NCJ Number
208414
Journal
Polygraph Volume: 33 Issue: 4 Dated: 2004 Pages: 223-233
Date Published
2004
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This study examined whether the accuracy advantage found using the University of Utah (UOUT) data evaluation conventions over the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DODPI) would replicate with a different dataset and different scores.
Abstract
In 2004, researchers investigated data evaluation conventions used by investigators at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DODPI) and the University of Utah (UOUT) to determine the source of accuracy differences reported. Results from the investigation found that veracity decisions obtained using data evaluation conventions from UOUT were more accurate than decisions obtained from DODPI data evaluation conventions. This study attempted to determine whether the accuracy advantage found in 2004 using the UOUT data evaluation conventions would replicate with a different dataset and different scorers. It was hypothesized that the greatest contributor to the accuracy difference would be the use of additional question series. Four federally certified psychophysiological detection of deception (PDD) examiners scored the physiological data from 16 deceptive and 16 nondeceptive examinees. The results indicate that substantial increases in the number of correct decisions can be achieved through the use of three to five question series, relative to that obtained using three question series. The results of the 2004 study and this study suggest that the use of the three to five questions series rule could be beneficial within the Federal Government. References and appendixes A and B