The awkward truth about lie detectors
By Tom Chivers | Telegraph.co.uk
Why are police forces trialling polygraph machines when many experts argue that they simply donít work?
Polygraphs, the lie detector machines beloved of Fifties comic books and Jeremy Kyle shows, have a chequered history. American law‑enforcement agencies continue to use them, despite what critics claim is a lack of evidence that they actually work. Now our Government has announced plans to use them to help determine whether or not paedophiles and rapists should go back to jail.
The Ministry of Justice will allow probation officers to send paroled sex offenders back to prison if a polygraph finds they have been lying. This follows a pilot study by the University of Kent which found that offenders were twice as likely to offer ďclinically significant disclosuresĒ Ė such as an admission of entering an exclusion zone around a school Ė if they were subjected to polygraph tests.
This is the latest example of British law-enforcers adopting technologies and methods that many deride as flawed at best, pseudo-science at worst. Graphology (the study of handwriting to reveal personality), voice-stress analysis, even ďmind-readingĒ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines: all have been posited as methods for sorting the honest from the deceitful. And it is not just the police who have been seduced by these devices; the Department for Work and Pensions has used voice analysis in an attempt to detect benefits cheats.
Opponents of such technologies insist that the scientific evidence for their reliability is decidedly patchy. The MoJ programme has been criticised by Dr Sile Lane of the charity Sense About Science, who points to serious methodological flaws.
ďThe researchers downplay the bias of the observer, which surely should be a large concern since the research depended on offender managers deciding what was or wasnít a clinically significant disclosure,Ē she says. The charity has published a paper, Sense About Lie Detectors, on the evidence and lack thereof for the techniques.
So how exactly is a lie detector supposed to work? And why are so many senior policemen and politicians apparently convinced of its effectiveness?
Polygraphs do not detect lies, but physiological proxies such as perspiration and heart rate. The technology relies on something called the Control Question Technique (CQT). The interrogator asks questions, some of which concern the incident under investigation, but also ďcontrolĒ questions which may, for example, be about other crimes, which the subject had nothing to do with, or more general stress-inducing questions like: ďHave you ever lied to get out of trouble?Ē
The assumption is that guilty people will be more stressed when talking about real crimes than when answering the controls, and that innocent people will be equally stressed for both. Elevated responses that can be measured by a machine Ė such as faster heartbeat or increased perspiration (which increases electrical conductivity of the skin) Ė are taken as indicators of deception.
However, itís difficult to be sure that these physiological changes are not indicators of stress that has no roots in guilt: understandably, someone being accused of lying to their probation officer can find themselves getting stressed very rapidly.
Dr Jamie Horder of Kingís College Londonís Institute of Psychiatry says that studying the effectiveness of polygraph technology is very difficult. ďThere have been studies in which you instruct some volunteers to try to conceal something, and you pay them if they are successful. But the problem is that the stakes are so small. You get maybe £20 or £50 if you beat [the machine], but in real life the stakes are much higher. And because the whole thing is based on emotion and stress, thatís really important.Ē
In fact it is possible to test the efficacy of polygraphs, but the trouble is such experiments are rare Ė at least according to Richard Wiseman, professor of the public understanding of psychology at the University of Hertfordshire. Because you canít simply ask a criminal whether he was lying or not, the only method would be to use polygraphs in cases where the true answer had already been established using other evidence. Then it would be possible to check the polygraphís responses against reality in a high-stakes situation. ďIf the examiner was unaware of the true answers, then that would be a proper double-blind scientific study. But there have been very few trials like that,Ē says Prof Wiseman.
From what evidence there is, he adds that ďthe polygraph seems to be very good at catching liars. But it seems very likely to give false positives as well, to ícatchí people who are telling the truthĒ.
Horder agrees, pointing to research which found that polygraphs were ď70-97 per cent accurate for people who turned out to be guilty, but between 12-94 per cent accurate for people who turned out to be innocent.Ē
Clearly, reliance on lie detectors makes it more probable that the innocent will be wrongly convicted. Furthermore, criminals can beat the test. ďIf you make yourself stressed for the control questions, then your stress on the investigative questions may not show up,Ē says Horder. ďMethods include causing physical pain, say biting your tongue, or simply thinking about something stressful.Ē
Despite the apparent ease with which it can be subverted, use of the polygraph is becoming routinely accepted in Britain. Since 2002, police forces in Surrey, Northumberland, the East and West Midlands, Sussex, Devon, Lancashire, London and Hertfordshire have run trials of polygraph tests on sex offenders. ďItís remarkable how itís kept cropping up,Ē says Horder. ďIt seems that once a year or so some service would trial it, then nothing much would happen, then a year later it would be trialled somewhere else.Ē
A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) confirmed that polygraph tests may be considered for use by police, saying that they could become ďanother toolĒ for the management of sex offenders, and their introduction will be discussed at a conference in September.
