- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by pailryder
- May 28, 2015, 03:22 PMQuote from: danmangan on May 26, 2015, 08:11 PMNothing confirms like confession?The Chicago PD learned the hard way that's not always the case.
True, it is not always the case. But, what is better?
Posted by Elie Mosseri
- May 27, 2015, 10:21 PMI wonder if hypnotism can be used to arrive at the truth
instead of a lie detector. How come it is not used.
What are the pros and cons.
instead of a lie detector. How come it is not used.
What are the pros and cons.
Posted by Ex Member
- May 27, 2015, 10:28 AMThanks again for taking the time to explain that Doc, very enlightening. I suspect my coupling was a little too loose. I had imagined that someone who denies being at a bank robbery yet shows reaction to a picture of the bank teller presented along with miscellaneous pictures of women in a GKT could be considered lying about not being there. But I guess this is more inference than detection.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- May 27, 2015, 07:58 AMQuote from: Arkhangelsk on May 26, 2015, 02:30 PMI said it was the "closest we can come" to detecting lies.
Actually, if performed correctly, the GKT/CIT has nothing to do with detecting lies--it has to do with detecting or not detecting evidence of memory encoding/memory retrieval for some issue of interest.
More specifically, although David's GKT resembled a multiple choice question format, it differs in a significant way--no questions are asked or answered and no truths or falsehoods are uttered.
A subject area (one of several in the overall GKT exam) is outlined (e.g., "The murder was committed in one of the following rooms of the victim's residence.") and the examinee simply repeats the alternative possibility following the examiner's vocalization of same (e.g., "the living room, the bedroom, the bathroom, the kitchen, the screened porch") as they are sequentially presented at some regular period (e.g., every 20 seconds) with one of the proposed alternative choices being key or correct, the contextual significance of which is known only to the perpetrator/witness of the crime, and all of the possibilities being equally plausible to a non-knowledgeable examinee.
If the aforementioned GKT paradigm is in any way confounded with a lie detection paradigm, the meaningful statistical analysis of the GKT can no longer be appropriately applied. Again--one of the important strengths of the GKT is that is not a lie detector test lacking in diagnostic validity.
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 26, 2015, 08:11 PMNothing confirms like confession?
The Chicago PD learned the hard way that's not always the case.
The Chicago PD learned the hard way that's not always the case.
Posted by Ex Member
- May 26, 2015, 02:30 PMI said it was the "closest we can come" to detecting lies. As Lykken points out, there is no lie detector. If there were, it would have a revolutionary effect on our society.
Posted by pailryder
- May 26, 2015, 02:21 PMQuoteI am always thinking about the question "how do we find outthe truth" in any situation. Are there any rules?
ELIE
In situations where deceptive misrepresentation is suspected, interview/interrogations are often conducted using techniques that may include verbal or written linguistic analysis, observation of body movement and expressions, recording of psychophysiological data and the use of psychological persuasion techniques.
Rules vary with military, government, law enforcement, employment or private matters, but one rule reigns supreme. Nothing confirms like confession.
Posted by pailryder
- May 26, 2015, 02:01 PMArk
I have used GKT, or as some prefer, the
CIT, Concealed Information Test, for many years and agree it is our best polygraph technique. But you overstate your case to argue that it detect lies. CIT works just like CQT, it can only detect that the subject is bothered by the question.
I have used GKT, or as some prefer, the
CIT, Concealed Information Test, for many years and agree it is our best polygraph technique. But you overstate your case to argue that it detect lies. CIT works just like CQT, it can only detect that the subject is bothered by the question.
Posted by Ex Member
- May 26, 2015, 01:19 PMPailryder,
I'm referring to the GKT. Judicious use of this technique and subsequent analysis is probably the closest one can come to lie detection. The CQT does not detect lies. What it can detect at best is that the subject is "bothered" by the questions.The polygrapher at this point tries to extrapolate this discomfort to lying--which in some situations, may indeed be the case, but in others not so--therein lies the gremlin.
I'm referring to the GKT. Judicious use of this technique and subsequent analysis is probably the closest one can come to lie detection. The CQT does not detect lies. What it can detect at best is that the subject is "bothered" by the questions.The polygrapher at this point tries to extrapolate this discomfort to lying--which in some situations, may indeed be the case, but in others not so--therein lies the gremlin.
Posted by pailryder
- May 26, 2015, 07:10 AMArk
The question perplexes me as well, and I have read ATITB, so help me out here. Specifically, what is the better way?
The question perplexes me as well, and I have read ATITB, so help me out here. Specifically, what is the better way?
Posted by Ex Member
- May 20, 2015, 07:04 PMQuoteI want to know if there is a better way to find out if someone is lying.
If this question perplexes you, I suggest reading "A Tremor in the Blood" (Lykken). He probes this issue very intuitively.
Posted by Ex Member
- May 20, 2015, 06:58 PMQuoteNobody ever knows who a person really is on the inside. We only see what's on the outside and based on this I have full respect for these three boys. I personally don't think that anyone would make this up and not only did they stick up for their opinion but they provided rich details.
You contradict yourself. First you say nobody knows who a person is on the inside, yet you project yourself into the hearts of the three boys and advocate for them.
Posted by Courtney k
- May 20, 2015, 05:53 PMQuoteNobody ever knows who a person really is on the inside. We only see what's on the outside and based on this I have full respect for these three boys. I personally don't think that anyone would make this up and not only did they stick up for their opinion but they provided rich details.First of all, one of the three boys admitted that he made it all up because he felt pressured to say that he had encounters with mrs. Ogletree. He was lying. Second of all, you do realize that the boys details of how things happened have been changed, adding things, leaving things out along the way? Also, anyone can make up details. They've had a long time to think these things up. I believe they made a mistake, got pressured into saying this, or were just trying to be cool by telling these lies about her, and it got out of hand. Because it all became such a Big deal, and with the family's of the boys being respected members of the community (one of them also very religious) they knew their own and their family's reputation would suffer greatly if people knew they made something so horrible up. Nobody would believe anything they said again. But if they just went with it, they would be seen as victims, and people would feel bad for them, and congratulate them for speaking up.
Posted by ELIE Mosseri
- May 20, 2015, 03:48 PMI want to know if there is a better way to find out if someone
is lying. Can we rely on a polygraph test to tell us a
PROBABLE or close enough answer when we do not have
a better way to do it.
I am always thinking about the question "how do we find out
the truth" in any situation. Are there any rules?
I appreciate your comments.
is lying. Can we rely on a polygraph test to tell us a
PROBABLE or close enough answer when we do not have
a better way to do it.
I am always thinking about the question "how do we find out
the truth" in any situation. Are there any rules?
I appreciate your comments.
Posted by Sydney Schauman
- May 20, 2015, 02:18 PMNobody ever knows who a person really is on the inside. We only see what's on the outside and based on this I have full respect for these three boys. I personally don't think that anyone would make this up and not only did they stick up for their opinion but they provided rich details.