and Researchers," International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 20, pp.
199-207. Abstract: We respond to Furedy's (1993) article in this journal where he raised an issue he
referred to as the "Polygrapher's Dilemma." Furedy claimed that the
control question test, the most commonly applied psychophysiological
detection of deception test, is inherently subjective and harmful to subjects
in both the field and the laboratory. Fortunately, Furedy's arguments were
based on inaccurate representations of the control question test and on
flawed logic. To correct Furedy's misrepresentations, we present an accurate
description of how the control question test is used and evaluated. We then
examine the results of empirical research that address Furedy's concerns.
Furedy's concerns are found to be lacking on almost all counts. Finally, we
discuss the findings from several studies that Furedy failed to mention but
are directly relevant to the issues he raised. (See also Furedy's reply to Honts, et. al.) McCarthy, Susan. "Passing the polygraph: Professional criminals are
the ones most likely to beat the lie detector," Salon, 2 March 2000. But for a better explanation
of how to pass a polygraph "test," see chapter four of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. McCarthy, Susan. "The Truth about the Polygraph," Salon, 2 March 2000. This is one of the few
published articles that exposes the trickery on which polygraph
"testing" depends. The author also discusses polygraph policy. The
following is an excerpt: Why does the Department of Energy want to do polygraph
testing if it's junk science? Is it so stupid it doesn't know that? It is not stupid, though some congresspeople may
be. When the scientists at the nuclear labs went public
with their protest against being given polygraphs, retired Air Force Gen. Eugene
Habiger, in charge of the DOE's security, told the Polygraphs don't have to work to be a deterrent.
People just have to believe that they work and can reveal whether they have
committed crimes. The DOE doesn't have to believe they work, either. Stein, Jeff. "Does the CIA stereotype Jews as security
risks?" Salon,
June, 1998. Discusses especially the case of CIA lawyer Adam P. Ciralsky: A lawyer for the Central Intelligence Agency,
suspended from duty under suspicion of unauthorized contact with Israel, is
preparing an unprecedented suit challenging the validity of the spy agency's
"lie detector" test, which he claims stereotypes Jews as security
risks. Stein, Jeff. "Lies, damned lies and polygraphs: 'Tea leaves and
witchcraft' are keeping hundreds of qualified, innocent people out of
government jobs," Salon,
April 1997. Stein, Jeff. "Spies and lies: Scientist Wen Ho Lee passed a
polygraph test, but the feds want to depend more on them to detect
espionage," Salon,
27 May 1999. Stone, LeRoy A. "Using the Polygraph to Detect Lying and Deception:
The Hoax of the Century." Electronic
Journal of Forensic Psychonomics, 2003. The author is a retired National
Security Agency senior clinical psychologist. Excerpt: ...[W]hen I was employed by the Federal
intelligence agency, I had considerable contact with many of that agency¹s
polygraphers, many of whom became 'at-work' friends. With most of these
associations, I usually was able to, at least once, ask whether they thought
they might be able to obtain the results they were after, even without ever
turning on the machine (i.e., the polygraph). Almost all, admitted that not
only that they believed that any good polygrapher could be successful even
with a machine that was never turned on, but that in some cases they had
actually proven to themselves that one could successfully carry off such a
charade. To me this could be considered that the polygraphers themselves were
fully aware that what they were doing was interrogation and that the
polygraph merely was a prop that could be used to encourage the subject
individual to confess. Walters, Scott. "The Rise in the Use of Countermeasures in Pre
Employment and Specific Issue PDD Tests," Today, there is a vast amount of reference
materials available on the subject of PDD testing. These reference materials
are being published in an effort to improve the validity and accuracy of the
Polygraph Examination, and to improve standards within the community of
Polygraph Examiners as a whole. Unfortunately, it is also providing
individuals with a greater knowledge of how the examination is administered
and how the results are determined. How many times have you heard a subject
make reference to his/her understanding of what the Comparison question is
and why it is used. Thus, rendering any attempt at a Zone Comparison
Technique (ZCT) all but useless as a means of determining the truthfulness of
that subject. (For more on the ZCT polygraph format, see George Maschke's post to the Antipolygraph.org message
board dated 17 November 2000.) Legal Resources Americans for
Effective Law Enforcement: Polygraph Exams. This page provides a list of legal cases
upholding and rejecting mandatory polygraph "tests," as well as
admissibility and other legal issues. Criminal
Justice Legal Foundation Amicus Curiae brief in U.S. v. Scheffer (United States Supreme Court No. 96-1133). Excerpt
from summary of argument: The polygraph is a scientifically invalid machine
that does not deserve the constitutional protection given by the court below.
The problems with polygraphy are old and continuous; polygraphers and
polygraphs have a long history of promising much more than they deliver.
There is no reason to believe that recent innovations change the validity of
the polygraph as a lie detector, as the last substantial changes in polygraph
techniques are over 30 years old. The polygraph is not a valid lie detector. Its greatest
problem is that there is no valid theoretical explanation for the polygraph
as a lie detector. Because there is no specific physiological response for
lying, polygraphy must rely on an indirect method measuring changes in
relative stress levels to determine whether the suspect is lying. The problem
with this measure is that many other emotional states such as fear or anger
can cause such changes. Because the polygraph cannot discriminate between
these emotional states and deception, any attempt by a polygrapher to
classify a subject as truthful or deceptive is little more than a guess. DaubertOnTheWeb.com. The linked page on this website provides summaries of federal cases
where rulings on polygraph admissibility were made. Henseler, Timothy B. "A
Critical Look at the Admissibility of Polygraph Evidence in the Wake of
Daubert: The Lie Detector Fails the Test." Published in Catholic University Law Review,
Summer 1997. Imwinkelried, Edward J. and James R. McCall. "Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary
Objections to the Admission of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations," (168 kb PDF) Wake Forest Law Review, Vol.
32 (1997), No. 4, pp. 1045-1081. Abstract: The Supreme Court's 1993 decision in Daubert v.
Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals opened the door for courts to reconsider the
general rule, adopted after Frye v. United States, that held polygraph
evidence inadmissible. As courts become increasingly willing to reject the
per se exclusion of polygraph evidence under rules relating to the
admissibility of scientific evidence, they must grapple with other potential
evidentiary objections to the evidence. These objections have gone largely
unconsidered under the per se rule of exclusion. In this article, Professors
Imwinkelried and McCall consider several "nonscientific evidence"
objections to the admissibility of exculpatory polygraph evidence offered by
an accused. The authors argue that objec-tions based on relevancy
considerations, the hearsay rule, and Rule 608's limitations on evidence
regarding a witness's character for truthfulness should be rejected. They
conclude that the admissibility of polygraph evidence should turn solely on a
court's assessment of the evidence's empirical validity under Daubert. Polygraph Law Resource Page. Maintained by Professor Charles R. Honts of Boise
State University, this page provides transcripts of polygraph-related
testimony and other legal documents. Labor Organizations Missouri Union of Law
Enforcement. MULE 57 is a
police officers' benevolent association that opposes polygraph
"testing." The MULE site includes a form which members have designed to protect officers
that are forced to submit to polygraph "exams." Society of Professional
Scientists and Engineers.
Provides links to documents regarding the Department of Energy's polygraph
screening program. Virginia
Coalition of Police and Deputy Sheriffs. The Virginia COPS organization is working hard on the state level to
prevent police officers from being forced into submitting to polygraphs.
Their site has a page condemning polygraphs.
|
|
|
