A comprehensive meta‐analysis of the comparison question polygraph test

We conducted a meta‐analysis on the most commonly used forensic polygraph test, the Comparison Question Test. We captured as many studies as possible by using broad inclusion criteria. Data and potential moderators were coded from 138 datasets. The meta‐analytic effect size including inconclusive ou...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied cognitive psychology 2021-03, Vol.35 (2), p.411-427
Main Authors: Honts, Charles R., Thurber, Steven, Handler, Mark
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Base rates
Bias
comparison question test
Crime
Deception
deception detection
Fieldwork
Forensic science
Generalizability Theory
Measurement Equipment
Meta Analysis
Moderators
Motivation
Outcome Measures
polygraph
Polygraphs
psychophysiological deception detection
Systematic review
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We conducted a meta‐analysis on the most commonly used forensic polygraph test, the Comparison Question Test. We captured as many studies as possible by using broad inclusion criteria. Data and potential moderators were coded from 138 datasets. The meta‐analytic effect size including inconclusive outcomes was 0.69 [0.66, 0.79]. We found significant moderator effects. Notably, level of motivation had a positive linear relationship with our outcome measures. Information Gain analysis of CQT outcomes representing the median accuracy showed a significant information increase over interpersonal deception detection across almost the complete range of base rates. Our results suggest that the CQT can be accurate, that experimental studies are generalizable, and no publication bias was detected. We discussed the limitations of the field research literature and problems within polygraph profession that lower field accuracy. We suggest some possible solutions.
ISSN:0888-4080
1099-0720
DOI:10.1002/acp.3779