Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Defence and security / Equipment and armament: yesterday, today and prospect / Articles
A brief history of lie detector
Material posted: Publication date: 10-09-2019
When Wonder woman deftly captures someone her Golden lasso, she can make him tell the truth. A handy tool to deal with sverhsoldata. If "lasso of truth" was real, for him, would, no doubt, would have formed a queue of police detectives.

Indeed, a large part of the last century, psychologists, criminologists, and others searched in vain for the perfect lie detector. Some thought they found it in the form of polygraph. The polygraph, a medical device for recording vital signs of the patient – pulse, pressure, temperature, respiratory rate, was designed in order to help find abnormalities of the heart rhythm and monitor the patient's condition during surgical operations.

The polygraph combines several tools. One of the first was the device 1906, invented by British cardiologist James Mackenzie, to measure arterial and venous pulse, and build their schedule in a continuous line on paper. Grass Instrument Co. from Massachusetts, a manufacturer of polygraph from the photo above, also sold equipment to monitor EEG, epilepsy and sleep.

The transition from medical devices to tool for the interrogation, how it is Ken alder in the 2007 book "the lie Detectors: the history of American mania", is pretty interesting. Scientists have tried to associate the vital signs with emotions long before the invention of the polygraph. In 1858, the French physiologist Etienne-Jules Mare recorded the changes of the human condition in response to unpleasant stress factors, including nausea and sharp sounds. In the 1890s Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso used a special glove to measure the pressure of a suspect during interrogation. Lombroso believed that criminals constitute a separate inferior race, and his glove was one way of confirming this opinion.

 

It's true: the polygraph machine from the 1960s, exhibited in the science Museum in London, was not designed as a lie detector, and as a diagnostic machine and surgical monitor

In the years before world war I, the Harvard psychologist Hugo Munsterberg used many tools, including the polygraph for recording and analysis of subjective sensations. Munsterberg called for the use of this machine in criminology, considering it to be impartial and indisputable.

William Marston, as a student, he worked in the laboratory of Munsterberg and became interested in his ideas. A bachelor's degree in 1915, Marston decided to continue her education at Harvard, receiving both a law degree and a doctorate in psychology, because he believed these disciplines are interconnected. He invented a sleeve for measuring systolic blood pressure, and together with his wife, Elizabeth Holloway Marston, used the device to search for connection between vital signs and emotions. He reported 96% detection accuracy of liars on tests of their students.

The first world war was an opportune time to examine the art of deception. Robert Yerkes, who received his doctorate in psychology at Harvard, and taking up the development of intelligence tests for the American army, agreed to sponsor a more thorough experiments in the studies of Marston, under the auspices of the national research Council of the United States. In one test of 20 detainees in the Boston municipal court Marston announced 100% success in the detection of lies. However, such high rates have raised suspicion among his superiors. Critics have argued that the interpretation of the results of the polygraph are more like art than science. For example, many people have increased blood pressure and heart rate when they are nervous or experiencing stress that may affect their reaction to the lie detector. Maybe they're lying but maybe they just don't like to be interrogated.

Marston, like Yerkes, was a racist. He said that may not be fully confident in the results of the work of blacks, because they believed that their minds are more primitive than whites. The war ended before Marston was able to convince other psychologists in the reliability of the polygraph.

At the other end of the country, in Berkeley, California, the police chief has turned the Department into a team, working on the basis of science and data collection. August Vollmer centralized management and communication, and ordered officials to communicate by radio. He invented a system of records with extensive cross-references for print and types of crimes. He collected crime statistics and evaluated the effectiveness of police methods. He organized internal employee training, in which teachers from the University were courses on evidence law, criminalistics and photographing crime scenes. In 1916, Vollmer hired the first chemist to work in the Department, and in 1919 began to hire police work to College graduates. Of all the candidates he was assessed with a set of tests on intelligence and psychiatric research.

Against this background, John Augustus Larson, a novice policeman and at the same time the holder of a doctorate in psychology, I read the article Marston, 1921,"Psychological possibilities in the deception test". Larson decided he could improve the technology Marston, and began working with volunteers using their own devices, "cardio-pneumo-of psychography". Vollmer gave Larson a carte Blanche to test this device in hundreds of cases.


Police Department Berkeley in the first half of the twentieth century he was famous for using technology to fight crime. Henry Wilkens passed the test on a polygraph, and as a result he was acquitted of murder charges of his wife.

