posted 11-12-2008 07:16 AM            

I understand how to construct the test, but it is still unclear how to score this test. It's not scored R vs. I. Now, in a multi issue test R/I seems pretty easy to score.

Chuck admits that a CQT is more accurate but the technique intrigues me.

My issue is if you are doing a single issue test and you are using the parts of a crime...DY hold the door to the bank that day? DY bring a gun to the bank that day? DY hold up the bank that day? ---how can one of those make you DI. Chuck did mention its a "build up of stress" in the exam.

posted 11-12-2008 11:08 PM            

"presentation" is each time you ask a question.

In some documents you'll see the term "askings," but "presentations" is the correct word. "Askings" is clear enough to us examiners, but it's bad language useage. "Askings" is a verb form, being used as a plural noun. "Presentation" is the correct noun. "Presentations" is the plural form, as in "three charts, resulting in three presentations of each RQ."

This is different than the way I was taught by Tom Ezell at ASPS, where they used different RQs on subsequent charts on pre-employment tests. They could include up to 18 distinct questions on those tests, but sometimes repeated a question on a subsequent chart. There is an obvious math problem with 18 RQs. Even six RQs is a substantial, probably unwise, compromise.

.012

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 11-13-2008 11:04 AM            

To be consistent, this must occur on two of the three presentations. The reactions do not have to be in the same channels only that there are reactions in 2 of the 3 channels in 2 of the 3 presentations in order to be DI.

I have not seen any information yet as to how this would be scored with use of the plethysmograph as an additional channel (whether it would require reactions in 2 of the 4 channels or if the PLE and Cardio would be grouped as the Pneumos are since the PLE does not always respond when the cardio does – of course, the Pneumos do that as well where there is noticeable reaction in one tracing but not the other, but I think on a less frequent basis than the Cardio and PLE). If anyone can shed light on that, I’d be interested in reading it since just because I haven’t seen it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist somewhere.

You are also looking at the overall reactivity of the RQ’s throughout all three charts and the gross curve of the Cardio particularly from X to XX on each chart as well as the degree and duration and distribution of reactions on all of the RQ’s during the test. Some of you may recall the term:
“conspecnificant” – where you are looking for consistent, specific, significant, and systematized responses as the primary factors in scoring RI tests. “Conspecnificance” is only a minor consideration in scoring of CQ tests. “Welcome back to the ‘old days’ of scoring!”

posted 11-13-2008 06:05 PM            

Let me make sure that I understand this. In a criminal/single issue R/I test, I am looking for SR in two of three presentations.

SR is referred to as a reaction in two of the three parameters. (not necessarily the same).

You are also looking at the overall reactivity of the entire chart. Nate used to call that looking at the Chart as a whole and "getting a feel of the chart."

I would like to see a R/I criminal chart if anyone has one so I can see it.

I guess my question would be what would a truthful chart look like? I would assume they innocent would react to the relevants not the irrelevants, but to a lesser degree. Also I see that you are not scoring the relevants to the other relevants-- you are just scoring the overall intensity of the relevants.

posted 11-13-2008 08:13 PM            

In regard to the plethysmograph channel, which is where the above rule would become a problem, I use it in all my tests, even R/Is. I find it's either telling or it doesn't offer much. It usually just "confirms" (in a sense) what I'm seeing elsewhere.

The only R/I study I know of where the PO2 was used is a Kircher et al (1988) study. Here's what they said about it there:

quote:

---

Relevant questions answered deceptively produced greater vasoconstriction in the finger than did relevant questions answered truthfully. In addition, the Deception X Seconds interaction was significant, F(19,1748) = 4.95, GGC p < .01. Examination of Figure 4 suggests that the interaction was due primarily to the rate at which the amplitude of finger pulses reached the minimum. The reduction in the amplitude of finger pulses occurred more quickly when the subject was deceptive than when the subject was truthful.

---

posted 11-16-2008 11:29 PM            

I personally do not use R/I tests and am of the opinion that they should not be used, for the most part, in criminal specific issues.

R/I is used in screening multiple issues. In this context, it is almost like a SPOT, which is followed up with a CQT when there is SR to an area.