<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Previously, Krapohl (2020) evaluated the Bigger-Is-Better Rule (BIBR) on the polygraph electrodermal channel to assess whether there was a best minimum ratio between response sizes for assigning a score. Performance peaked at a minimum ratio between 10% and 20%. The ratios had been calculated by comparing the electrodermal responses for each relevant question against those of the immediately preceding comparison question. The analysis did not consider whether the same optimal ratio would be found if the relevant question electrodermal responses are compared to those of the stronger of two adjacent comparison questions. To investigate we analyzed responses from an independent sample of 255 laboratory cases. The data from those cases found the highest correlation between scores and ground truth occurred when the minimum difference between two electrodermal responses was 30%.</abstract>

Electrodermal Response Ratios: Scoring Against the Stronger of Two Comparison Questions in Search of an Optimal Minimum Threshold

Case Studies Using the Polygraph to Assist in Assessing Sexual Risk in Three Clerics

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The goal of this article is to provide a class of MeToo# victims of a high-profile serial sexual harasser with a non-invasive method for civil action, when the accused publicly dismisses the victims’ claims as lies. When these libelous claims do occur, the victims can be assembled into a class-action libel/defamation case, which in most US states must be mounted within two years of the claim. Because under current civil methods, the plaintiffs would be subject to intense cross-examination in a civil jury trial, class-action lawsuits with small numbers of plaintiffs (e.g. 5–8) have proven impossible to conduct. This article provides a blueprint to create a collaboration amongst the victims, credibility-assessment (lie-detector) experts, statisticians, and MeToo# attorneys to litigate libel suits, which will likely produce out-of-court settlements. Once the first case is successfully completed, precedent will be set to bring other perpetrators to justice, and act as a deterrent to future exploitation. The evidentiary basis would be based on testing the null hypothesis that all plaintiffs are lying, to compare the inferred lying rates of the plaintiffs to similar population controls, who would be known liars, to a “Yes” answer to “Did X sexually harass you?”</abstract>

Trying an Accused Serial Sexual Harasser for Libel in a US Civil Court

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In this article the author gives recommendations for running polygraph examinations of Islamic faith representatives during the Muslim fasting period of Ramadan based on his own practical experience and interactions with Muslim psychologists, and also analyzes examples of incorrect formulations of relevant questions on the subject of Islamic terrorism / extremism in the course of screening examinations.</abstract>

Important Aspects of Polygraph Examinations of Islamic Faith People

Polygraph: The Use of Polygraphy in the Assessment and Treatment of Sex Offenders in the UK

Magdalena Kasprzak: Badania wariograficzne w polskim systemie prawnym (literally: “Polygraph examination in the Polish legal system”), Instytut Wydawniczy EuroPrawo, Warszawa 2020

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 1 (September 2023)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 1 (October 2022)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 2 (June 2021)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 1 (April 2021)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 2 (June 2020)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 1 (March 2020)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 2 (June 2019)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 1 (March 2019)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 3 (September 2018)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 2 (June 2018)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 1 (March 2018)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 4 (December 2017)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 3 (September 2017)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 2 (June 2017)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 1 (March 2017)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 4 (December 2016)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 3 (September 2016)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 2 (June 2016)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 4 (December 2015)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 3 (September 2015)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 2 (June 2015)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 1 (March 2015)

Volume 8 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 8 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 8 (2014): Issue 2 (June 2014)

Volume 8 (2014): Issue 1 (March 2014)

European Polygraph

 European Polygraph is an international journal devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries, and book reviews on the subject of polygraph examinations. These include jurisprudence, forensic sciences, psychology, forensic psychology, psychophysiology, psychopathology, and other aspects of polygraph examinations.  Rejection Rate  &gt;35%  Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.  Target group  Researchers and experts in the field of criminal law