An Assessment of the Validity of Polygraph Examinations for the Psychophysiological Detection of Deception: A Judicicial Opinion and Research Study Review

Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 113-119

  Yocom, Jerry D ^a  

^a Creighton University School of Law   (United States)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Arousals; Physiology; Polygraph; Psychology; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957286978     PISSN: 08820783     EISSN: 19366469     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11896-007-9009-0     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Annual Polygraph Report to Congress by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (2000).
2. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) 509 U. S. 579, 589.
3. Employee Polygraph Protection Act (1988) 29 U. S. C. Chap. 22.
4. Federal Rules of Evidence 403 (Jan. 2, 1975, P. L. 93-595, sec. 1, 88 Stat. 1932). 702 (Jan. 2, 1975, P. L. 93-595, sec. 1, 88 Stat. 1937).
5. Frye v. United States, 292 F. 1013 {D. C. Cir., 1923}.
6. Fuoco MA (2002) Polygraph examiners back the value of their tests. Post-gazette. com Local News, Pittsburgh, PA.
7. Iacono WG, Lykken DT (1997) The validity of the lie detector: two surveys of scientific opinion. J Appl Psychol 82(3): 432.
8. Krapohl DJ, Shull KW, Ryan AA (2002). Does the confession criterion in case selection inflate polygraph accuracy estimates? Forensic Sci Commun 4(3): 1-10.
9. National Research Council (2003) The polygraph and lie detection. Committee to review the scientific evidence on the polygraph. Division of behavioral and social sciences education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
10. Office of Technology Assessment (1983) Scientific validity of polygraph testing: a research review and evaluation. A technical memorandum. U. S. Congress, Washington, DC.
11. Richardson DC Dr (1999) Memorandum to FBI Assistant Director Dr. Donald M. Kerr.
12. Rosen J (2006) The supreme court: the personalities and rivalries that defined America. Times Books. Henry Holt & Co, New York, New York, 6.
13. Sleek S (1998). Psychologists' debate merits of the polygraph. APA Monitor 29(6).
14. U. S. Const. amend. 6 (1791).
15. U. S. v. Benavidez-Benavidez (2000) 217 F. 3d 720 (9th Cir.).
16. U. S. v. Call (1997) 129 F. 3d 1402 48 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 339, 97 CJ C. A. R. 3059 (10th Cir.).
17. U. S. v. Lea (2001) 249 F. 3d 632 (7th Cir.).
18. U. S. v. Kwong (1995) 69 F. 3d 663 (2nd Cir.).
19. U. S. v. Posado (1995) 57 F. 3d 428 (5th Cir.).
20. U. S. v. Scheffer (1998) 523 U. S. 303, 309.
21. U. S. v. Toth (1996) 91 F. 3d 136 (4th Cir.).