Would I be lying if I said that Wonder Woman's lasso of truth was based on the polygraph test? Would you know if I was lying?
Would you be lying if you said that you knew I was lying?
Last week I attended a lecture by the Professor Emeritus of
Forensic Psychology from the University of Newcastle. The subject of the
lecture was polygraph testing in the forensic setting, the slightly more
interesting aspect of the lecture was that it was given by an American who is
very pro polygraph testing when used correctly and in appropriate circumstances
while being rather bemused that the British don’t get it simply because there
is something rather unBritish about the lie detector.
He explained that in America lie detectors are used
for all kinds of job interviews especially when there is a degree of security
involved, banks some law enforcement applications etc. In Britain we just take
your word for it as there would be something rather unseemly in giving
someone a polygraph.
So on this side of the pond we are a bit far behind and even articles in respected newspapers are always fundamentally flawed in their facts and this reinforces the fallacies that the British public have about lie detectors.
So on this side of the pond we are a bit far behind and even articles in respected newspapers are always fundamentally flawed in their facts and this reinforces the fallacies that the British public have about lie detectors.
The three big lies are;
1) It didn’t work in the 1950's and it
doesn’t work now
2) It is a bogus pipeline to the truth
3) The test can be
easily beaten.
None of these are true.
If you are not familiar with it the polygraph is now a small
box about the size of a box of man sized tissues. It has a chest strap, a belly
strap and a blood pressure cuff with the clamp electrode on one finger. This
measures chest and abdominal breathing, cardiovascular activity and sweating.
These changes are not specific to lying, they are simply of arousal. It is not a narrow
defined stress response it is more an arousal to threat which psychologists
call the 'orientating response'.
I would explain that as this not being the stress response you have when someone points a gun at you. This is the response you have when walking through a dark forest and you hear a noise that may or may not be a threat. All your senses then pinpoint where that noise came from, focussing on where the threat actually is, and that is the method of the lie detector. The brain is scanning the situation waiting for the question that is going to cause the threat.
I would explain that as this not being the stress response you have when someone points a gun at you. This is the response you have when walking through a dark forest and you hear a noise that may or may not be a threat. All your senses then pinpoint where that noise came from, focussing on where the threat actually is, and that is the method of the lie detector. The brain is scanning the situation waiting for the question that is going to cause the threat.
The Brits still believe that the polygraph measures the
stress of trying to lie convincingly and therefore it can be beaten if you have very good relaxation/biofeedback techniques or are a
psychopath. But as the orientating response is a much more primal response, much
deeper in the brain and is therefore hard wired so the relaxation biofeedback the psychopath has the same response on a polygraph as everyone else.
Here is Ramsay's version of an interesting experiment they did;
Here is Ramsay's version of an interesting experiment they did;
Let's take the Europeans and South Africans of
the MIA blogsite and put them in one room (I’m taking Cara as a French person
in this). So we have the combined loveliness of Cara, Caro, Zoe, Jorn, Michael
and Stanley in one room. In the other room we have the 'Donald Trump non appreciation
society' of Annamaria, Jeffrey etc. Just to make Annamaria’s life difficult
we’ll put Evka in that room as well.
The person conducting this experiment knows that the European team will not cheat under any circumstances as they are honourable Europeans. So, the researcher takes one of the American team to the side and charges him $20 for the answers to the exam paper. Both classrooms then sit the same exam and at the end of the exam in the US classroom the cheater stands up and reveals he had all the answers all along and cheated. He asks his fellow US students not to say a word. The Europeans have now become the control group. The Americans become the subject of the experiment. All the students are then told that they are going to be polygraph tested and will be asked if they knew of any cheating going on. No matter how many times this experiment is done the results are consistent.
The person conducting this experiment knows that the European team will not cheat under any circumstances as they are honourable Europeans. So, the researcher takes one of the American team to the side and charges him $20 for the answers to the exam paper. Both classrooms then sit the same exam and at the end of the exam in the US classroom the cheater stands up and reveals he had all the answers all along and cheated. He asks his fellow US students not to say a word. The Europeans have now become the control group. The Americans become the subject of the experiment. All the students are then told that they are going to be polygraph tested and will be asked if they knew of any cheating going on. No matter how many times this experiment is done the results are consistent.
