Pailryder,

You are correct that David Lykken, for more than half a century, and now (David's former graduate student and a leading psychophysiologist in his own right, e.g., former past president of the Society for Psychological Research) Bill Iacono have made invaluable contributions to our understanding of the theory (plausible and implausible) of various polygraphic applications.  

Having known David for the last 25 years of his life, having spoken to him frequently during that time, being more than familiar with the two editions of A Tremor in the Blood, and having testified as an expert witness with Bill Iacono on several occasions, I can assure you that neither of these gentlemen have ever commingled information-based and lie-detection polygraphic examinations.  

There exists a solid foundation for the former and precious little/none for latter.  Best Wishes...

Arkhangelsk


Lyyken's CIT does not rely on a unique response, only salience to the key item.   

Not to dwell on Lyyken, but the CIT is the most easily understood of the polygraph techniques.  You really should read his book.

Is this how you slip away from the hot seat by telling somebody to go read a book? 

If you want to dwell on Lyyken, in his address to the 1991 Convention of the American Psychological Association, he states:

"The early hominids no doubt learned to lie soon after they first learned to speak. They did not, however, evolve a unique, involuntary response that signaled they were lying, because that would have been maladaptive."

The word "unique" is key to my previous post.

Arkhangelsk

Have you read Lyyken's book?

pailryder wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2013 at 11:35am:

I'm all ears, please elaborate on this theory.

Arkhangelsk

A simplistic and confused answer.  A theory for the detection of deception by psychophysiological measurement certaintly exists for both information based tests and deception based tests.  May not be correct and is open to question and improvement, but it exists.  Consider Dr. Lyyken's explanation of CIT in A Tremor in the Blood.

Quote:

You touch upon a profound topic. It has to do with mental work and I would assume there would be no associated feelings. So the real question is why does mental work precipitate a reaction?; what are the exact psycho-neurological mechanisms? This is precisely where polygraphy breaks down--without knowing the nature of these mechanisms, there cannot exist a theory for the detection of deception.

Why would you get a reaction doing a complex math problem? what would you be feeling?

for pre-employment poly if I don't admit to anything but they say my reactions show "evasive" can I get in trouble either criminally or with my current job? (police)

See Chapters 3 & 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector:

https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

Note that if your polygraph is in connection with a criminal investigation, you would be wise to cancel the appointment, obtain legal counsel, and not speak with investigators without your lawyer present.

I have a poly tomorrow, and I need to know how to employ countermeasures. Any and all help is appreciated, thanks