Larson has established a Protocol of questions with answers of type "Yes/no" that the interrogator was to pose a constant tone, to locate a base level of performance. All suspects were asked the same set of questions; none of the interrogation lasted more than a few minutes. Larson asked for consent before the tests, although it is believed that you can only culprits. Overall, he checked in 313 861 suspect cases and confirmed 80% of their results. The Vollmer is convinced, and he helped to promote the use of the polygraph through articles in the Newspapers.

But despite active support from the police Department of Berkeley and a growing fascination with the lie detector, U.S. courts did not hurry to take a polygraph as evidence.

For example, in 1922, Marston appeared as an expert on the case Frye vs. United States. Defendant James Alphonso Frye was arrested for the robbery, and then he confessed to the murder of Dr. R. W. brown. Marston believed that his lie detector can attest to the falsity of the confession, but he never had that opportunity.

Presiding judge Walter McCoy was not allowed Marston to speak, stating that recognition lies is not "common knowledge". The court of appeal upheld the decision on slightly different grounds: that this area of science is not generally accepted in the relevant scientific community. This precedent became known as the "Frye standard" or test in common use by which the courts accept any new scientific tests as evidence.


Wonder woman and the lasso of truth, created by William Marston, one of the first supporters of the lie detector

Marston, without a doubt upset, and it apparently captured the idea of infallible lie detector. He later helped to create the comic "Wonder woman". The lasso of truth of the heroine proved to be more effective in catching criminals and revealing their crimes than the Marston polygraph.

To this day the results of the polygraph are not recognized by most courts. After several decades after Frye, the U.S. Supreme court in U.S. V. Scheffer ruled that persons found guilty of crimes are unable to provide the results of a polygraph in his defense, noting that "the scientific community remains extremely divided on the question of the reliability of the polygraph".

However, this does not prevent the use of polygraphs in criminal investigations, at least in the United States. The U.S. army, the Federal government and other agencies are actively using the polygraph to decide whether the person for the job and level of access to secrets.

Meanwhile, voice recognition technology lies evolved from tracking basic vital signs to monitor brain waves. In the 1980s, Peter Rosenfeld, a psychologist from northwestern University, has developed one of the first such methods. It uses a special type of brain wave P300, which are emitted through approximately 300 MS after recognition of a specific image. The idea of the test P300 was suspect, for example, in theft, will show the characteristic reaction, when you see a picture of the stolen object, and is innocent of such a reaction will not give. One of the main disadvantages of the method – search the image associated with the crime, which only saw a criminal.

In 2002, Daniel Langleben, a Professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania began to use functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, to capture images of the brain in the process of how the subject was telling the truth or a lie. Langleben found that the average brain is more active during lying, and suggested that for most people the truth is a natural modality that, I believe, evidence in favor of mankind. Langleben said that he was able to correctly identify the lie or the truth with 78% of cases.

Later liespotting attracted the possibility of artificial intelligence. Researchers from the University of Arizona has developed an automated virtual agent for truth assessments in real-time [Automated Virtual Agent for Truth Assessments in Real-Time, AVATAR], for interrogation of the person using the video. The system uses AI to evaluate changes in the eyes, the voice, the gestures and poses of the person speaking in favor of possible deception. According to Fast Company, and CNBC, the Department of homeland security United States experienced AVATAR at the border, to weed out people for further review, with a success rate of 60-75%. Accuracy of people, for comparison, is 54 to 60%, according to information from the developers of AVATAR.

Although the results of the work of AVATAR and fMRI may seem promising, they also indicate that the machines cannot be considered infallible. Both technologies compare specific results with group data sets. As for any machine learning algorithm, the data set must be diverse and representative of the entire population. If data quality suffers or they are not complete, or if the algorithm produces a bias, or if the sensors that measure the psychological response of the interrogated do not work, then it will simply be a more sophisticated version of scientific racism Marston.

fMRI and AVATAR new challenges to the already controversial history of speech recognition lies. For years psychologists, detectives and the government argue about their authenticity. There is, for example, a professional organization called the "American polygraph Association". Meanwhile, lawyers, fighters for civil rights and other psychologists condemn the use of polygraphs. Their supporters have an indomitable belief in the superiority of data and devices in front of human intuition. Opponents see so many alternative explanations for positive results and this margin is evidence that polygraph tests do not seem more reliable than mere guesses.

Full of sensationalism articles about the crimes and the Hollywood dramatization of reality made the public believe in the proven technology of the polygraph, and at the same time, in contrary to this the fact that the best criminals can fake the results of his work.

Think comes closest to the truth Ken alder, when I noticed that essentially a lie detector achieves success only when the check believes in its efficiency.

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/466583/

Tags: science


RELATED MATERIALS: Defence and security
Возрастное ограничение