This paper explores the validity and reliability of polygraph testing, a subject of scientific debate for nearly a century. It defines validity as how well a polygraph measures what it is intended to measure, and reliability as consistency in performance. The paper outlines methodologies for determining both properties through controlled testing with subjects known to be truthful or deceptive, establishing a baseline accuracy threshold of approximately 90%. By examining existing research and proposing direct testing methods, the paper contributes to understanding how polygraph effectiveness can be scientifically evaluated.
The validity and reliability of polygraph testing has been a subject of debate since such testing was first implemented almost a century ago (OTA, 1983, par. 1). Abundant research has been conducted on modern polygraph machines and techniques that has served to validate their use and accuracy; however, controversy still remains in the minds of many (Gougler et al., 2011, pp. 196–201).
One way to determine the reliability and validity of a polygraph machine is to examine existing research conducted on the machine, if available. It truly takes years and abundant study to ensure these features to a degree worthy of scientific scrutiny (Gougler et al., 2011, p. 197). Assuming such research is unavailable or is untrustworthy, there are other more direct methods that can be employed to effectively determine how valid and reliable a polygraph is. Understanding polygraph technology and its applications requires both examination of existing literature and rigorous experimental validation.
Validity is a measure of how well the polygraph measures what it is supposed to measure, while reliability is a measure of how consistent the polygraph is. These two properties are fundamental to scientific measurement. Reliability in scientific instruments refers to reproducibility, whereas validity speaks to accuracy and proper measurement of the intended construct.
To determine both validity and reliability, multiple tests will need to be performed with subjects that are both known to be telling the truth on certain elements and known to be lying on others. Alternatively, some subjects may only tell the truth while others lie after baseline measurements are taken (Gougler et al., 2011, pp. 196–198).
The research design must account for physiological variation by establishing baseline measurements before deceptive responses are introduced. This allows researchers to distinguish between normal variation and responses indicative of deception. Peer-reviewed physiological research supports the use of baseline comparisons in detecting autonomic responses associated with deception.
"90% threshold and evaluation criteria"
You’re 74% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.