References
- Ansley, N., and Krapohl, D.J. (2000), The frequency of appearance of evaluative criteria in field polygraph charts. Polygraph, 29 (2), 169–176.
- Bell, B.G., Raskin, D.C., Honts, C.R., and Kircher, J.C. (1999), The Utah numerical scoring system. Polygraph, 28 (1), 1–9.
- Bernhardt, P.C. (2005), Effects of prior demonstrations of polygraph accuracy on outcomes of probable-lie and directed-lie polygraph tests. The University of Utah, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
- Cacioppo, J.T., Tassinary, L.G., and Berntson, G.G. (2000), Handbook of Psychophysiology, 2nd edition. New York, NY: Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511546396
- Dollins, A.B., Senter, S.M., and Pollina, D.A. (2001), A Test of the Counterintelligence Screening Polygraph Process. Report No. DoDPI01-R-0002. Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, Ft. Jackson, SC. Unpublished.
- Handler, M.D. (2006), Utah Probable Lie Comparison Test. Polygraph, 35 (3), 139– 148.
- Kircher, J.C. (1983), Computerized decision-making and patterns of activation in the detection of deception. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44 (1-B).
- Krapohl, D.J. (2020), Electrodermal responses: When is bigger really better? (in press).
- Podlesny, J.A., and Raskin, D.C. (1978), Effectiveness of techniques and physiological measures in the detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 15 (4), 344–359.10.1111/j.1469-8986.1978.tb01391.x693743
- Pollina, D.A. Dollins, A.B., Senter, S.M., Krapohl, D.J., & Ryan, A.H. (2004), Comparison of polygraph data obtained from individuals involved in mock crimes and actual criminal investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1099–1105.10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.109915584845