The Utility of Polygraphs in National Security - Term Paper Example

Topic Paper In the present world scenario of rising terrorism, espionage activity, international crimes, and nuclear threats, national security has become a concern of utmost importance for most countries. In the American context, adoption of measures that ensure national security has even greater relevance. Psychophysiological Detection of Deception (PDD) Examinations, or polygraph tests in common parlance, are currently used in criminal investigations in many countries including Belgium, Canada, Israel, Japan, Turkey, Singapore, South Korea, Mexico, Pakistan, the Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, and the USA (The British Psychological Society, 2004) . Polygraphy is based on the rationale that a person resorting to deceptive behavior gets measurably stressed with the action, the stress manifesting itself as involuntary changes in physiological responses such as breathing, blood pressure, heart, and perspiration rates. But few techniques used in forensic science to date have generated as much controversy as PDD has. Experts from all fields including scientists, psychologists, psychophysiologists, medical men and the legal fraternity have opined that polygraph tests, besides being far from completely reliable, have limited usefulness. Scientists, after many studies, have dismissed PDD procedure as quite unscientific and extremely fallible (National Research Council, 2003). As such, absolute reliance on polygraph screening would present a danger to national security objectives. National security is too important to be left to such a blunt instrument, according to Stephen E. Fienberg, head of the panel of experts convened by the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, to review the scientific evidence on the polygraph (Fienberg, 2002). Although the polygraph test is essentially a psychological test, according to psychophysiologists, Furedy and Heslegrave (1988), it is not a standardized technique for differentiating honesty (or innocence) from guilt. A summary of scientific opinion from a recent survey concludes that most psychology experts do not consider polygraphy to be technically sound and even more believe that skilled subversives can defeat polygraph tests.” (Polygraphs and Security, 1999). Nevertheless, all experts are agreed that introduction of scientific and dependable techniques to fight the threats to national security is of great importance. No consensus exists to date on the utility of PDD Examinations in national security and polygraph testing in the realm of national security has remained one of the most hotly debated topics. Not everyone holds PDD examination in such low regard; there is widespread acceptance of the utility of PDD Examination as well. Some of its proponents argue that the polygraph has a basis in modern science because the polygraph relies on physiological responses (Cacioppo, Tassinary, and Berntson, 2007). Also, according to MacLaren, “the polygraph technology used in the Department of Defense screening program appears to have considerable validity and utility… The polygraph screening program has a respectable record of identifying persons with hostile or selfish intentions that are contrary to the maintenance of national security.” (MacLaren, 2000, p 155). Original research studies (Furedy and Heslegrave, 1988), review articles (The British Psychological Society, 2004) and excellent reports (OTA Report, 1983, NRC Report, 2003) are now available on the efficacy as well as deficiencies of the PDD examination. While scientists and other experts, including legal experts, are mostly unconvinced about the credibility of the polygraph examination, apparently everyone agrees that there is a need for carefully designed experiments and more research into the experimental protocol, as well as cautious interpretation of the data before large-scale application of PDD Examination in screening programs. The primary objective of the research paper, “The Utility of PDD Examinations in Homeland Security,” is to present a thorough analysis of the PDD Examination vis a vis the important role it could play in the defense of the United States. The purpose of the study is to provide information pertinent to the application of PDD Examinations, the PDD Examination process and procedures, the theory behind the science, PDD history, research, and how PDD Examinations are currently used in the field of counterintelligence. This paper will research the controvertial issues in detail, with a view to removing the lacunae. The research questions proposed to be addressed in this paper connect to the debates and controversies related with the topic ‘the utility of polygraphs in national security’ and the relevance of these questions in determining the research findings cannot be disputed. From the early stage of the introduction of polygraphs, there have been debates on the utility of polygraphs in national security, and the topic has always been one of the most divisive questions in the national security sector. The Department of Energy (DOE) has been making attempts to set up polygraph screening for the employees and applicants as a measure to ensure security in the national nuclear weapons laboratories. There were severe criticisms against the presumptions of DOE that the tests would identify subversives and put off potential terrorists. The sub-panel of Sandia’s Senior Scientists and Engineers who made a profound analysis on ‘Polygraphs and Security’ concluded that “there is no adequate scientific basis for this assumption. No specific polygraphic or behavioral response has been directly linked to the act of deception…” (Polygraphs and Security, 1999). It was also specified by them that the subjective factors involved in the administration and interpretation of polygraph tests point to their limitations with regard to national security. It was also specified by them that the subjective factors involved in the administration and interpretation of polygraph tests point to their limitations with regard to national security. Therefore, it is extremely important to do a precise analysis of all the available data and to come up with the most sagacious findings on the question. Apart from inadequacy of a scientific basis for the tests, other controversies in respect of the application of PDD examinations for purposes of national security pertain to accuracy, polygraph testing validity, countermeasures, and false results including both false negatives and false positives. The employment of polygraph in national security must only follow a thoroughly researched and