On 13 January 2005, London's Dana Centre (http://www.danacentre.org.uk/), in its "Naked Science" series, hosted a panel discussion on memory-testing technologies. Polygraphy and voice stress analysis were also discussed. Featured speakers included Paul Matthews, neuroscientist, University of Oxford, Jennifer Vendemia, psychologist, University of South Carolina, and Tor Butler-Cole, medical ethicist, King's College London.
Dr. Vendemia (http://www.vendemia.net) has received some $5 million in taxpayer-funded research grants, including from the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute. As such her remarks will be of particular interest to those following U.S. trends.
A video recording of the discussion is available on-line. See, Naked Science: Criminal Memories (http://www.danacentre.org.uk/Default.aspx?DanaMenu=_WEBCAST_BY_ID&ArticleID=%7B0D9FDE82-9CCB-418E-AD61-D1B31AB57A8F%7D).
Outstanding video link, George! I really enjoyed it. I particularly enjoyed the comments of Jennifer Vendemia, a psychologist from the University of South Carolina. Her comments on the "Bogus Pipeline," wherein convincing people of the accuracy of "the box" can help drive its accuracy were interesting. Perhaps, using reverse psychology, your trying to convince people of the IN-acurracy of "the box" might in some way drive its occasional IN-accuracy. If so, then playing with people's heads as you do on this forum may be a disservice to both them and polygraphy. Something to think about. Anyway, thanks again for the link. :)