Should Lie-Detector Tests Be Used To Monitor Convicted Sex Offenders?
Main Category: Psychology / PsychiatryArticle Date: 09 Aug 2008 - 4:00 PDT
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
2.18 (11 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
4 (3 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 2 posts |
In the September edition of Legal and Criminological Psychology, Forensic Psychiatrist Professor Don Grubin and Professor Gershon Ben-Shakhar argue the cases for and against the use of polygraph testing of convicted sex offenders.
Polygraph, or lie detector tests, monitor physiological responses such as heart rate. Individual's physiological responses to questions are measured and the polygraph records the body's responses that reflect psychological stress and arousal. In the case of convicted sex offenders, offender's responses to questions such as their use of pornography or whether they have been on the lookout for victims are measured, with the aim of monitoring behaviour and adherence to relapse prevention plans.
Polygraph testing is widely used with convicted sex offenders in the United States to assist in their treatment and supervision, and in 2007 legislation was passed in England enabling a national trial of mandatory testing in the probation service.
In the journal Legal & Criminological Psychology, Professor Don Grubin from Newcastle University and the Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Trust puts forward the case for post-conviction sex offender testing (PCSOT).
He claims: "The focus of PCSOT is facilitating disclosure to assist in the treatment and supervision of sex offenders. PCOST has been found to be effective at getting a complete sexual history, checking compliance with treatment and supervision and gaining information about an individual's offending."
However Professor Gershon Ben-Shakhar (Hebrew University of Jerusalem) believes: "Polygraph examinations have no value as a scientific method for detecting deception and uncovering information the examinee does not wish to disclose." Arguing that "autonomic measures are by no means measures of deception".
Furthermore, he claims that as the measurement of these physiological responses lacks standardization, the results cannot be quantified objectively so 'pass' and 'fail' are subjective judgements vulnerable to several biases.
The full cases for and against the use of polygraph testing of sex offenders can be found in Legal and Criminological Psychology, Volume 13 Part 2 September 2008.
The British Psychological Society
Visit our psychology / psychiatry section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/117717.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/117717.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (2)
Polygraph Has Been Standardized
posted by Michael Martin on 11 Aug 2008 at 8:06 amProfessor Ben-Shakhar is wrong in claiming that polgaph lacks standardization. Polygraphy, now called Psychophysiological Detection of Deception (PDD), has been standardized both by the American Polygraph Association (http://www.polygraph.org) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (http://www.astm.org). Additionally, the industry has established validation guidelines, and several PDD techniques have been validated (over 90% accuracy required). The technology has advanced considerably in the last ten years and remains the gold standard for lie detection methodology.
Validity
posted by Don on 16 Aug 2010 at 2:18 pmI have taken the polygraph test and believe it to be inaccurate for as I on two occassions could not pass ANY of the questions,(even the questions that they know I was not lying about ie: The weather, our test location etc.) I have been on medications for years for my nerves & suicidal ideations and was told by the Polygrapher that "That really doesn't make a difference." I strongly feel this to be un-true!
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.





