IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/etc/journl/y2019i19p146-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polygraph Tests - Benefits and Challenges

Author

Listed:
  • Panthayil Babu Rajan

Abstract

This research describes the working, benefits and challengers of polygraph tests. Polygraph tests are lie-detecting devices that help ascertain individuals� honesty based on physiological indicators. The heart rate/blood pressure, respiration, and skin responses are the three indicators measured in the test to assess honest/deceitful behavior. The underlying assumption behind the working of polygraph tests is that the autonomic responses of dishonest individuals are distinctively different from those of honest people because the liars will be more nervous than truth tellers. Control Question Test (CQT), Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) or Concealed Information Test (CIT) and Neuroscience-Based Advanced Polygraph Tests are the important types of polygraph tests used today. Polygraph tests are used to detect truthfulness of individuals in such important fields as crime investigation departments, national security agencies, and business and industry. However, accuracy of polygraph tests and ethical issues associated with the tests are highly debated.

Suggested Citation

  • Panthayil Babu Rajan, 2019. "Polygraph Tests - Benefits and Challenges," Academicus International Scientific Journal, Entrepreneurship Training Center Albania, issue 19, pages 146-155, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:etc:journl:y:2019:i:19:p:146-155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://academicus.edu.al/nr19/Academicus-MMXIX-19-146-155.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://academicus.edu.al/nr19/Academicus-MMXIX-19-146-155.html
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark D. Happel, 2005. "Neuroscience and the Detection of Deception," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 22(5), pages 667-685, September.
    2. Matthew L. Jensen & Thomas O. Meservy & Judee K. Burgoon & Jay F. Nunamaker, 2010. "Automatic, Multimodal Evaluation of Human Interaction," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 367-389, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Olsen, Carmen & Gold, Anna, 2018. "Future research directions at the intersection between cognitive neuroscience research and auditors’ professional skepticism," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 127-141.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:etc:journl:y:2019:i:19:p:146-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gabor Vasmatics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/etctial.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.