Test Questions Technique (Lie Detector)

All those who use the lie detector, and all who sharply criticize its use, nevertheless agree that it is necessary to somehow prevent Othello's mistakes. And on the question of how much the risk of their appearance reduces, the procedure for asking questions is a heated debate now. When testing, there are usually four options for asking questions, and given sub-options, even more. Now we consider only two. The first of them, as a rule, used in the investigation of criminal cases, is the technique of control questions. The suspect is asked not only questions relevant to the crime (such as “You stole $ 750?”), But also control questions. And most of the disagreement about this technique is due to the existence of different points of view on what controls these issues and how well they are doing so.
I will quote the psychologist David Reskin on this account, as he is a leading scientist who supports the use of test questions techniques in criminal investigations: “The operator may say to the suspect the following:“ Since it’s about theft, I’m forced to ask you some general questions regarding your decency and your attitude to theft. I have to do it to establish what kind of person you are and whether you could be the one who stole the money and now deceives everyone. So, I ask you: until you fulfill moose 18, have you ever stolen anything? How do you answer this? manner, in which this question is posed, and the behavior of the operator himself is specially thought out so that the suspect immediately begins to resent, make excuses and say "no." is carried out to ensure that the innocent person focuses more on control rather than on relevant issues, while the guilty party will still concentrate more on relevant issues, since they represent the most serious and immediate threat to him. Innocent, knowing that he answers honest questions honestly, begins to focus more on doubts about his truthfulness in questions of control questions ^[133] .
David Likken - a psychologist and a big fan of the guilty test, described by me at the end of the previous chapter - on the contrary, is a principal opponent of the test questions technique. (Reskin, by the way, criticizes the guilty test.) In a recent book on the use of a lie detector, he writes: “In order for this technique to work, you have to make each subject believe that the results are almost infallible and that excessive control over his answers only put him at risk of exposure (while the truth is just the opposite). And it would be a mistake to believe that any detector operator will be able to convince any suspect of two such false judgments ” ^[134] .
And Likken is right in asserting that both of these judgments, in which the suspect must believe, are false. Not one person, neither one nor the other, believes that the detector is infallible; not even the hottest defenders believe it. The detector makes mistakes. Likken is also right that the suspect should not know this ^[135] .
If an innocent test subject knows that the detector is not sinless, he may begin to fear an incorrect interpretation of his answers due to the imperfection of the technique. And, frightened in this way (as a result of his disbelief), the suspect can react equally to control questions and relevant questions; and if he is equally emotionally excited while answering any question, the detector operator will not be able to conclude that he is guilty or not guilty. Worse, an innocent suspect, confident of the machine’s faultlessness, can show more fear in answering relevant questions — and thus be found guilty ^[136] .
The second statement - that strong control only hurts - is also false, and all operators know this. On the contrary, the opposite is true: if a suspect is more worried about answering control questions (“Until you turned 18, have you ever stolen anything?”) Than relevant (“Did you steal $ 750?”) then he is safe and will be found not to have lied and, accordingly, not guilty of the crime. And only a thief, and not an innocent person, will rather be initiated precisely by the relevant issue of the crime of 750 dollars.
In order for the detector test to succeed, the control question must be emotionally arousing for the innocent — at least as much, if not more, than the relevant question for the criminal. The hope is to get the innocent to focus on the control question much more than the relevant question, and complete the case so that he believes that the answer to the control question is much more important and affects the whole outcome of the test. Of course, the detector operator, as a rule, assumes that almost everyone, prior to his majority, appropriated something alien. And usually people quite easily admit to such misconduct. However, during a detector test, an innocent person usually does not do this, since the operator leads him to the idea that recognition of such a misdemeanor will show that he is the very person who could steal those 750 dollars. The operator wants the innocent to lie in response to the control question, denying the petty theft committed in his youth. The operator expects the innocent to be emotionally upset by such a lie and this will be reflected in the graph issued by the detector. When the innocent person is asked the relevant crime question “You stole $ 750?”, He will truthfully answer “No”. Since he does not lie, he will not be emotionally upset, at least in the way he was upset when he lied to the control question, and the detector will not show any increase in the activity of the ANS. The thief will also say: “No,” when asked about $ 750; however, he will be more excited about his lies when answering a relevant question than when answering a control question. In short, the whole logic is that the record of an innocent suspect will show more emotional arousal when answering control questions than relevant ones. And only the culprit will have more emotional excitement on the issue of 750 dollars.
The test questions technique eliminates the mistake of Othello only if the innocent, exactly as it was just described, will be more excited by the test questions than the relevant ones. Otherwise, there are mistakes, and the truthful speaker is not believed. Let's look at how this error can happen. What can make an innocent person be more emotionally excited when answering a relevant, rather than a control question? ^[137]
For this, it is necessary that, on the one hand, the suspect understands that both these questions are different, despite all the attempts of the operator to hide it, and on the other hand, that the question of $ 750 is a question of a more recent and specific event. As a result, an innocent person can calculate that a relevant question is more threatening to him; that is, it may entail punishment, while the control question relates to a past that cannot be punished in any way ^[138] .
However, the operator should not immediately calm down and stop the tests, even if an innocent suspect does not show greater emotional arousal when answering specific, threatening, crime-relevant questions. Let's look at a few reasons why some innocent suspects can do the opposite to what is expected of them and be convicted as guilty.

