Deception and nondeception in guilty knowledge and guilty actions polygraph tests

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 81, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 153-160

  Bradley, M T ^a   MacLaren, V V ^a   Carle, S B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030541992     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.2.153     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Balloun, K. D., & Holmes, D. S. (1979). Effects of repeated examinations on the ability to detect guilt with a polygraphic examination: A laboratory experiment with a real crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 316-322.
2. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Furedy, J. J. (1990). Theories and applications in the detection of deception. New York: Springer-Verlag.
3. Bradley, M. T., & Rettinger, J. (1992). Awareness of crime-relevant information and the Guilty Knowledge Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 55-59.
4. Bradley, M. T., & Warfield, J. F. (1984). Innocence, information, and the Guilty Knowledge Test in the detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 21, 683-689.
5. Elaad, E. (1990). Detection of guilty knowledge in real-life criminal investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 521-529.
6. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1989). Effects of motivation and verbal response type on psychophysiological detection in the Guilty Knowledge Test. Psychophysiology, 26, 442-451.
7. Elaad, E., Ginton, A., & Jungman, N. (1992). Detection measures in real-life criminal guilty knowledge tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 757-767.
8. Furedy, J. J. (1991). Alice-in-Wonderland terminological usage in, and communicational concerns about, that peculiarly American flight of technological fancy, the CQT polygraph. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 26, 241-247.
9. Furedy, J. J., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). The roles of deception, intention to deceive, and motivation to avoid detection in the psychophysiological detection of guilty knowledge. Psychophysiology, 28, 163-171.
10. Furedy, J. J., Davis, C., & Gurevich, M. (1988). Differentiation of deception as a psychological process: A psychophysiological approach. Psychophysiology, 25, 683-688.
11. Furedy, J. J., & Heslegrave, R. J. (1991). The forensic use of the polygraph: A psychophysiological analysis of current trends and future prospects. Advances in Psychophysiology, 4, 157-189.
12. Furedy, J. J., Posner, R. T., & Vincent, A. (1991). Electrodermal differentiation of deception: Perceived accuracy and perceived memorial content manipulations. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 11, 91-97.
13. Giesen, M., & Rollison, M. A. (1980). Guilty knowledge versus innocent associations: Effects of trait anxiety and stimulus context on skin conductance. Journal of Research in Personality, 14, 1-11.
14. Gustafson, L. A., & Orne, M. T. (1965). The effects of verbal responses on the laboratory detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 7, 10-13.
15. Horneman, C. J., & O'Gorman, J. G. (1985). Detectability in the card test as a function of the subject's verbal response. Psychophysiology, 22, 330-333.
16. Iacono, W. G., & Patrick, C. J. (1988). Assessing deception: Polygraph techniques. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (pp. 205-233). New York: Guilford Press.
17. Kirk, R. E. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
18. Kugelmass, S., Lieblich, I., & Bergman, Z. (1967). The role of "lying" in psychophysiological detection. Psychophysiology, 3, 312-315.
19. Lykken, D. T. (1959). The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 385-388.
20. Lykken, D. T. (1960). The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 258-262.
21. Lykken, D. T. (1974). Psychology and the lie detector industry. American Psychologist, 29, 725-739.
22. Lykken, D. T. (1981). A tremor in the blood: Uses and abuses of the lie detector. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23. Lykken, D. T. (1991). Why (some) Americans believe in the lie detector while others believe in the Guilty Knowledge Test. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 26, 214-222.
24. O'Toole, D., Yuille, J. C., Patrick, C. J., & Iacono, W. G. (1994). Alcohol and the physiological detection of deception: Arousal and memory influences. Psychophysiology, 31, 253-263.
25. Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (1991). Comments on Furedy and Heslegrave: Misconceptions, misdescriptions, and misdirections. Advances in Psychophysiology, 4, 215-223.
26. Saxe, L., Dougherty, D., & Cross, T. (1985). The validity of polygraph testing. American Psychologist, 40, 355-366.
27. Stern, R. M., Breen, J. P., Watanabe, T., & Perry, B. S. (1981). Effect of feedback of physiological information on responses to innocent associations and guilty knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 677-681.
28. Vincent, A., & Furedy, J. J. (1992). Electrodermal differentiation of deception: Potentially confounding and influencing factors. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 13, 129-136.
29. Waid, W. M., Orne, E. C., Cook, M. R., & Orne, M. T. (1978). Effects of attention, as indexed by subsequent memory, on electrodermal detection of information. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 728-733.
30. Wilson, J. Q., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1985). Crime & human nature. New York: Simon & Schuster.