If the students are told the polygraph is 40% accurate, the
Americans will lie to protect their friend. If they are told it is 70% accurate
they will still (tend to ) lie to protect their friend. However if they are told that the polygraph accuracy is getting
towards 75% then people begin to disclose even before the polygraph is switched
on. And as polygraphs are between 85 and 92% accurate there is a tendency
toward full disclosure and it is the disclosure aspect of the polygraph that is
of most use in focusing the resources of a criminal investigation.
Dr Don Grubin has been using this technology in a very worthwhile
way but stresses again and again that the polygraph has no place in court. It
is this ability of it to force people to disclose activity that is important.
In the South of England he has conducted many
interventions and I am using the example
of 60 men who have been shown to have child pornography on their computers.
These 60 men were told that they were going to be given a polygraph test and
that the polygraph test is between 85 and 92% accurate and of the 4 indicator
questions allowed one of them was 'have you ever tried to make contact with a
child for sexual purposes?' 7 of those men then disclosed immediately even
before being given the test and that group then became subject to further
investigation. All the men were polygraphed and the results of the indicator
questions tended to replicate the disclosure result.
The lecturer explained that there is always a tendency for
there to be more false failures than false positives so its not a case that
dangerous people will slip through the net but more that slightly less
dangerous people are going to be caught up.
Even after this very eminent Prof explaining how the
polygraph can be used accurately and ethically the very esteemed prosecutors
and defence lawyers in the audience immediately started to argue with him that
it was in some ways a downright dastardly thing to do. I am glad to say that
the Prof defended the polygraph robustly.
There was a bit of
lovely humour when he showed a clip from the TV series the Wire to which the
audience murmured uniformly we didn’t watch it that as we could not understand
the accents. And the American replied the Baltimore accent is nothing compared
to the Glaswegian accent.
And of course, William Moulton Marsden created Wonder Woman and the lie detector! So there!
Caro Ramsay 19th Feb 2016
Very informative, Caro. But I have one major gripe. I claim Cara and Stan for the American team. Otherwise I will be left alone with Jeff and EvKa and will surely die of pun poisoning. My life is on the line here.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking that you could have Susan and Sujata but yes I agree, it would be too cruel to subject you to the J and E punfest. But you would disclose your secrets just at the threat of Jeff and EvKa, so it would all work out ok!
ReplyDeleteThis seems a very boring experiment for the 'European' team. Maybe we should lie about having the test just to make it more interesting!
ReplyDeleteIt would not be boring in the European room Michael. After getting full marks in the test we could sit around, draw rude pictures of teacher on the board and make paper aeroplanes. Well, it never did me any harm!
ReplyDeleteFascinating column, Caro, at least the part I've gotten to. I'll read the rest when I'm done staring at Linda Carter...
ReplyDeleteWhat I think the police REALLY need is a lye detector, since that is the preferred method of body disposal by more intelligent murderers.
All joking aside, I think the efficacy of the lie detector could be raised to nearly 100%, at least for male subjects, if Linda Carter were the test administrator. I'm convinced she'd have not trouble causing them to make a clean breast of it.
And that EvKa is why you will be in the American part of the experiment!
ReplyDeleteBut I agree that anybody faced with those huge blue pants (British use of pants) would probably 'fess up before they fall over laughing. Or is that just a female point of view...
No, I think only a man could possibly design an 'outfit' like that one. At least, any woman that came up with that should have their membership card revoked. Men... well, we're all idiots and are expected to behave as such.
DeleteFrankly, I'm shocked and appalled at the behavior of my American male teammate. How could he possibly ignore the arousal measurement capacity of Wonder Woman's lasso of truth and settle for making himself a boob. Shame on you EvKa.
ReplyDeleteI cannot lie. I am completely and udderly ashamed. Please don't tell anyone else. I'd be destroyed were I ostracized, were a gap or cleavage to form 'tween me and my bosom companions. I need your full support, Jeff, or I shall sag in the flesh as I have in the mind.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe prosecution rests its case.
Delete