Suggested Clinical Uses of Polygraphy in Community-Based Sexual Offender Treatment Programs

Abstract

A literature review was conducted to evaluate the research findings regarding the use of polygraphy with sexual offenders. Inconsistent empirical data from various studies provide a challenge to the validity and reliability of the polygraph procedure. Treatment program utility was nonetheless enhanced by the disclosures made during the preparation process before the actual examination. Empirically based standards for the use and interpretation of polygraph results were found to be lacking. Guidelines for the responsible use of polygraphy in community-based treatment for sexual offenders are proposed. Finally, issues needing further research are identified.

Community Notification Laws

“…First, studies on the efficacy of polygraphy suggest that polygraph examinations are an effective tool for sex offender treatment and supervision, but there are concerns as to their use (Grubin and Madsen, 2006;Blasingame, 1998;Kokish et al, 2005;Ahlmeyer et al, 2000;Grubin et al, 2004;Farkas and Stichman, 2002). Polygraphs are not considered reliable enough to be admissible in criminal courts, however, over 70 percent of community-based sex offender treatment programs use polygraphs for adult offenders, and their results are permissible at sex offender revocation hearings (Kokish et al, 2005;Farkas and Stichman, 2002).…”

“…Polygraphs are not considered reliable enough to be admissible in criminal courts, however, over 70 percent of community-based sex offender treatment programs use polygraphs for adult offenders, and their results are permissible at sex offender revocation hearings (Kokish et al, 2005;Farkas and Stichman, 2002). Some treatment providers do not embrace polygraphy due to concerns about validity and reliability (false positives and false negatives) (Blasingame, 1998), treatment provider's over-reliance on polygraphs, and claims that sex offenders will make fictitious admissions (Kokish et al, 2005).…”

“…Studies do suggest accuracy rates as high as 85 percent (Grubin and Madsen, 2006), but the polygrapher's tone of voice and demeanor can skew the results (Blasingame, 1998). Further, the experience and competence of individual polygraphers led to an accuracy rating of 53 percent from one polygrapher and 100 percent by another, both of whom attended the same school (Blasingame, 1998).…”

The Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing Among Sexual Offenders

“…This is particularly relevant to forensic populations where psychopathic individuals are overrepresented (Shaffer et al, (2015). Studies have no yet considered the usability of the polygraph with specific groups of such as young children or those with active mental illnesses, whose test may also be comprised, due to the nature of these impairments affecting the accuracy of the outcomes (Blasingame, 1998). Again, mental illness is also a common feature of forensic populations (Fazel & Seewald, 2012).…”

A review of the polygraph: history, methodology and current status

“…They can differ subtly or radically amongst individuals (especially for those with active mental illnesses or anxiety disorders) and even for the same individual under different circumstances Blasingame, 1998;Kasprowicz, Manuck, Malkoff, & Krantz, 1990;Sherwood, Dolan, & Light, 1990). This has obvious implications for polygraph practitioners, who employ techniques that assume certain patterns of cardiovascular activity to be characteristic of certain psychological states (e.g.…”