A Comparison of Computer Programs Designed to Evaluate Psychophysiological Detection of Deception Examination: Bakeoff 1

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Dollins ◽  
Donald J. Krapohl ◽  
Donnie W. Dutton
Keyword(s):  
Computer Programs ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Psychophysiological Detection

Efficacy of Repeated Psychophysiological Detection of Deception Testing

1998 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 14350J ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Dollins ◽  
Victor L. Cestaro ◽  
Donald J. Pettit
Keyword(s):  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Psychophysiological Detection

Machiavellianism, the Control Question Test and the Detection of Deception

1987 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 747-757 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. T. Bradley ◽  
K. I. Klohn
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Arousal ◽  
Partial Support ◽  
High Arousal ◽  
Control Question ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
High Mach ◽  
Mock Crime ◽  
Psychophysiological Detection

Individuals, differing in levels of Machiavellianism, were involved in a mock crime psychophysiological detection of deception study. It was hypothesized that those scoring high on Machiavellianism would perceive detection results as more accurately reflecting their actual guilt or innocence, especially under conditions of high arousal, than those with low scores. The hypothesis was based on assumptions that subjects must appropriately discriminate amongst crime-relevant and irrelevant questions, that this discrimination is moderately difficult with Control Question Tests, and that high-Mach scorers under arousing conditions will make this discrimination more readily than low-Mach scorers. Partial support for the hypothesis was found in that guilty high-Mach scorers were more accurately detected than guilty low-Mach scorers. This result did not hold for innocent Mach scorers, and there was no augmentation of the effect in conditions designed to increase emotional arousal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document