A validation study of polygraph examiner judgments

Abstract

Validated the lie detection judgments in criminal investigations conducted by the military services against unanimous guilt-innocence decisions by a panel of 4 Judge Advocate General (JAG) attorneys. Since the study did not permit isolation of the role played by the polygraph record itself, the examiner's judgment was considered the end product of his complete interrogation of a suspect. Each JAG attorney made an independent decision based upon perusal of case files from which all polygraph references were deleted. Attorneys were instructed to eliminate files lacking sufficient evidence and to disregard legal technicalities. Level of agreement was 92.4%. Percentage of agreement decreased significantly to 74.6% when the criterion was a majority JAG panel decision. The study supports the use by the military services of polygraph examiner judgments as an aid in determining whether to continue or to terminate the investigation of a suspect. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)