Why does this apparently flawed technology refuse to die? Partly itís our fascination with gadgets: ďWe use technology for so much nowadays that it would make sense to apply it to lying. And it would be great if it worked. But it would have been great in the Fifties, too; it didnít work then, and it doesnít work now,Ē says Prof Wiseman. And yet enthusiasts and pressure groups keep pushing it?
ďThe uncharitable explanation would be that they kept trying until they convinced someone,Ē says Dr Horder. However, a more reasonable explanation is that even if it canít detect lies, some believe that the polygraph may encourage honesty. In social psychology, itís called a ďbogus pipeline to the truthĒ.
ďThe pilot study found that the lie detector tests led to offenders being more honest with their offender managers,Ē a Ministry of Justice spokesman told The Daily Telegraph. Fans of The Wire will be familiar with this principle: detectives on the show trick a suspect into confessing by pretending a photocopier is a polygraph.
Regardless of whether or not this is the case, is this an acceptable way for the legal system to act? ďYouíre trying to detect deception by using deception,Ē says Horder. ďEthically, opinions will differ, but itís murky with regard to legal principles like entrapment. And why stop at a lie detector? Why not a magic wand?Ē
Read the full article at: telegraph.co.uk
Also tune into Red Ice Radio:
Bruce Lipton - The Biology of Belief
Lynne McTaggart - The Intention Experiment
Paul Levy - George W Bush & our Collective Psychosis
Sonia Barrett - Destiny, Time, Space, Belief & Transcending the Levels of Programming
Covering-Up Government Lies (What Else?)
"Believing Is Seeing": Truth, lies and photographs
10 Psychological States Youíve Never Heard OfÖ and When You Experienced Them
Do Me A Favor So Youíll Like Me: The Reverse Psychology of Likeability
School cafeterias to try psychology in lunch line
The Psychology of Conspiracy Denial
Psychological warfare campaign rages under the radar
Why Psychologists Are Infinitely More Dangerous Than Conspiracy Theorists
Terrorist "pre-crime" detector field tested in United States
UK government promoted useless íbomb detectorsí
Brain scans being misused as lie detectors, experts say
Latest News from our Front Page
Better Identification of Viking Corpses Reveals: Half of the Warriors Were Female
Shieldmaidens are not a myth! A recent archaeological discovery has shattered the stereotype of exclusively male Viking warriors sailing out to war while their long-suffering wives wait at home with baby Vikings. (We knew it! We always knew it.) Plus, some other findings are challenging that whole ‚Äúrape and pillage‚ÄĚ thing, too.
Researchers at the University of Western Australia decided ...
Off Your Knees, Germany! Ernst Zundel 1983 - 2003
For more information on the holocaust, how the war was forced upon Germany, and the REAL victims of the second world war see:
IRS Drops Attack For Six Years ‚Äď No Evidence of Jurisdiction
A big congrats to a friend I‚Äôve been working with for several years, he stood up to the predators commonly called the ‚ÄúIRS‚ÄĚ and they dropped their attack. Thanks also for providing me with the proof below.
The criminals called the ‚ÄúIRS‚ÄĚ initiated an attack claiming my friend was required to file six tax returns, or explain how he made ...
Into Eternity - Finland's 100,000 Year Massive Underground Spent Nuclear Fuel Program
Into Eternity is a documentary about a deep geological repository for nuclear waste. The concept of long-term underground storage for radioactive waste has been explored since the 1950s. The inner part of the Russian doll-like storage canisters is to be composed of copper. Hence in the case of Onkalo it is tightly linked to experiments on copper corrosion in running ...
SPLC Accuses Oath Keepers of Inciting ‚ÄúArmed Confrontation‚ÄĚ Over Sugar Pine Mine
The Southern Poverty Law Center has accused Oath Keepers of inciting an armed confrontation with BLM authorities over the Sugar Pine Mine dispute in Oregon, despite the fact that the organization has explicitly stated that it is not promoting armed confrontation with the feds.
In an article provocatively posted on the organization‚Äôs ‚ÄėHatewatch‚Äô section entitled Oath Keepers Descend Upon Oregon with ...
|More News » |