A quantitative review of the Guilty Knowledge Test.

MacLaren, Vance V.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.674

Cited by 109 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 63 publications

(76 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar accuracy rates were reported by Ben-Shakhar and Furedy (1990), who reviewed 10 mock crime studies and found detection rates of 84% and 94% respectively. A more recent review showed similar results with successful detection of 76% of participants with concealed knowledge and slightly lower detection, 83%, of those without (MacLaren, 2001). The two available field studies (Elaad, 1990;Elaad, Ginton, & Jungman, 1992) show equally high detection of innocent suspects (98% and 94%, respectively), but somewhat lower detection accuracy among guilty suspects (42% and 76%, respectively).…”

Section: Sex Offenders and Job Applicantssupporting

confidence: 54%

The Polygraph and the Detection of Deception

Meijer

Verschuere

2010

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2Over the last decade, Europe has seen a marked increase in the use of the polygraph for the detection of deception. Belgium and Finland, nowadays regularly use polygraph tests in criminal investigations, and the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have adopted its use in the treatment and monitoring of sex offenders (Meijer & van Koppen, 2008). Still the use of the polygraph for the detection of deception has been debated in the scientific literature for ages. In this contribution we highlight the promises and perils of the use of the polygraph for the detection of deception. The polygraphThe words 'polygraph' and 'lie detector' are often used synonymously.Technically, the term 'polygraph' refers only to the recording device that is used for registering different physiological parameters. Polygraphs that are specifically designed for lie detection tests used to be briefcase-sized machines that registered physiological signals from the subject by recording them with multiple pens on a lengthy roll of paper.Nowadays, a small amplifier/digitizer and a laptop recording the signals are used in most cases. The sensors attached to the subject are generally (1) two expendable bands positioned around the thorax and the abdomen measuring respiration, (2) two electrodes attached to the inside of the hand measuring electrodermal activity and (3) an inflatable cuff positioned around the upper arm registering blood pressure. These physiological parameters co-vary with a number of psychological processes, including attention and emotion. Consequently, inferences about psychological processes can be made from polygraph recordings. And although it is widely accepted that there is no unique physiological pattern associated with lying, polygraph recording can still be used to infer guilt or innocence. Detection of deception with the polygraphThe most widely used polygraph technique is known as the Control Question Test (CQT; Reid, 1947). In this type of test, the suspect answers several questions while connected to the polygraph. Among these questions are relevant and control questions. The relevant questions specifically deal with the incident under investigation, for example "on the 25th of March, did you hold up the post office in Chorley?" The control questions have a more generic nature, but also deal with undesirable behavior, for example "In the first 25 years of your life, have you ever done anything illegal?" It is reasoned that the most threatening questions will elicit the strongest physiological responses. The crucial assumption is that the relevant questions are most threatening for guilty suspects, whereas the control questions form the biggest threat to innocent suspects. This latter assumption requires some explanation. A CQT is preceded by a lengthy interview that serves to convince the suspect that the polygraph can determine to an extremely high degree of accuracy determine whether the suspect is lying or not. This means that an innocent examinee can confidently and honestly answer "no" to the relevant questions...

show abstract

Section: Sex Offenders and Job Applicantssupporting

confidence: 54%

The Polygraph and the Detection of Deception

Meijer

Verschuere

2010

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…24: 991-1002(2010 Published online 1 September 2009 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002DOI: 10. /acp.1601 about 76-84% guilty and 83-94% innocent examinees (Ben-Shakhar & Elaad, 2003;MacLaren, 2001).…”

Section: Detecting Concealed Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting concealed information with reaction times: Validity and comparison with the polygraph

Verschuere

Crombez

Degrootte

et al. 2009

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Concealed Information Test is used to assess recognition of information that the examinee cannot or does not want to reveal. Physiological measures recorded with the polygraph have shown to be highly valid measures of concealed information. Research suggests that a reaction-time (RT) based test may also successfully reveal concealed information. Due to its simplicity, an RT-based test has great advantages for applied testing. In the present study, we assessed the validity of the RT-based test for concealed information detection, and compared its discriminative power with the polygraph. Thirty two participants in a feigned amnesia study were promised a financial reward when successfully concealing autobiographical information. Participants performed an RT-based test, and a polygraph test. The data support the validity of the RT-based test for concealed information detection, and indicate its discriminative power is similar to the polygraph. Our data confirm the potential of the RT-based test.

show abstract

“…(Farwell & Donchin, 1991). The participant is instructed to respond "No" to each answer while physiological measures (e.g., heart rate, skin conductivity) are registered (see e.g., Ben-Shakhar & Dolev, 1996;Bradley, MacLaren, & Carle, 1996; for a review, see MacLaren, 2001). Thus, in some sense this test is a variant of what is known as a lie detection test, with the aim of detecting suspects' knowledge about a crime instead of detecting lying.…”

Section: Abstract Eye Movements Concealed Information Test Guiltymentioning

confidence: 99%

The revealing glance: Eye gaze behavior to concealed information

Schwedes

Wentura

2011

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explored the usefulness of eye fixation durations as a dependent measure in a concealed knowledge test, drawing on Ryan, Hannula, and Cohen (2007), who found eye fixations on a familiar face to be longer than fixations on an unknown face. However, in their study, participants always had to select the known face out of three faces; thus, recognition and response intention could not be differentiated. In the experimental phase of our experiment, participants saw six faces per trial and had to select one of them. We had three conditions: In the first, one of the six faces was a known face, and the participants had to conceal that knowledge and select another face (concealed display); in another, one of the six faces was a known face, and the participants had to select that face (revealed display); or finally, all six faces were unknown, and participants had to select any of the six faces (neutral display). Using fixation durations as the dependent measure, we found a pure and early recognition effect; that is, fixations on the concealed faces (known but not selected) were longer than fixations on the nonselected unknown target faces in the neutral display. In addition, we found a response intention effect; that is, fixation durations on the selected known faces were longer than those on concealed faces (known but not selected).

show abstract

A quantitative review of the Guilty Knowledge Test.

Cited by 109 publications

References 63 publications

The Polygraph and the Detection of Deception

The Polygraph and the Detection of Deception

Detecting concealed information with reaction times: Validity and comparison with the polygraph

The revealing glance: Eye gaze behavior to concealed information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About