Validated polygraph testing techniques

Polygraph Chat Room

Validated Polygraph Testing Techniques - Part One
back to article index

As Jack Ogilvie stated in his article in the last
issue, "we have validated testing techniques for
specific issue testing". We have a lot of techniques
that are being used in the PDD field, and we hear
that these various techniques are validated. The key
word in this is, of course, "validated. The next
obvious question then becomes, "validated by whom?"

I will list the techniques that I have either been
trained with, read about, completed quality reviews
of, or have seen used by other PDD Examiners - of
course all of which are claimed to be validated. The
list is as follows:

-Arther Known Lie MGQT Test
-Arther Specific Accusation MGQT Test
-Backster "Exploratory" Zone Comparison Test
-Backster "SKY" Zone Comparison Test
-Backster "You Phase" Zone Comparison Test
-Canadian Zone Comparison Test - "A" and "B" Series
-Concealed Information Test
-DODPI "You Phase" Bi-Zone Comparison Test
-DODPI Zone Comparison Test
-General Questions Test
-Gordon Integrated Zone Comparison Test
-Guilty Knowledge Test
-Keeler Technique
-Marcy MGQT Technique
-Matte Quadri-Track Zone Comparison Technique
-Matte Quinque Zone Comparison Technique
-Military Primary/Secondary Series Technique
-Modified Zone of Comparison Technique with SKY
Series
-Modified General Questions Test (MGQT)
-Army Version
-Air Force Version
-Navy CIS Version
-U.S. Secret Service Version
-Modified Relevant-Irrelevant Technique (MRI)
-Musser Balanced Flexibility Test
-Peak of Tension Test
-Positive Control Technique
-Reid MGQT Technique
-Relevant-Irrelevant Technique (RI or IR)
-Test for Espionage & Sabotage (TES)
-Utah Zone Comparison Test
-Bartlett Version
-Honts/Raskin Version
"What the Heck Is This? I Think I'll Throw Something
Together & Form My Own Technique" Technique

If I missed anybody's technique, I apologize
profusely for the omission. This became an issue in
recent ASTM meetings. We were asked to develop a
standard which dealt with use of "validated"
techniques which was slowly diluted to "recognized"
techniques that had some kind of research to
establish that the techniques had been tested by
someone to determine that they actually would detect
deception.

To paraphrase a quote from Don Krapohl in a report
that he wrote concerning validated techniques,"
"because something is validated does not necessarily
mean that it is valid". To be considered valid,
there must exist sufficient research to indicate
accuracy and error rates as well as replicated
independent research that establishes the same
conclusions and results of the original validation
study.

As Don further indicates, voice stress technology has
been "validated" and replicated studies have
determined that the accuracy and error rates are near
chance level and it is not valid for detection of
deception.

Another problem concerning voice stress and
polygraphy is that many of us, me included, will
blast voice stress because they have no independent
research to support their claims of accuracy, yet we
use question formats and testing techniques that have
no independent research to support our claims that
some of the techniques that we use are validated as
accurate.

Don Krapohl's report indicated that the following
techniques have a body of replicated and peer-
reviewed research using the names listed below. He
further indicates that this cannot be considered a
list of valid techniques or necessarily the best
techniques, but that there is established research
for them. The are as follows:

Deception Tests:

Army Modified General Questions Test
Backster Single Issue-ZCT
Federal Single-Issue ZCT
Reid Single-Issue Test
Test for Espionage & Sabotage
Utah Single-Issue ZCT

Knowledge Tests:

Concealed Information Test AKA Guilty Knowledge Test
Peak of Tension Test

That certainly whittled down the original list quite
a bit. He explains that by simply using one of these
testing formats and changing something, changes the
issue of validation. If a PDD Examiner uses the Army
MGQT and uses inclusive comparison/control questions
(no "time-bars" or qualifiers) instead of exclusive
Comparison/control questions (use of "time-bars" or
qualifiers) or uses current controls as opposed to
non-current controls, that disqualifies that
Examiner's test from being considered as having used
a validated technique.

This would suggest, then, that use of the Reid
Technique (where the Army MGQT came from and was
renamed) with a Guilt Complex question as a
control/comparison would not fit as "validated" nor
would the Marcy MGQT fit the mold with the
Introductory Stimulation Question as a
control/comparison and the addition of a Symptomatic
Question nor would the Arther Technique with the
Known Truth Crime Questions.

Additionally, if the validation studies used
relevant/crime questions taking the indirect approach
(e.g., "Did you cause the death of John Smith?" or
"Did Mary sexually touch you?") versus the direct
approach ("Did you kill John Smith?' or "Did Mary
touch your bare penis?"), this would also affect
validity of the technique when using the validation
studies to support the accuracy of a technique.

This is why Don Krapohl made the statement that
someone who uses a technique by the same name as the
ones on the "short list"; e.g., "I used an Army MGQT"
or "I used a Federal ZCT" does not mean that the PDD
Examiner used the exact "formula" (for lack of better
terms) as that used in the study.

Does that mean that modified versions of these
techniques and question formats are invalid? I would
think not. I would think that it just means that if
you have to defend your technique, you had better be
able to articulate clearly why your modifications of
the techniques in the validation studies that you are
using as evidence of "validation" have not violated
the principles of the technique as outlined in the
various studies.

We should all be very careful when suggesting that we
are using validated techniques. I will continue with
a further discussion of this in a later issue with
more comments from the report made by Don Krapohl.

What is a Polygraph? (FAQ)
Polygraph Associations || Polygraph Schools
Equipment & Software || Insurance || Home