Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evidence Based Practice Integration into Polygraph Practice: A suggested paradigm Cover

Evidence Based Practice Integration into Polygraph Practice: A suggested paradigm

By: Tuvya T. Amsel and  Avital Ginton  
Open Access
|Oct 2021

References

  1. American Polygraph Association (2011), Meta-Analytic Survey of Criterion Accuracy of validated Polygraph Techniques. Polygraph, 40 (4), 194–305.
  2. Amsel T., (2020), The Centennial Introspection Project 100 Years of Polygraph Practice. European Polygraph, 14 (1), 23–26.10.2478/ep-2020-0003
  3. Baker M., (2016), 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533 (7604), 452–454.10.1038/533452a
  4. Ben-Shakhar G., Lieblich I., & Kugelmass S., (1970), Guilty knowledge technique: Application of signal detection measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54 (5), 409–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/h002978110.1037/h00297815474268
  5. Bornmann L., Mutz R., (2015), Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66 (11), 2215–2222.10.1002/asi.23329
  6. Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, (2015), Board on Health Care Services; Institute of Medicine; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Balogh, E.P., Miller B.T., Ball J.R., (eds.) 2015.
  7. Diagnostic Errors: Technical Series on Safer Primary Care, (2016), Geneva: World Health Organization. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
  8. Elaad E., (1985), Decision Rules in Polygraph Examination in: IDENTA 85 – An International Conference held in Jerusalem Israel in 1985: Anti-terrorism, Forensic Science, Psychology in Police Investigations, 167–179, A Book of proceeding. First Published, 1985 Imprint Routledge. 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429036590.10.4324/9780429036590
  9. Elaad E., and Kleiner, M., (1986), The stimulation test in polygraph field examinations: a case study. Journal Police Science & Administration, 14 (4), 328–333.
  10. Elaad E., and Schachar, E., (1985), Polygraph field validity. Polygraph, 14 (3), 217–223.
  11. Fanelli D. (2009), How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLOS ONE 4(5) e5738. Bibcode:2009PLo-SO...4.5738F. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738. PMC 2685008. PMID 19478950.10.1371/journal.pone.0005738268500819478950
  12. Ginton A., (1985), A Built-In Validity in Polygraph Field Examinations. in: IDENTA 85 – An International Conference held in Jerusalem Israel in 1985: Anti-terrorism, Forensic Science, Psychology in Police Investigations, 167–179, A Book of proceeding. First Published, 1985 Imprint Routledge. 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429036590.10.4324/9780429036590
  13. Ginton A., (2009), Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength – A new concept in PDD that reframes the notion of Psychological Set and the role of attention in CQT poly-graph examinations. Polygraph, 38 (3), 204–217
  14. Ginton A., (2013, Sept), Adaptive Polygraph. [Paper Presentation]. The annual meeting of the American Polygraph Association, Orlando, FL. USA.
  15. Ginton A., (2019), Essentials of the Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength; A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Comparison Question Test (CQT) A detailed outline version. European Polygraph, 13 (4), 181–201. DOI: 10.2478/ep-2019-0013.10.2478/ep-2019-0013
  16. Ginton A., Daie N., Elaad E., and Ben-Shakhar G., (1982), A method for evaluating the use of the polygraph in a real-life situation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67 (2), 131.10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.131
  17. Gustafson L.A., & Orne M.T., (1963), Effects of heightened motivation on the detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47 (6), 408–411, https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041899.10.1037/h0041899
  18. Gustafson L.A., & Orne M.T., (1964), The effects of task and method of stimulus presentation on the detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48, 383–387.10.1037/h0044000
  19. Guyatt G., Cairns J., Churchill D., et al. (1992), Evidence-Based Medicine: A New Approach to Teaching the Practice of Medicine, JAMA, 268 (17): 2420–2425.10.1001/jama.268.17.2420
  20. Horton R., (2015), Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma? The Lancet, 385 (9976).10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1
  21. Ioannidis J.P.A., (2005), Why Most Published Research Findings Are False? PLOS Med, 2 (8): e124.10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124118232716060722
  22. Kleiner M., (2002), Physiological detection of deception in psychological perspectives: A theoretical proposal. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 127–182). Academic Press.
  23. Krapohl D.J. & Goodson W., (2015), Decision accuracy for the Relevant-Irrelevant screening test: Influence of an algorithm in human decision-making. European Poly-graph 9 (4), 189–208.10.1515/ep-2015-0007