investigated study which confirms the effectiveness and answers the criticisms leveled against its use. These research questions are able to draw out some central concerns in the national security sector and to pinpoint the essential areas of disputes. “Indeed, the lie detector’s contributions to the maintenance of national security have been far from straightforward. Although the instrument has certainly been occasionally deployed in national security campaigns on behalf of governmental agencies, the lie detector’s indebtedness to the domains of its emergence necessitates an expansion of the understanding of national security to include national culture.” (Kinsman, Buse, Steedman, and Kinsman, 2000, p. 202). The main debates on the question involve the validity and reliability of the modern polygraph, especially as it relates to national security. In the opinion of Furedy and Heslegrave (1988), “The modern instruments (polygraphs) available to most pro­fessional polygraphers are reliable in the sense of providing an adequate record of the actual physiological functions. From the point of view of reliability, therefore, there is no great problem with these instruments. Rather, it is their validity or accuracy that is at issue” (p. 221). The Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) has concluded that "while there is some evidence for the validity of polygraph testing as an adjunct to criminal investigations, there is very little research or scientific evidence to establish polygraph test validity in screening situations" (OTA Report, 1983, p.8). Also, according to the OTA report, the complexity of the PDD procedure makes it very difficult to assess its validity, which may also vary widely from one application to another (pp. 7-8). The research done so far on polygraph validity has varied widely in the quality of both research design and methodology which is also reflected in the results. Two commonly used polygraph tests are the Control Question Test (CQT) and the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) but opinions of experts are divided as to which of the two is more accurate. According to the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph (National Research Council, 2003), “although the theory underlying GKT testing (orienting theory) is more plausible than the theory underlying CQT testing, GKT is not without theoretical problems either.” Besides, “Polygraph research has not developed and tested theories of the underlying factors that produce the observed responses….. There is little knowledge about how much these factors influence the outcomes of polygraph tests in field settings” (NAS Report, Executive Summary, 2003, p.4). Hence, more research on these matters is clearly warranted. Another research question that needs to be addressed is what the NRC report states as: “Although we believe it likely that polygraph testing has utility in screening contexts because it might have a deterrent effect, we were struck by the lack of scientific evidence concerning the factors that might produce or inhibit deterrence” (p.187). Moreover, not many studies have been carried out to understand the interrogation beliefs and practices of police investigators and polygraph examiners which might contribute to ambiguous PDD conclusions. It is well established that countermeasures can affect the results of a polygraph test. However, “the research on countermeasures has been limited and the results—while conflicting—suggest that validity may be affected” (OTA Report, 1983, p. 5). This is particularly important and could have significant implications for national security if polygraph is used and relied on for such purposes since even a small false negative rate could undermine security of the nation. A sizeable scientific psychology community believes that criminals or subversives can beat a polygraph (Iacono and Lykken, 1997). Moreover, the countermeasures are difficult to detect either instrumentally or through observation. Hence, if polygraph testing is to be more widely employed in national security investigations, there is an urgent need for research on countermeasures (OTA Report). In conclusion, given that one of the major concerns, at the present juncture, is to uphold national security, a valid approach to identification of falsehoods would seem to have great utility for the identification of potential perpetrators of anti-national activities. However, PDD procedure as currently practiced is highly controversial. Also, the general quality of the evidence available at the present time for judging polygraph validity is relatively low. The research questions proposed in this study have great potential in analyzing all these controversial aspects and bringing about a logical conclusion. References Cacioppo, J. T., Tassinary, L. G., & Berntson, G. G. (2007). Handbook of Psychophysiology. New York: Cambridge University Press. Fienberg, SE. (2002). National Research Council Report Release News Conference. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=s10420 Furedy, J.J. & Heslegrave, R.J. (1988). Validity of the lie detector: A psychophysiological perspective. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 15 (2), 219-246. Iacono, WG and Lykken, DT. (1997). The Validity of the Lie Detector: Two Surveys of Scientific Opinion. Jounal of Applied Psychology, 82, 426-433. Kinsman, Gary William., Buse, Dieter K., Steedman, Mercedes., and Kinsman, Gary. (2000). Whose National Security?: Canadian State Surveillance and the Creation of Enemies. Between the Lines. p 202. MacLaren, V.V. (2000).  Can we trust counterintelligence polygraph tests?  Polygraph, 29, 2, p 151-155. Retrieved January, 02, 2009, from http://ftp.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/maclaren.html National Research Council, Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph (2003). The polygraph and lie detection, 416 pp., ISBN: 978-0-309-08436-9. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) Report. (1983). Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation, Retrieved January 8, 2009 from http://fas.org/ota/otareports/year/1983a/ “Polygraphs and Security: A Study by a Subpanel of Sandia’s Senior Scientists and Engineers.” (1999). Retrieved January, 02, 2009, from http://ftp.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/sandia.html The British Psychological Society ((2004). Polygraphic deception detection: A review of the current scientific status and fields of application. Retrieved January 9, 2009, from http://www.bps.org.uk/document-download-area/document download$.cfm?file_uuid=9081F97A-306E-1C7F-B65E-570A3444FF4D&ext=pdf Read More