Automation of a screening polygraph test increases accuracy

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 187-199

  Honts, Charles R ^a   Amato, Susan ^b  

^a BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Automation; Employment screening; National security; Polygraph; Psychophysiological detection of deception

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947404402     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160600632843     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Amato, S., Honts, C. R., & Plaud, J. J. (1996). Effects of misinformation on the concealed knowledge test. Paper presentation at the 1996 meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
2. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Furedy, J. J. (1990). Theories and applications in the detection of deception. New York: Springer.
3. Bradley, M. T., & Janisse, M. P. (1981). Accuracy demonstrations, threat, and the detection of deception: Cardiovascular, electrodermal, and papillary measures. Psychophysiology, 18, 307-315.
4. Grimsley, D. L., & Yankee, W. J. (1986). The effect of multiple retests on examiner decisions in applicant screening polygraph examinations. Final Report NSA Contract MDA 904-85-C-A962. Charlotte, NC: A. Madley Corporation.
5. Honts, C. R. (1991). The emperor's new clothes: Application of polygraph tests in the American workplace. Forensic Reports, 4, 91-116.
6. Honts, C. R. (2004). The psychophysiological detection of deception. In P. Granhag, & L. Strömwall (Eds.), Detection of deception in forensic contexts. London: Cambridge University Press.
7. Honts, C. R., & Perry, M. V. (1992). Polygraph admissibility: Changes and challenges. Low and Human Behavior, 16, 357-379.
8. Honts, C. R., Devitt, M. K., Winbush, M., & Kircher, J. C. (1996). Mental and physical countermeasures reduce the accuracy of the concealed knowledge test. Psychophysiology, 33, 84-92.
9. Honts, C. R., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (2002). The scientific status of research on polygraph techniques: The case for polygraph tests. In D. L. Faigman, D. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony vol. 2. St Paul, MN: West.
10. Horowitz, S. W., Kircher, J. C., Honts, C. R., & Raskin, D. C. (1997). The role of comparison questions in physiological detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 34, 108-115.
11. Horvath, F. S. (1988). The utility of control questions and the effects of two control question types in field polygraph techniques. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 16, 198-209.
12. Kircher, J. C., & Raskin, D. C. (1988). Human versus computerized evaluations of polygraph data in a laboratory setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 291-302.
13. Kircher, J. C., & Raskin, D. C. (1996). Computerized polygraph system, version 2.20. Salt Lake City, UT: Scientific Assessment Technologies.
14. Kircher, J. C., & Raskin, D. C. (2002). Computer methods for the psychophysiological detection of deception. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Kircher, J. C., Raskin, D. C., Honts, C. R., & Horowitz, S. W. (1994). Generalizability of statistical classifiers for the detection of deception. [Abstract]. Psychophysiology, 31, S11.
16. Kircher, J. C., Woltz, D. J., Bell, B. G., & Bernhardt, P. C. (1998). Final report: Effects of audiovisual presentations of test questions during relevant-irrelevant polygraph examinations and new measures. Available from the first author.
17. Knight, J. (2004). The truth about lying. Nature, 428, 692-694.
18. National Research Council (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
19. Otter-Henderson, K., Honts, C. R., & Amato, S. L. (2002). Spontaneous countermeasures during polygraph examinations: An apparent exercise in futility. Polygraph, 31, 9-14.
20. Potkonjak, V., Radojicic, J., & Tzafestas, S. (2002). Modeling robot 'psycho-physical' state and reactions - A new option in human-robot communication. Part 1: Concept and background. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 35, 339-352.
21. Raskin, D. C., & Honts, C. R. (2002). The comparison question test. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Spector, J. M., & Ohrazda, C. (2004). Automating instructional design: Approaches and limitations. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (pp. 685-699).
23. Yankee, W. J., Giles, F., & Grimsley, D. L. (1987). A comparison between control question and relevant-irrelevant polygraph test formats in a screening situation. Final Report, NSA contract no. MDA904-86-R-2192.