(1) torture
(2) truth serums /
nacroanalysis
(3) hypnotism
(4) the
psychological stress evacuator (PSE)
(5) voice stress
analyzer (VSA)
(6) computerized
voice stress analyzer (CVSA)
(7) computerized
analysis of facial responses
(8) brain
fingerprinting
WHY THE PREFERENCE FOR THE POLYGRAPH?
The field of lie detection began
as a twentieth-century phenomenon. Before the nineteenth century, there
were ways of forcing a confession, but no way to determine if the
victim of the torture was just confessing to make the pain stop or if
their deception had been broken down. After the development of the
polygraph in the 1920s, the first major challenge came from Doctor
Robert E. House, the “father of truth serum,” who believed that the
drug called scopolamine could make a person tell the truth.
1 Reacting to this innovation
by House, William Marston wrote, “The mind cannot be compelled
to act against its own, self-determined inclination,” meaning that
there is no way to force the truth, thus supporting his own research in
the detection of lies.
2
Another method that
competed with the use of the polygraph was hypnotism, but its
description as a “state of heightened suggestibility,” cast a shade of
doubt over its validity.
3
The next major challenge to the use of the polygraph as the primary
device for lie detection came in the 1970s with the invention of the
psychological stress evacuator (PSE) by Charles McQuiston, which could
analyze voice patterns for signs of stress.
4
This technology developed out of a need during the Vietnam War
for an alternative to the polygraph to use to interrogate
prisoners of war without appearing to obviously test for lies.
5 Similar technology to analyze
voice patterns included teh voice stress analyzer (VSA), and the
computerized voice stress analyzer (CVSA). However, the
American Polygraph Association, and later the Department of Defense in
the United States government, was quick to discredit the validity of
voice stress analyses. The polygraph may not have proven to be 100%
accurate, but they preferred to support the use of the polygraph
instead of this new technology. The support of the federal government
after it began using the polygraph during World War II, and still
today, has caused other lie detection technology to be overlooked.
Besides, the test, order and type of questions, used with the equipment
remained the same, but now the technology recorded the voice patterns
of the subject rather than the three physiological responses recorded
by the polygraph. The choice of methods of interrogation within the
science of the polygraph allows it to change its use periodically to
create an illusion of variation every time the validity of this
technology is tested. The most recent technology presented as an
alternative to the polygraph has been the innovation of brain
fingerprinting, in which:
“Words or pictures relevant to a
crime are flashed on a computer screen, along with other, irrelevant
words or pictures. Electrical brain responses are measured
non-invasively through a patented headband equipped with sensors. Dr.
Farwell has discovered that a specific brain-wave response called a
MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted
electroencephalographic response) is elicited when the brain processes
noteworthy information it recognizes.”
6
Brain fingerprinting has been tested in Farwell
Laboratories and it was proven "100 % accurate in over 120 tests,"
7 according to the website
dedicated to Farwell Laboratories. Real world tests are different
from the labortory, the reaction of the polygraph to its use outside
the laboratory has proven this theory, but only time will tell if brain
fingerprinting will continue prove its worth. The field of forensic
science is constantly in flux
as the
psychologists working in conjunction with those in the fields of
biology try to delve further into the human mind to assess the best
method of detecting truth in a world with too many reasons for people
to lie to ensure honesty.