  24. Krapohl D.J. & Rosales T., (2014), Decision accuracy for the Relevant-Irrelevant screening test: A partial replication. Polygraph, 43 (1), 20–29.
  25. Krapohl D.J., and Shaw P.K., (2015), Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice, Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.00005-0
  26. Kugelmass S., Lieblich I., Ben-Ishai A., Opatowski A., & Kaplan M., (1968), Experimental evaluation of galvanic skin response and blood pressure change indices during criminal interrogation. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology & Police Science, 59 (4), 632–635. https://doi.org/10.2307/1141863.10.2307/1141863
  27. Larsen P.O., & von Ins M., (2010), The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics (2010) 84, 575–603, DOI 10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z.10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z290942620700371
  28. Langlois J.P., (2002), “Making a Diagnosis”. In: Mengel M.B., Holleman W. L., Fields S.A., (eds.) Fundamentals of Clinical Practice (2nd ed.). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publisher.
  29. Leach M.J., (2006), Evidence-based practice: A framework for clinical practice and research design. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 12 (5): 248–251.10.1111/j.1440-172X.2006.00587.x16942511
  30. Lykken D.T., (1959), The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 285–388.10.1037/h0046060
  31. Lykken D.T., (1960), The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44 (4), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044413.10.1037/h0044413
  32. Mullen E.J., (2002, July), Evidence-Based Knowledge: Designs for Enhancing Practitioner Use of Research Findings (a bottom-up approach). [Paper Presentation]. The 4th International Conference on Evaluation for Practice, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/sospol/eval2002/EvidenceF2002.PDF.
  33. National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019), Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.10.17226/2530331596559
  34. National Research Council (2003), The Polygraph and Lie Detection. Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10420.10.17226/10420
  35. Nelson R. (2015), Appendix B: 2015 Update to the American Polygraph Association 2011 meta-analytic survey of validated polygraph techniques. In D. Krapohl and P. Shaw Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice. Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.09986-2
  36. Nelson R., Handler M. & Krapohl D. (2007, Sept), Development and validation of the Objective Scoring System, version 3. [Poster presentation]. The annual meeting of the American Polygraph Association, New Orleans, LA. USA.
  37. Nelson R., Handler M., Shaw P., Gougler M., Blalock B., Russell C., Cushman B. & Oelrich M., (2011), Using the Empirical Scoring System. Polygraph, 40, 67–78.
  38. Nelson R., Krapohl D. & Handler M., (2008), Brute force comparison: A Monte Carlo study of the Objective Scoring System version 3 (OSS-3) and human polygraph scorers. Polygraph, 37, 185–215.
  39. Olechno J., (2016), Individualized medicine vs. precision medicine. DDNews, 12,5.
  40. Open Science Collaboration, (2015), Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349 (6251).10.1126/science.aac471626315443
  41. Orne M.T., Thackray R.I. & Paskewitz D.A., (1972), On the detection of deception, A model for the study of the physiological effects of psychological stimuli. In: N.S. Greenfield & R.A. Sternbach (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972, 743–785.
  42. Pashler H., Wagenmakers E.J., (2012), Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science. 7 (6). 528–530.10.1177/1745691612465253
  43. Peng R., (2015), The reproducibility crisis in science: A statistical counterattack, Signifi cance, 12 (3), 30–32.10.1111/j.1740-9713.2015.00827.x
  44. Sackett D.L., Rosenberg W.C., Muir Gray J.A., Haynes R.B., Richardson W.S., (1996), Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312, 71–72.10.1136/bmj.312.7023.7123497788555924
  45. Straus S.E., Glasziou P., Richardson W.S. & Haynes R.B. (2011), Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (4th ed.), Churchill Livingstone.
  46. The Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress –OTA- (1983), Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation.,
  47. Webb S., (2001), Some consideration on the validity of evidence-based practice in social work. British Journal of Social Work 31 (1), 57–79.10.1093/bjsw/31.1.57
  48. Youngstrom E.A., Choukas-Bradley S., Calhoun C.D., Jensen-Doss A., (2015), Clinical Guide to the Evidence-Based Assessment Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 2 (1).10.1016/j.cbpra.2013.12.005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ep-2021-0001 | Journal eISSN: 2380-0550 | Journal ISSN: 1898-5238
Language: English
Page range: 9 - 28
Published on: Oct 22, 2021
Published by: Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2021 Tuvya T. Amsel, Avital Ginton, published by Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.