LIE DETECTION DEBATE
STRONG POINTS OF LIE DETECTION IN INVESTIGATION
1. Detecting deception: Polygraph tests are designed to measure physiological
responses such as heart rate, blood pressure, and perspiration, which are
believed to indicate stress and anxiety associated with deception. Proponents
argue that these measurements can provide valuable insights into whether a
person is being truthful or deceptive.
2. Obtaining additional information: Polygraph tests can encourage individuals
to provide additional information or confess to crimes. The fear of being
caught in a lie during the test may prompt individuals to reveal details or
admit guilt that they might not otherwise disclose.
3. Screening potential employees: Polygraph tests are sometimes used as part of
pre-employment screening processes, particularly for positions that require
high levels of security or trust. Proponents argue that polygraph tests can help
identify individuals who may have a higher risk of engaging in dishonest or
illegal activities.
4. Investigative tool: Polygraph tests can be used as an investigative tool to help
law enforcement focus their efforts. By eliminating individuals who pass the
polygraph test from suspicion, investigators can narrow down their list of
potential suspects and allocate resources more effectively.
5. Deterrent effect: The mere presence of polygraph testing in certain settings can
act as a deterrent against dishonesty or illicit activities. Knowing that they may
be subjected to a polygraph test can discourage individuals from engaging in
misconduct in the first place.
6. Supplemental information: While polygraph results are not admissible as
evidence in most courtrooms, proponents argue that they can provide
investigators with additional information that can be used to guide further
inquiries, corroborate other evidence, or identify areas where further
investigation is needed.
LOOPHOLES AND REBUTTALS
Lack of scientific basis: Critics argue that the scientific basis of polygraphy is weak.
The physiological responses measured by the polygraph, such as heart rate and
perspiration, can be influenced by numerous factors unrelated to deception, such as
anxiety, stress, or even physical discomfort. These critics argue that the polygraph's
reliance on these physiological measures as indicators of deception is not
scientifically established.
Rebuttal: While the scientific basis of polygraphy may be debated, proponents argue
that when conducted by trained and experienced examiners, polygraph tests can still
provide valuable information. They contend that, while not infallible, the
physiological responses measured during a polygraph test can indicate a person's
stress and arousal levels, which may be correlated with deception.
Countermeasures: Skeptics argue that individuals can employ countermeasures to
manipulate the results of a polygraph test. Techniques such as controlled breathing,
muscle tensing, or mental distractions can potentially alter the physiological
responses measured by the polygraph, leading to inaccurate results.
Rebuttal: Proponents of polygraphy acknowledge the existence of countermeasures
but argue that trained examiners can usually detect them and take steps to minimize
their impact. They argue that the use of countermeasures requires specific knowledge
and skill, and most individuals undergoing a polygraph test are unlikely to possess
the necessary expertise to consistently and effectively deceive the test.
Variability in interpretation: The interpretation of polygraph results is subjective
and can vary among examiners. Different examiners may reach different conclusions
based on the same set of physiological data, leading to inconsistency and potential
bias.
Rebuttal: While interpretation can be subjective to some extent, proponents argue
that experienced examiners follow standardized procedures and guidelines to
minimize interpretation variability. They contend that professional training and
adherence to established protocols help ensure a consistent and reliable
interpretation of polygraph results.
False positives and false negatives: Polygraph tests can produce both false positives
(indicating deception when the person is truthful) and false negatives (indicating
truthfulness when the person is deceptive). This inherent inaccuracy raises concerns
about the reliability of polygraphy as an investigative tool.
Rebuttal: Proponents acknowledge that false positives and false negatives can occur.
However, they argue that when polygraph tests are conducted by skilled examiners
and used as part of a comprehensive investigative process, they can still provide
valuable information. Polygraphy is viewed as a tool that can help guide further
investigation and serve as a supplemental source of information, rather than a
definitive proof of guilt or innocence.
