“Believe your chart but don’t ignore your nose”
By:
References
- Albrechtsen, J.S., Meissner, C.A. & Susa, K.J. (2009), Can intuition improve deception detection erformance? <em>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45</em>(4), 1052–1055, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.017" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.017</a>">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.017</ext-link>
- Ambady, N. (2010), The Perils of Pondering: Intuition and Thin Slice Judgments, <em>Psychological Inquiry</em> 21(4):271–278.
- Ambady, N. & Rosenthal, R. (1992), Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. <em>Psychological Bulletin, 111</em>(2), 256–274.
- Amsel, T. (2016), Polygraph Examinations Contaminating Factors, <em>European Polygraph</em>, 4(38), 151–157.
- DePaulo, B.M. & Morris, W.L. (2004), Discerning lies from truths: Behavioral cues to deception and the indirect pathway of intuition. In Pär-Anders Granhag & Leif (Eds.), The detection of deception in forensic contexts (pp. 15–40). New York: Cambridge University Press.
- DePaulo, B.M., Lindsay, J.J., Malone, B.E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K. & Cooper, H. (2003), Cues to deception. <em>Psychological Bulletin</em>, 129, 74–118.
- Elaad, E., Ginton, A. & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1994), The effects of prior expectations and outcome knowledge on polygraph examiners’ decisions. <em>Journal of Behavioral Decision Making</em>, 7(4), 279–292, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070405" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070405</a>">https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070405</ext-link>
- Elaad, E., Ginton, A. & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1998), The role of prior expectations on polygraph examiners’ decisions, <em>Psychology, Crime and Law</em>, 4(1), 1–16.
- Fox, E. (2022), Switch Craft: The Hidden Power of Mental Agility, HarperOne, HarperCollins Publisher, NY.
- Gigerenzer, G. (2023), The Intelligence of Intuition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- 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 polygraph examinations. <em>Polygraph</em>, 38 (3), 204–217.
- Ginton, A. (2013), The Importance of the Consistency Factor in CQT and Other Polygraph Tests. <em>Polygraph,</em> 42, 146–162.
- Ginton, A., (2019), Basic vs. Applied Psychology perspectives lead to different implications from the same data; reevaluating the impact of prior expectations on polygraph outcomes, <em>Social Sciences & Humanities Open,</em> Volume 1, Issue 1, 2019, 100005.
- Ginton A. (2022), Calculating the Base Rate in Polygraph Populations and the Posterior Confidence in the Obtained Results in the Comparison Question Test, Built upon the Proportion of Outcomes: The Case of Israel Police. <em>Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology</em> (2022), <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://doi.org/<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09526-6" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1007/s11896-022-09526-6</a>">http://doi.org/<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09526-6" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1007/s11896-022-09526-6</a></ext-link>
- Gladwell, M. (2007), Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, Little, Brown & Co., NY
- Hurteau, M., Rahmanian, J., Houle, S. & Marchand, M.-P. (2020), The Role of Intuition in Evaluative Judgment and Decision. <em>American Journal of Evaluation</em>, 41(3), 326–338.
- Krapohl D.J. & Shaw P.K. (2015), <em>Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice</em>, Academic Press, USA.
- Krapohl, D.J. & Dutton, D.W. (2018), Believing is seeing: The influence of expectations on blind scoring of polygraph data. <em>Polygraph and Forensic Credibility Assessment</em>, 47(2), 91–107.
- Matte, J.A. (1996), <em>Forensic Psychophysiology Using the Polygraph</em>, J.A.M Publication, NY, 42–43.
- National Center for Credibility Assessment (NCfCA 2017) PDD 503-ANALYSIS II, (August 2017) Test Data Analysis: Numerical Evaluation Scoring System Pamphlet, Aug 2017 p. 6.
- Nelson, R. (2024), Practical Polygraph Integrating Automated Data Analysis Algorithms with Human Expert Decision Making, <em>APA Magazine</em>, 57 (1), 40–43.
- Raskin, C.D., Barland, GH. & Podlesny, J.A. (1978), Validity and Reliability of Detection of Deception, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U. S. Department of Justice.
- Reid, J. (1982), Behavior symptoms of polygraph subjects, <em>Polygraph</em>, 11(1) 37–45.
- Reid, J.E & Inbau, F.E. (1977), Truth and Deception The polygraph (“lie-detector”) technique”, The Williams & Wilkins Company, Baltimore. Prof. Frank Horvath’s presentation “The Reid Polygraph Technique”, 48<sup>th</sup> Annual APA Seminar, Orlando, FL, September 12, 2013 and Polygraph (March 1982) 11(1).
- 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. <em>BMJ, 3</em>12, 71–72.
- Stel, M., Schwarz, A., Van Dijk, E. & Van Knippenberg, A. (2020), The Limits of Conscious Deception Detection: When Reliance on False Deception Cues Contributes to Inaccurate Judgments, <em>Frontiers in Psychology</em>,11.
- Szucko, J.J. & Kleinmuntz, B. (1981), Statistical versus clinical lie detection, <em>Polygraph</em>, 10(2), 92–104.
- Ten Brinke, L., Stimson, D. & Carney, D.R. (2014), Some Evidence for Unconscious Lie Detection, <em>Psychological Science</em> 25(5), <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://doi.org/<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524421" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1177/0956797614524421</a>">http://doi.org/<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524421" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1177/0956797614524421</a></ext-link>
- United States Government (2011), Federal Psychophysiological Detection of Deception Examiner handbook. <em>Polygraph</em>. 40(1), 1–66, p. 33.
- Wicklander, D.E. & Hunter, F.L. (1975), The Influence of auxiliary source of information in polygraph diagnosis”, <em>Journal of Police Science & Administration</em>, 3 (4), 405–409.
- Wygant, R.J. (1984), Rationale for scoring, <em>Polygraph</em>, 13(3), 263–266.
- <em>Confirmation bias</em>, APA Dictionary of Psychology, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://dictionary.apa.org/confirmation-bias">https://dictionary.apa.org/confirmation-bias</ext-link> (accessed: April 23, 2024, 20:40).
- <em>Gut feeling/reaction</em>, Cambridge University Press & Assessment, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gut-feeling-reaction?q=gut+feeling%2Freaction">https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gut-feeling-reaction?q=gut+feeling%2Freaction</ext-link> (accessed: March 3, 2024, 16:33).
- <em>Intuition</em>, Cambridge University Press & Assessment, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/intuition">https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/intuition</ext-link> (accessed: March 3, 2024, 16:35).
- American Polygraph Association, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.polygraph.org">https://www.polygraph.org</ext-link> (accessed: March 4, 15:42).
- Awati R., <em>Garbage in, garbage out (GIGO)</em>, TechTarget, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.techtarget.com/searchsoftwarequality/definition/garbage-in-garbage-out">https://www.techtarget.com/searchsoftwarequality/definition/garbage-in-garbage-out</ext-link> (accessed: March 3, 2024, 18:48).
Language: English
Page range: 75 - 90
Published on: Jul 29, 2025
Published by: Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
Related subjects:
© 2025 John Reid, Tuvya T. Amsel, published by Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.