- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by orolan
- May 01, 2003, 08:47 PMGeorge,
Thanks for the link. Interesting study and hypothesis they have. The process shows some promise, but I think they need to broaden the subject base on their next study.
Thanks for the link. Interesting study and hypothesis they have. The process shows some promise, but I think they need to broaden the subject base on their next study.
Posted by Marty
- May 01, 2003, 07:48 PMGeorge,
Thanks for posting that link. It's quite interesting though whether it can be applied to CQT's is dubious. Looks promising for CIT's but institutional inertia against CIT's remains. Since CQT's are so ingrained. it would be quite useful if some variation did prove to form the basis of a high quality "lie detector" which could be scientifically validated AND reduce both false positives and false negatives. One can always hope, though I am far less optimistic it can be so extended to CQT's.
-Marty
Thanks for posting that link. It's quite interesting though whether it can be applied to CQT's is dubious. Looks promising for CIT's but institutional inertia against CIT's remains. Since CQT's are so ingrained. it would be quite useful if some variation did prove to form the basis of a high quality "lie detector" which could be scientifically validated AND reduce both false positives and false negatives. One can always hope, though I am far less optimistic it can be so extended to CQT's.
-Marty
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 01, 2003, 04:41 PMSee the report "Brain Activity during Simulated Deception: An Event-Related Functional Magnetic Resonance Study" by D.D. Langleben and collaborators.
Posted by orolan
- May 01, 2003, 03:51 PMAnybody familiar with this guy's work? This quote is taken from an article on brain scanning in todays Boston Globe.
"Work published last year by Dr. Daniel D. Langleben, assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, indicated that certain areas of the brain show more activation when people lie. His group is now trying to see whether they can use the technique to produce an effective lie detector, one that would far outperform the deeply imperfect polygraph."
"Work published last year by Dr. Daniel D. Langleben, assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, indicated that certain areas of the brain show more activation when people lie. His group is now trying to see whether they can use the technique to produce an effective lie detector, one that would far outperform the deeply imperfect polygraph."