The case against the use of polygraph examinations to monitor post-conviction sex offenders
In this article I caution against the use of polygraph testing in convicted sex-offenders programs. First, I explain that the prevalent method of polygraph testing, the CQT, suffers from several major flaws and has no scientific basis. These flaws, which characterize all usages of the CQT, including...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2008
|
| In: |
Legal and criminological psychology
Year: 2008, Volume: 13, Issue: 2, Pages: 191-207 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Summary: | In this article I caution against the use of polygraph testing in convicted sex-offenders programs. First, I explain that the prevalent method of polygraph testing, the CQT, suffers from several major flaws and has no scientific basis. These flaws, which characterize all usages of the CQT, including its use with sex offenders, create a considerable risk for false positive as well as false-negative errors. Second, no methodologically sound research examining the validity of the CQT, neither in its forensic application, nor in its use with sex offenders has been conducted. Finally, I explain why the use of CQT polygraphy with sex offenders is even more problematic than its common use as an aid in criminal investigations. Clearly, rehabilitation programs of convicted sex offenders are highly important, but the use of polygraph testing in this context is misguided and instead of reducing recidivism in sex offenders is likely to achieve just the opposite. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2044-8333 |
| DOI: | 10.1348/135532508X298577 |