Efficacy of repeated psychophysiological detection of deception testing

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 1016-1023

  Dollins, Andrew B ^a   Cestaro, Victor L ^a   Pettit, Donald J ^b  

^a Dept of Defense Polygraph Institute ^*  (United States)

^b CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Forensic science; Galvanic skin resistance; Habituation; Heart rate; Peak of tension; Psychophysiological detection of deception; Repeated measures; Respiration; Statistical analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREATHING; CARDIOVASCULAR RESPONSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRODERMAL RESPONSE; FORENSIC MEDICINE; HEART BEAT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY; SKIN CONDUCTANCE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0031658174     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1520/jfs14350j     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Krapohl D, Sturm S. Terminology reference for the science of psychophysiological detection of deception. Chattanooga (TN): American Polygraph Association, in press.
2. Podlesny J, Raskin D. Physiological measures and the detection of deception. Psychol Bull 1977;34:782-99.
3. Yankee WJ. The current status of research in forensic psychophysiology and its application in the psychophysiological detection of deception. J Forensic Sci 1995;40:63-68.
4. Lykken DT. A tremor in the blood: Uses and abuses of the lie detector. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981;1-8.
5. Office of Technology Assessment. Scientific validity of polygraph testing: A research review and evaluation - a technical memorandum. Washington (DC): Office of Technology Assessment; 1983 Nov. Report No.: OTA-TM-H-15, 29-43.
6. Furedy JJ. Lie detection as a psychophysiological differentiation: some fine lines. Coles MGH, Donchin E, Porges SW, editors. Psychophysiology: Systems, Processes, and Applications. New York: Guilford Press, 1986;683-701.
7. Campbell RJ. Psychiatric Dictionary (6th ed). New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
8. Barland GH, Raskin DC. An evaluation of field techniques in detection of deception. Psychophysiol 1975;12:321-30.
9. Bersh PJ. A validation study of polygraph examiner judgments. J Appl Psychol 1969;53:399-403.
10. Horvath F, Reid J. The reliability of polygraph examiner diagnosis of truth and deception. J Crim Law Crim & Pol Sci 1971;62: 276-81.
11. Horvath F. The effect of selected variables on interpretation of polygraph records. J Appl Psychol 1977;62:127-36.
12. Hunter FL, Ash P. The accuracy and consistency of polygraph examiners' diagnoses. J Pol Sci & Adm 1973;1:370-5.
13. Slowik SM, Buckley JP. Relative accuracy of polygraph examiner diagnosis of respiration, blood pressure, and GSR recordings. J Pol Sci & Adm 1975;3:305-9.
14. Ellson DG, Davis RC, Saltzman IJ, Burke CJ. Accuracy of detection and the effect of repetition. A report of research on detection of deception. Bloomington (IN): Indiana University, Department of Psychology; 1952 Tech Rep Contract Number N60NR-18011.
15. Abrams S. The complete polygraph handbook. Lexington (MA): Lexington Books; 1989.
16. Elaad E, Ben-Shakhar G. Effects of motivation and verbal response type on psychophysiological detection of information. Psychophysiol 1989;26:442-51.
17. Lieblich I, Naftali G, Shumueli J, Kugelmass S. Efficiency of GSR detection of information with repeated presentation of series of stimuli in two motivational states. J Appl Psychol 1974;59:113-5.
18. Balloun KD, Holmes DS. Effects of repeated examinations on the ability to detect guilt with a polygraphic examination: A laboratory experiment with a real crime. J Appl Psychol 1979;64:316-22.
19. Lykken DT. The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. J Appl Psychol 1960;44:258-62.
20. Grimsley DL, Yankee WJ. The effect of multiple retests on examiner decisions in applicant screening polygraph examinations. Charlotte (NC): A. Madley Corporation; 1986 National Security Agency Contract No. MDA 904-85-C-A962.
21. Yankee WJ. Test and re-test accuracy with a psychophysiological detection of deception test. Ft. McClellan (AL): Department of Defense Polygraph Institute; 1993. Adopted from Yankee WJ, Grimsly DL. The effect of a prior polygraph test on a subsequent polygraph test. Charlotte (NC): University of North Carolina; 1986 National Security Agency Contract No. MDA 904-84-C-4249.
22. Yankee WJ. Test and re-test accuracy with a psychophysiological detection of deception test. Ft. McClellan (AL): Department of Defense Polygraph Institute; 1993. Adopted from Yankee WJ, Grimsly DL. The effect of a prior polygraph test on a subsequent polygraph test. Charlotte (NC): University of North Carolina; 1986 National Security Agency Contract No. MDA 904-84-C-4249.
23. Reid JE. A revised questioning technique in lie detection tests. J Crim Law & Crim 1947;37:542-7.
24. Cestaro VL, Dollins AB. An analysis of voice responses for the detection of deception. Polygraph 1996;25:15-34.
25. Timm H. The effect of placebos and feedback on the detection of deception (US Department of Justice Contract No. 78-NI-AX-0028). East Lansing (MI): Michigan State University; 1979.
26. Timm H. Analyzing deception from respiration patterns. J Pol Sci & Adm 1982;10:47-51.
27. Timm H. Effect of altered outcome expectancies stemming from placebo and feedback treatments on the validity of the guilty knowledge technique. J Appl Psychol 1982;67:391-400.
28. Keppel G. Design and analysis, a researcher's handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, (NJ): Prentice Hall, 1991.
29. Winer BJ. Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.
30. Williams RH, Zimmerman DW. Statistical power analysis and reliability of measurement. J Gen Psychol 1989;116:359-69.
31. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
32. Koele P. Calculating power in analysis of variance. Psychol Bull 1982;92:513-6.
33. Laubscher NF. Normalizing the noncentral t and F distributions. Ann Math Statist 1960;31:1105-12.
34. Bavry JL. Stat-Power statistical design analysis system. Chicago: Scientific Software, Inc., 1991.
35. Geisser S, Greenhouse SW. An extension of Box's results on the use of the F distribution in multivariate analysis. Ann Math Statist 1958;29:885-91.
36. Greenhouse SW, Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959;24:95-112.
37. Iacono WG, Boisvenu, GA, Fleming JA. Effects of diazepam and methylphenidate on the electrodermal detection of guilty knowledge. J Appl Psychol 1984;69:289-99.
38. Ben-Shakhar G, Lieblich I. The dichotomization theory for differential autonomie responsivity reconsidered. Psychophysiol 1982; 19:277-81.
39. Furedy JJ, Ben-Shakhar G. The roles of deception, intention to deceive, and motivation to avoid detection in the psychophysiological detection of guilty knowledge. Psychophysiol 1991;28:163-71.
40. Furedy JJ, Gigliotti F, Ben-Shakhar G. Electrodermal differentiation in deception: the effect of choice versus no choice of deceptive items. J Psychophysiol 1994;18:13-22.
41. Iacono WG, Cerri AM, Patrick CJ, Fleming JAE. Use of antianxiety drugs as countermeasures in the detection of guilty knowledge. J Appl Psychol 1992;77:60-4.
42. Kugelmass S, Lieblich I. The effects of realistic stress and procedural interference in experimental lie detections. J Appl Psychol 1966;50:211-6.
43. Podlesny J, Raskin D. Effectiveness of techniques and physiological measures in detection of deception. Psychophysiol 1978;15: 344-59.
44. Thackray R, Orne M. A comparison of physiological indices in detection of deception. Psychophysiol 1968;4:329-39.
45. Committee on Government Operations. The use of polygraphs and similar devices by federal agencies (Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, 93rd congress, 2nd session). Washington (DC): U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.