Original reporting and commentary about polygraphs, voice stress analyzers, and other purported "lie detectors."
New York Times columnist William Safire comments on polygraphy, concluding: Because professional spies are trained to defeat the device; because pathological liars do not cause its needles to spike; and because our counterspies relax when a potential suspect “passes” — the system breeds the opposite of security. Here’s how I learned about that. In 1981 …
Sue Vorenberg reports for the Albuquerque Tribune. Excerpt: A new study saying polygraph tests are not accurate enough to screen government employees for potential security risks doesn’t surprise Al Zelicoff. But it doesn’t go far enough for him, either. Zelicoff, a senior scientist at Sandia National Laboratories and a leading critic of polygraph tests, said …
Ian Hoffman reports for the Oakland Tribune. Excerpt: Polygraph tests used by nearly every federal national-security agency as a screening tool will flag loyal workers as security risks and free actual spies from suspicion, a panel of top scientists reported Tuesday. Gathered by the National Research Council, scientists said the theory and research supporting polygraphy …
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) released the following press release: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, October 8, 2002 Scientific Study Supports N.M. Senators’ Position that DOE Polygraph Policy Must be Changed WASHINGTON – In light of a new scientific study released today, U.S. Senators Jeff Bingaman and Pete Domenici are calling for the Department of Energy (DOE) …
Chicago Tribune Washington correspondent Michael Kilian reports. Excerpt: WASHINGTON –The National Academy of Sciences declared Tuesday that polygraph examinations are dangerously unreliable and the federal government should cease depending on them to screen for security risks. The academy’s 18-month, federally-funded study found that the so-called lie detector not only incorrectly deems large numbers of people …
Reuters health and science correspondent Maggie Fox reports. Excerpt: WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Lie detectors may work in some cases, but they are too flawed to use for general security screening and could let through skilled spies, an independent panel said on Tuesday. Not only do polygraphs cost many honest people a government job, but there …
Pittsburg Post-Gazette science editor Byron Spice reports. Excerpt: Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? Not polygraph examiners, at least not those charged with finding spies and other security risks within the ranks of federal employees, a new National Research Council report concludes. Lie detectors simply aren’t accurate enough to ferret out …
Los Angeles Times staff writer Charles Piller reports. Excerpt: Polygraph testing for national security screening is little more than junk science, with results so inaccurate that they tend to be counterproductive, according to a long-awaited report released Tuesday by the National Academy of Sciences. The nation’s premier scientific organization said such tests, a key counterespionage …
Dan Stober reports for the San Jose Mercury News. Excerpt: Lie-detector tests are useless in ferreting out spies and they have unfairly tainted innocent employees and job applicants, the nation’s leading researchers concluded in a report issued Tuesday. Prompted by the controversial case of Wen Ho Lee, who was accused of spying for China, the …
Washington Post staff writer Shankar Vedantam reports. Excerpt: Polygraph tests are ineffective in catching spies and have probably tarred thousands of innocent government employees and applicants with unwarranted suspicion, a top scientific panel has concluded. While lie detectors may have some utility in criminal investigations, where subjects can be tested on specific questions about a …