The case against the use of polygraph examinations to monitor post-conviction sex offenders

Legal and Criminological Psychology

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 191-207

  Ben Shakhar, Gershon ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROL QUESTION TECHNIQUE; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FORENSIC MEDICINE; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; GUILTY KNOWLEDGE TEST; HUMAN; INTERVIEW BIAS; MULTICHANNEL RECORDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCREENING TEST; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL CRIME; STANDARDIZATION; VALIDITY;

EID: 50849096109     PISSN: 13553259     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135532508X298577     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Abrams, S. (1999). A response to Honts on the issue of the discussion of questions between charts. Polygraph, 28, 223-228.
2. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Backster, C. (1963). Polygraph professionalization through technique standardization. Law and Order, 11, 63-64.
4. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1977). A further study of dichotomization theory in detection of information. Psychophysiology, 14, 408-413.
5. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1980). Habituation of the orienting response to complex sequences of stimuli. Psychophysiology, 17, 524-534.
6. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1989). Non conventional methods in personnel selection. In P. Herriot (Ed.), Handbook of assessment in organizations: Methods and practice for recruitment and appraisal (pp. 469-485). Chichester: Willy.
7. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). Future prospects of psychophysiological detection: Replacing the CQT by the GKT. In J. R. Jennings, P. K. Ackles, & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Advances in psychophysiology (Vol. 4, pp. 283-289). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
8. Ben-Shakhar, G. (2002). A critical review of the control questions test (CQT). In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 103-126). San Diego: Academic Press.
9. Ben-Shakhar, G., Bar-Hillel, M., & Lieblich, I. (1986). Trial by polygraph: Scientific and juridical issues in lie detection. Behavioral Science and the Law, 4, 459-479.
10. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Dolev, K. (1996). Psychophysiological detection through the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of mental countermeasures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 273-281.
11. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Furedy, J. J. (1990). Theories and applications in the detection of deception: A psychophysiological and international perspective. New York: Springer.
12. Chapman, L. J., & Chapman, J. P. (1982). Test results are what you think they are. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 239-248). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). Effects of mental countermeasures on psychophysiological detection in the guilty knowledge test. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 11, 99-108.
14. Elaad, E., Ginton, A., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1994). The effects of prior expectations and outcome knowledge on polygraph examiners' decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 279-292.
15. Elaad, E., Ginton, A., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1998). The role of prior expectations in polygraph examiners decisions. Psychology, Crime and Law, 4, 1-16.
16. English, K. (1998). The containment approach: An aggressive strategy for the community management of adult sex offenders. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 4, 218-235.
17. Fiedler, K., Schmid, J., & Stahl, T. (2002). What is the current truth about polygraph lie detection? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 313-324.
18. Furedy, J. J., & Heslegrave, R. J. (1991). The forensic use of the polygraph: A psychophysiological analysis of current trends and future prospects. In J. R. Jennings, P. K. Ackles, & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Advances in psychophysiology (Vol. 4, pp. 157-189). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
19. Furedy, J. J., & Liss, J. (1986). Countering confessions induced by the polygraph: Of confessionals and psychological rubber hoses. Criminal Law Quarterly, 29, 92-114.
20. Ginton, A., Daie, N., Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1982). A method for evaluating the use of the polygraph in a real life situation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 131-137.
21. Grubin, D. (2008). The case for polygraph testing of sex offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 177-189.
22. Grubin, D., & Madsen, L. (2006). Accuracy and utility of post-conviction polygraph testing of sex offenders. British Journal of Psychiatry, 188, 479-483.
23. Grubin, D., Madsen, L., Parsons, S., Sosnowski, D., & Waberg, B. (2004). A prospective study of the impact of polygraphy on high-risk behaviors in adult sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 16, 209-222.
24. 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.
25. Honts, C. R., & Perry, M. V. (1992). Polygraph admissibility: Changes and challenges. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 357-379.
26. Honts, C. K., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (1987). Effects of physical countermeasures and their electromyographic detection during polygraph tests for deception. Journal of Psychophysiology, 1, 241-247.
27. Honts, C. R., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (1994). Mental and physical countermeasures reduce the accuracy of polygraph tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 252-259.
28. Honts, C. R., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. (2002). The scientific status of research on polygraph techniques: The case for the admissibility of the results of polygraph examinations. In D. L. Faigman, D. H. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony (Vol. 2, pp. 446-483). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
29. Iacono, W. G. (1991). Can we determine the accuracy of polygraph tests? In J. R. Jennings, P. K. Ackles, & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Advances in psychophysiology (Vol. 4, pp. 1-101). London: Jessica Kingsley.
30. Iacono, W. G., & Lykken, D. T. (2002). The scientific status of research on polygraph techniques: The case against polygraph tests. In D. L. Faigman, D. H. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence. The law and science of expert testimony (Vol. 2, pp. 483-538). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
31. 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.
32. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
33. Kleiner, M. (2002). Physiological detection of deception in psychological perspectives: A theoretical proposal. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 127-182). New York: Academic Press.
34. Kokish, R. (2003). The current role of post-conviction sex offender polygraph testing in sex offender treatment. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 12, 175-194.
35. Kokish, R., Levenson, J. S., & Blasingame, G. D. (2005). Post-conviction sex offender polygraph examination: Client-reported perceptions of utility and accuracy. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17, 211-221.
36. Kubis, J. F. (1962). Studies in lie detection: Computer feasibility considerations. Technical Report #62-205, prepared for the Air Force Systems Command. Contract No. AF 30 (602) -2270, project No. 5534, Fordham University.
37. Lykken, D. T. (1959). The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 385-388.
38. Lykken, D. T. (1960). The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 258-262.
39. Lykken, D. T. (1974). Psychology and the lie detection industry. American Psycbologist, 29, 725-739.
40. Lykken, D. T. (1998). A tremor in the blood: Uses and abuses of the lie detector. New York: Plenum.
41. McGrath, R. J., Cuniming, G. F., & Burchard, B. L. (2003). Current practices and trends in sexual abuser management: The Safer Society 2002 Nationwide Survey. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press.
42. Meijer, E. H., Verschuere, B., Merckelbach, H. L. G. J., & Crombez, G. (in press). Sex offender management using the polygraph: A critical review. Psychology, Crime and Law.
43. National Research Council (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Committee to review the scientific evidence on the polygraph. Division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
44. Raskin, D. C. (1986). The polygraph in 1986: Scientific, professional, and legal issues surrounding applications and acceptance of polygraph evidence. Utah Law Review, 60, 29-74.
45. Raskin, D. C. (1989). Polygraph techniques for the detection of deception. In D. C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence (pp. 247-296). New York: Springer.
46. Reid, J. E., & Inbau, F. E. (1977). Truth and deception: The polygraph ('Lie Detection') technique. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.
47. Saxe, L. (1991). Lying: Thoughts of an applied social psychologist. American Psychologist, 46, 409-415.
48. Saxe, L., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1999). Admissibility of polygraph tests: The application of scientific standards post-Daubert. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 5, 203-223.
49. Saxe, L., Dougherty D., & Cross, T. P. (1983). Scientific validity of polygraph testing (OTA-TM-H-15). (Report for the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
50. Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. Jr. (1978a). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 148-162.
51. Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. Jr. (1978b). Hypothesis-testing processes in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1202-1212.