1. The police may be wrong. Not everyone who could commit this particular crime passes the detector test. The innocent, who is being asked to undergo such testing, knows that the police, having suspected him, have already made a serious mistake that could damage his reputation. In addition, he already testified about why he did not commit, did not commit and could not commit any crime. He clearly did not believe, even though they should have believed. In this case, he may consider the detector test as a great opportunity to prove his innocence, but at the same time he is afraid that those who have once made a mistake, having suspected him, may make even more serious mistakes. If the police methods have such flaws that allow him to suspect him, then the lie detector may also not be infallible.
2. Police out of decency. A person may simply not believe law enforcement personnel, believing that their main task is to suspect everyone. If, moreover, the suspect is a representative of a group or subculture that treats the police with disdain or distrust, then he will most likely be afraid of the operator of the lie detector and expect a misinterpretation of his answers.
3. Technique nebeshibi. Some, in general, believe that the police are quite sensible about interrogating them about a crime they did not commit. However, such people may not trust the lie detector itself. This can be based on disbelief in technology in general or on those articles and TV shows that criticize the work of the detector.
4. The suspect is frightened, guilty or just angry. Some, especially frightened or guilty, respond to specific, threatening questions with fear. Angry people behave in the same way, especially if they are inclined to be angry with the authorities in general. And the detector registers any of these emotions equally.
5. The suspect, even without being guilty, reacts emotionally to the events related to the crime. More strongly, than to the control one, emotionally react to the relevant question, not necessarily the guilty ones. Suppose an innocent man suspected of the murder of his colleague envied him for faster promotion. And now, when his rival is dead, the suspect may feel remorse, some pleasure from winning the rivalry, blame for feeling this pleasure, etc. Or, suppose, the innocent was very upset, unexpectedly stumbling on his bloodied, crippled body colleague When asked about the murder, the memory resurrects this scene and these feelings to him, and he is a macho ^[139] and is afraid to openly say about it. The suspect may not be aware of these feelings. And the detector will show that he is lying (and this is true), but behind this lies only an unformed feeling (or demonstration), and not guilty of murder. In the next chapter, we will discuss the case when the innocent suspect did not pass the test on the detector and was convicted as a murderer.

Proponents of using test questions techniques in criminal investigations know some of these sources of error, but they believe that such occurrences are rare. Opponents, however, argue that a large percentage of innocent suspects (the most zealous critics bring him up to 50% show a stronger emotional reaction to a relevant question than to the control question. When this happens, we can assume that Othello made a mistake - they didn’t believe an honest person.