Historical Development
The first attempt to utilize a scientific instrument in an
effort to detect deception occurred around 1895.
Lombroso.C, conducted experiments on actual criminal
suspects.
Used instrument called Hydrosphygmograph (invented
and developed by other scientist for medical purposes)
Deceptiveness determined on the basis of presence or
absence of Blood Pressure-Pulse change.
William Moulton Martson
In 1915 he began his research in this area.
His technique consisted essentially of the use of an
ordinary Sphygmomanometer (instrument used by
physicians in determining patient’s blood pressure)
He also recorded respiration and noted the time of
subject’s verbal response.
He also experimented with the galvanometer to record
skin resistance changes.
John A Larson, 1921 constructed an instrument capable
of recording all three phenomenon –blood pressure,
pulse and respiration.
Conducted test on number of criminal suspects and
reported high percentage of accuracy.
In 1926 Leonarde Keeler constructed a more
satisfactory instrument and improved it in 1949.
“Keeler Polygraphy ” included GSR or electrodermel
response.
In 1947 Reid introduced a completely revised
Polygraph technique, the most significant feature
being the utilization of Control Questions.
Polygraph
Not a lie detector
Poly = many, graph = write
Machine that records multiple continuous measures of
autonomic nervous system arousal
Galvanic skin response (GSR)
Thoracic and abdominal respiration
Blood Pressure
Heart rate
General Theory
Arousal Increased ANS (Autonomic Nervous
System)activity
Sweating
Respiration changes
Vasoconstriction
Pulse rate
Blood pressure
Specific patterns of arousal during questioning could indicate
guilt or lying
The Instrument
Pneumatically operated mechanical recorder of
changes in BP, Pulse, Respiration supplemented with a
unit of recording the GSR.
Phneumograph tubes (chest & abdomen).
Blood Pressure cuff.
Electrodes (index finger & ring finger).
Test Procedure
Pretest Interview.
Card Test.
Preparation of Test Question.
Relevant Questions
Irrelevant Questions.
Control Questions.
Basic factors underlying Deception
Responses
Possible detection appears to be the principle factor
accounting for the physiological changes that are
recorded and interpreted as symptoms of detection.
Consciousness of wrongdoing may serve as
contributing factors.
Assumption:
A liar or guilty person will be more aroused by relevant
questions than Irrelevant ones, while an innocent
person will show no difference
So, if arousal(relevant) > arousal(irrelevant) = lying
Type
Comparison Question Test
Directed Lie Test
Concealed Information Test
Comparison/ Control Question Test
Most common method of polygraph interrogation
Developed by John Reid
Begins with extensive pre-test interview
Three kinds of questions:
1. Relevant
E.g. “Did you kill Nicole Brown Simpson”
2. Control/Comparison (aka probable lie)
E.g. “Have you ever stolen something”
3. Irrelevant
Is your name Mr. X?
Assumption:
A liar become more aroused by lying to the relevant questions
than the control questions.
An innocent person will be more aroused by the comparison
questions.
Arousal(relevant) > Arousal(comparison) = guilty
Direct Lie Test
Same kind of questions as CQT, only subject is
instructed to lie to all the control questions.
Assumption:
Guilty person will show more arousal lying to relevant
questions.
Innocent person will show more arousal lying to control
questions.
CIT (Guilty Knowledge Test)
Developed by David Lykken in 1958
Rather than trying to detect arousal caused by lying, tries to detect
arousal from recognition of “guilty knowledge” from the “orienting
response”
Multiple-choice (serially presented) questions where the
investigator knows the correct answer
Eg. What was the weapon used to kill Mr. X?”
.
Candlestick
Rope
Revolver
Lead Pipe
Knife
Wrench
Assumption:
A guilty person’s arousal will increase upon
recognizing the correct alternative due to involuntary
orienting response.
Innocent person will not be able to discern the correct
alternative from the others.
Admissibility
Is Polygraph Test admissible in the courts?
NHRC Guidelines for conducting
the Polygraph Test (2000)
No Lie Detector Tests should be administered except on the
basis of consent of the accused. An option should be given
to the accused whether he wishes to avail such test.
If the accused volunteers for a Lie Detector Test, he should
be given access to a lawyer and the physical, emotional and
legal implication of such a test should be explained to him
by the police and his lawyer.
The consent should be recorded before a Judicial
Magistrate.
During the hearing before the Magistrate, the person
alleged to have agreed should be duly represented by a
lawyer.
At the hearing, the person in question should also be told
in clear terms that the statement that is made shall not be a
‘confessional’ statement to the Magistrate but will have the
status of a statement made to the police.
The Magistrate shall consider all factors relating to the
detention including the length of detention and the nature
of the interrogation.
The actual recording of the Lie Detector Test shall be done
in an independent agency (such as a hospital) and
conducted in the presence of a lawyer.
A full medical and factual narration of manner of the
information received must be taken on record.