The comparison question polygraph test: A contrast of methods and scoring

Honts, Charles R.; Reavy, Racheal

doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.02.028

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is assumed that the truthful examinees will focus on showing that they are suitable subjects and on clearly demonstrating that their reactions when lying are different from their reactions to the relevant questions and by that divert their concerns from the relevant questions to the comparison ones (Raskin & Honts, ). Results from both laboratory (Horowitz et al, ; Honts & Reavy, ) and field studies (Honts & Raskin, ) are consistent in showing no significant differences in accuracy from the probable lie method. The success of the directed lie comparison (DLC) questions, is incompatible with Backster's psychological set theory as clearly no fear of detection is involved in reacting to them.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…The RIG theory also explains the success of the DL approach in which the instructions and the explanations given to examinees concerning the DLs, function as baits for attracting their attention and diverting it from the relevant to the comparison questions. More recently, the concept of cognitive load has been adopted as a core factor in explaining the demonstrated differential strength of reactions between relevant and comparison questions, in deceptive versus truthful examinees (Honts, ; Honts & Reavy, ). It is claimed that elevated cognitive loads relating to certain questions results in increased physiological reactions to those questions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique: Theoretical and practical implications

Ginton¹

2017

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two types of questions are most important in the CQT polygraph examination, relevant questions that deal directly with the case under query and comparison questions, which usually deal with past probable misdeeds of the examinees that they choose to deny. The simplistic core reasoning behind the CQT is that the risk of being detected for lying is a threatening situation and like any kind of threat, it automatically triggers the autonomic nervous system to respond with the "fight or flight" type of reaction. For the deceptive examinee, the relevant questions pose the main threat, whereas the truthful examinee, knowing that he is telling the truth on the relevant issue while probably lying to the comparison questions, perceives the latter as more threatening, considering his goal to appear truthful on the test. Accordingly, the deceptive examinee reactions are focused on the relevant questions, whereas the truthful focuses them on the comparison ones. Results of the current field study suggest that at least with truthful examinees, comparison questions, which do not incorporate any lies to be afraid of their exposure, or any lies at all, might function similarly to probable lie questions, by just increasing their salience in a manner that presumably creates some concerns about them. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed in line with the RIG strength notion (Ginton, 2009).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique: Theoretical and practical implications

Ginton¹

2017

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CPSPro Fusion algorithms have been validated in a number of recent peer-reviewed publications (e.g. Honts and Reavy 2015;Honts and Alloway 2007;Honts et al 2004).…”

Section: Polygraph Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using a Polygraph System for Evaluation of the Social Desirability Response Bias in Self-Report Measures of Aggression

Poltavski

Eck

Winger

et al. 2018

Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical evidence suggests that respondents systematically overreport socially desirable behaviors and systematically underreport socially undesirable behaviors. This "social desirability response bias (SDRB)" presents significant challenges for research that relies on self-report measures to assess behaviors that adhere to or violate social norms. The present study used a state-of-the-art polygraph system to examine SDRB in widely used aggression questionnaires, including the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire-Short Form, the Indirect Aggression subscale of the Aggression Questionnaire by Western Psychological Services, and the Reactive-Proactive Questionnaire. Sixteen college students with no criminal record, no known prior history of aggressive behavior, and no reported drug abuse, responded to verbally administered forms of the instruments. Indirect aggression items produced the largest, statistically significant physiological response across the sampled channels. The magnitude of this response was negatively and significantly correlated with the self-report ratings of the frequency of such behaviors. The mean separation between physiological (skin conductance) and self-report responses for indirect aggression remained significant and consistent with correlational analyses when both types of responses were converted to the same scale and compared directly. Finally, the relative magnitude of skin conductance response for items assessing indirect aggression was significantly greater than the relative magnitude of skin conductance response for direct aggression. Overall, the study suggests that the use of automated state-of-the art polygraph systems may potentially identify sensitive items on self-report instruments where social responsibility response bias is possible. Implications for the use of this procedure with such instruments are discussed.

show abstract

“…The examiner may also formulate a number of control questions comprised of 'known' or 'probable' lies, which are irrelevant to the focus of the polygraph examination, but can assess the validity of the test through the observation of psychological changes to known lies (Honts & Reavy, 2015).…”

Section: A Critique Of the Polygraph With Sexual Offendersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing Among Sexual Offenders

Elliott

Völlm

2016

Sex Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is often difficult to ascertain the true extent and nature of sexually deviant behaviour, as much relies on self-report or historic information. The polygraph has been proposed as a useful tool in the treatment and supervision of sex offenders. The current review aims to provide a coherent, objective and recent synthesis of evaluation studies exploring the utility of the post-conviction polygraph (PCSOT) in the treatment and management of sexual offenders. This was assessed based on offence recidivism rates and disclosure, self-reported utility was also considered. Nineteen studies were identified from the US, UK, and the Netherlands with no randomised controlled trials identified. Overall, there was a significant increase in relevant disclosures associated with the polygraph. The impact on reoffending rates was significant for violent but not sexual offences. A number of methodological factors introduced the potential for bias in a significant number of studies reviewed in this review.

show abstract

The comparison question polygraph test: A contrast of methods and scoring

Cited by 17 publications

References 19 publications

Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique: Theoretical and practical implications

Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique: Theoretical and practical implications

Using a Polygraph System for Evaluation of the Social Desirability Response Bias in Self-Report Measures of Aggression

The Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing Among Sexual Offenders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About