On Saturday, 15 June 2002, I e-mailed the following challenge to American Polygraph Association past president Frank Horvath:

Dear Professor Horvath:

On Friday, 14 June 2002, reporter Joe Bauman of the  Deseret News interviewed you for an article about polygraphy. Bauman's article, which seems to be based soley [sic] on your interview, appears in today's (Saturday, 15 June) issue of the Deseret News under the title, "Polygraph tests not flawless." [Note: the Deseret News is an afternoon paper, and the article actually appeared in the 14 June edition.]

Bauman consfuses irrelevant questions with comparison (or "control") questions. In the second paragraph of his article, Bauman writes:


Quote:

The tests record physiological responses to questions. The queries usually cover both a crime under investigation and matters that are irrelevant or simply technical such as: Is today Friday? Responses to these comparison questions are checked against responses to relevant questions.

You must certainly know the above statement to be false. Irrelevant questions such as, "Is today Friday?" are not comparison questions, responses to which are checked against responses to relevant questions. Irrelevant questions are not scored at all!

Comparison ("control") questions involve an element of trickery on the polygrapher's part. While the polygrapher admonishes the examinee to answer all questions truthfully, he actually wants the subject to experience anxiety-inducing doubt about the truthfulness of his answers to the "control" questions. One commonly used "control" question is, "Did you ever lie to get out of trouble?" The polygrapher deliberately steers the examinee into a denial by suggesting, for example, that the kind of person who would lie to get out of trouble is the same kind of person who would commit the crime that is under investigation.

It is hard to imagine how Bauman could have reached such an erroneous conclusion about the nature of comparison ("control") questions unless you led him to it. You are a past president of the American Polygraph. Association, whose motto is "Dedicated to Truth." I challenge you demonstrate your dedication to truth by contacting Mr. Bauman and Deseret News associate editor Steve Fidel with a correction. Otherwise, the public might conclude that the misinformation in Bauman's report was the result of deliberate disinformation on your part.

In setting the record straight, the following description of comparison ("control") questions from p. 20 of the Congressional Office of Technology [Assessment]'s 1983 technical memorandum, "Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation" may be helpful. (You were a member of OTA's Polygraph Validity Advisory Panel.):


Quote:

The polygraph examiner does not tell the subject that there is a distinction between the two types of questions (control and relevant). Control questions are described as intending to determine if the subject is the "type of person" who would commit a crime such as the one being investigated (136). The examiner stresses that the subject must be able to answer the questions completely with a simple "yes" or "no" answer, that the polygraph will record any confusion, misgivings, or doubts, and that the subject should discuss any troublesome questions with the examiner (20). Thus, the situation is set up such that the subject is persuaded that the examiner wants the truth. In reality, however, the examiner wants the subject to experience considerable doubt about his or her truthfulness or even to be intentionally deceptive. According to Raskin (91), "Control questions are intentionally vague and extremely difficult to answer truthfully with an unqualified 'No'."

You also told Mr. Bauman that critics will say that polygraph testing is 70% accurate. However, polygraph critics are more likely to say that polygraph testing has no scientific basis at all. I refer you, for example, to Professor William G. Iacono's article, "Forensic 'Lie Detection': Procedures Without Scientific Basis" and Professor John J. Furedy's article, "The North American Polygraph and Psychophysiology: Disinterested, Uninterested, and Interested Perspectives."

This challenge to you will also be publicly posted to the Polygraph Policy forum of the AntiPolygraph.org message board, where you are invited to publicly respond.

Sincerely,

George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org

cc: Joe Bauman <bau@desnews.com>
    Steve Fidel, Associate Editor <steve@desnews.com>