posted 10-25-2004 07:43 AM            

Over the past few weeks, I attempted a new cotrol question that at first seemed reasonable. The question was, "Did you lie to me about anything in your background?" I thought that this would be an inclusive question that would allow the innocent subject to focus on that area that bothered him/her the most during the pre-test. After only a few tests, I have been able to see the problem with this question. This is what I found:

This question did prompt significant responses, but it seemed to prompt responses regardless of whether the subject did/didn't do what they were accused of. One particular case was a Financial Transaction Card Theft/Fraud where the subject was almost certainly guilty. This question showed such strong reaction that it ultimately threw me into the "inconclusive" range. I subsequently obtained a confession, but I realized that a guilty person could have difficulty differentiating between "Did you lie to me today" and what the question actually asked was whether they had lied about anything in their background.

So, my attempt to find a good inclusive control question turned out to not be very good. I believe that this question would be beneficial for the innocent subject, but it leaves too much room for the guilty person to react to it.

I'll chalk this up to a learning experience. Fortunately, I figured this out before I allowed a guilty person to get by.

posted 03-09-2005 01:11 PM            

I have had similar responses with the "did you lie to me about anything" type of question. It does, however, work as a sacrifice relevant question (used up front). The truthful person hits on it due to lying to the comparisons while the deceptive person hits on it because of lying to the relevant questions.....seems to work.

I use the "did you lie to me today" sac/rel question on mixed issue screening, like on pre-employment tests.

Chip Morgan