Znanstveni premislek o psihofiziološkem ugotavljanju zavajanja

Igor Areh (Author), Kaja Vidmar (Author)

Abstract

Zanimanje za psihofiziološko ugotavljanje zavajanja se je v zadnjem desetletju povečalo, kar je povezano s povečanimi varnostnimi tveganji, s katerimi se soočamo. Članek razpravlja o primernosti uporabe poligrafa pri preiskovanju kaznivih dejanj z vidika znanosti, predvsem psihologije. Predstavlja, oceni in primerja dve najbolj uporabljeni tehniki ugotavljanja zavajanja: Test primerjalnih vprašanj (CQT) in Test prikritih informacij (CIT). Pri obeh tehnikah preuči njuno teoretično ozadje, objektivnost in standardiziranost testnih postopkov, točnost (veljavnost) tehnik ter predstavi etične in druge praktične pomisleke. Test primerjalnih vprašanj po desetletjih raziskav in razvoja ni razrešil svojih temeljnih težav in omejitev. Ostaja neznanstven in nestandardiziran test, ki si ločen od znanosti niti ne prizadeva k izhodu iz slepe ulice. Članek predstavi vplivnejše teorije, na katerih skušajo zagovorniki utemeljiti poligrafsko testiranje. Kritična analiza kaže, da nobena od teorij ne predstavlja zadovoljivega teoretičnega temelja tehnike. Zaradi odsotnosti znanstveno-teoretične utemeljitve ostaja tehnika primerjalnih vprašanj sporna in ujeta v samozadostnost. Ta se napaja predvsem iz metodološko vprašljivih raziskovalnih ugotovitev zagovornikov tehnike. Nasprotno pa tehnika prikritih informacij doživlja raziskovalni razcvet, predvsem na področju nevrologije, in velja za etično manj sporno in delno znanstveno utemeljeno s teorijo orientacijskega odziva. Z njo se nekoliko naivno in sporno ugotavljanje laži nadomešča z iskanjem podatkov, ki so prikriti v spominu testirancev. A tudi ta tehnika ima resne pomanjkljivosti in omejitve, zaradi katerih se postavlja vprašanje o smiselnosti uporabe poligrafa pri ugotavljanju zavajanja.

Keywords

poligrafi;tehnika primerjalnih vprašanj;tehnika prikritih informacij;objektivnost;testiranje;forenzična psihologija;Test primerjalnih vprašanj CQT;Test prikritih informacij CIT;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2016
Typology:	1.02 - Review Article
Organization:	UM FVV - Faculty of Criminal Justice
UDC:	159.9:340.6
COBISS:	3193834
ISSN:	2350-5141
Views:	1295
Downloads:	318
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	Scientific review of psychophysiological detection of deceit
Secondary abstract:	Psychophysiological detection of deceit has been in the centre of attention in the recent decade, which correlates with heightened security challenges of a modern world. The article provides scientific discussion about polygraph that is used in criminal investigation. Two most employed polygraph techniques are critically presented, examined and compared: the Comparison Question Test (CQT) and the Concealed Information Test (CIT). Theoretical foundations, objectivity and standardization of testing procedures, ethical and practical issues are analysed. Proponents of the Comparison Question Test have not been successful in their efforts to resolve fundamental problems and limitations with which the technique is challenged. It remains unstandardized and unscientific, separated from science and mainly without attempts to escape from the dead-end. The most influential theoretical backgrounds of CQT technique are examined; however, none of them represents a satisfactory scientific foundation of the technique. Without being scientifically grounded in a verifiable theory, it remains controversial and caught into self-sufficiency, mostly supported by methodologically questionable research findings gained by proponents. To the contrary, the Concealed Information Test is associated with fast development, particularly in the field of neurology, and is considered to be less disputed and to be partly supported by a sound scientific ground. Applying the Concealed Question Test, somewhat naïve and disputable detection of lies typical of the Comparison Question Test is replaced by a search for information that lies concealed in the suspects’ memory. However, the Concealed Information Test also has been challenged by serious deficiencies, which bring forward a question about justification of the use of the polygraph.
Secondary keywords:	deceit;polygraphs;testing;forensic psychology;Comparison question test CQT;Concealed information test CIT;
URN:	URN:NBN:SI
Type (COBISS):	Scientific work
Pages:	str. 144-155
Issue:	ǂLetn. ǂ25
Chronology:	4. okt. 2016
DOI:	10.20419/2016.25.451
ID:	10847702