Literature DB >> 1954164

Alice-in-Wonderland terminological usage in, and communicational concerns about, that peculiarly American flight of technological fancy. The CQT polygraph.

J J Furedy1.   

Abstract

Alice-in-Wonderland (AW) terminological usage employs basic terms in a systematically misleading and taxonomically anarchic way. The so-called "control" question "test" (CQT) polygraph procedure, which enjoys a controversial but nevertheless scientific status in North America, involves such AW terminological usage. The basic concepts of "test," "control," and "quantification" are loosely employed. There is loose talk about the "detection of deception," which generates the paradox that in the CQT it is in the innocent that deception should be detected. Moreover, deception is not really assessed either in the CQT or in the more scientically-based Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT). Finally, there is loose practice in evaluating the CQT, which should not be primarily assessed in terms of its overall accuracy, but in terms of its specific effects in improving accuracy through the provision of physiological information to the examiner. Such as assessment has not been carried out even in laboratory analogues of polygraphy. The treatment of the CQT exemplifies most psychophysiologists' reluctance to treat basic definitional issues seriously, and also means that opponents of the CQT are unable to communicate clearly about it with non-psychophysiologist professionals and with the lay community.

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1954164     DOI: 10.1007/bf02912516

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci        ISSN: 1053-881X


  8 in total

1.  Why (some) Americans believe in the lie detector while others believe in the guilty knowledge test.

Authors:  D T Lykken
Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci       Date:  1991 Jul-Sep

2.  On approaches to explaining cardiovascular reactivity: toward explanations that explain.

Authors:  J J Furedy
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 4.016

3.  Specific versus placebo effects in biofeedback training: a critical lay perspective.

Authors:  J J Furedy
Journal:  Biofeedback Self Regul       Date:  1987-09

4.  Specific versus placebo effects in biofeedback: some brief back-to-basics considerations.

Authors:  J J Furedy; D Shulhan
Journal:  Biofeedback Self Regul       Date:  1987-09

5.  Evaluating polygraphy from a psychophysiological perspective: a specific-effects analysis.

Authors:  J J Furedy
Journal:  Pavlov J Biol Sci       Date:  1987 Oct-Dec

6.  Differentiation of deception as a psychological process: a psychophysiological approach.

Authors:  J J Furedy; C Davis; M Gurevich
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 7.  Truth and deception: a reply to Lykken.

Authors:  D C Raskin; J A Podlesny
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 8.  The detection of deception.

Authors:  D T Lykken
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 17.737

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.