Polygraph Verification Test
- Issue date
Oficyna Wydawnicza AFM
European Polygraph 2011, nr 2, s. 61-67.
- Bezpieczeństwo narodowe i wewnętrzne; Prawo; Psychologia
If we as examiners wish to defi ne what is the most problematic part of a polygraph test while conducting a Comparison Question Test (CQT) the answer would be adjusting the correct comparison question for this particular examinee. A few years ago the author asked Cleve Backster how he would defi ne a good comparison question, and his answer was “the one which gives us the correct result.” An examiner from Canada once told the author that development of a Comparison Question is 50% knowledge, and 50% art. Due to the problem of proper selection and introduction of the Comparison Questions (CQ), many examiners fi nish a test questioning whether or not their result was correct based on their selection and introduction of this question. In 2003, the author learned from Nathan J. Gordon, the Polygraph Validation test (PVT). It was explained that this method could be used to identify false positive results, verify deceptive results, and in the latter case, assist in breaking a deceptive examinee’s objections. Later it was explained that the original idea for this new method came from William L. Fleisher (Gordon’s partner) and that Gordon then modifi ed and applied it. Th e PVT is administered as a Peak Of Tension Test, or more correctly, a Guilty Knowledge Test after the administration of a CQT, providing the examinee different possible reasons for his failure of the CQT, while monitoring on which of the reasons he is focusing on.
Files in this item
- SHURANY_Polygraph_verification ...
The following license files are associated with this item: