Course Description

It deals with the study of scientific lie detection and forensic psychophysiology. It
covers the fundamental concepts about lies and deceits, history of lie detection,
fundamentals of polygraph science, and polygraph examination procedures and
techniques. Other methods of detecting deception aside from polygraphy are included in
the academic discussions. However, the focus of the study is on the uses of polygraph
instrument and the standard procedures of polygraph examination.

GENERAL OBJECTIVES

At the end of the course, the students should be able to:

1. State the significance of studying the physiology of the human nervous system in
relation to lie detection;
2. Identify the pioneers in lie detection and their significant contributions;
3. Discuss the basic function of the polygraph instrument in psychophysiological
veracity examination;
4. Enumerate the principal uses, objectives, stages, procedures, and techniques of
polygraph examination;
5. Enumerate the qualifications and responsibilities of the polygraph examiner;
6. Demonstrate the basic operation of the polygraph instrument and how to attach
the sensors to a person’s body;
7. Interpret the tracing produced by the subject during the instrumentation stage;
and
8. Define the basic principles behind each of the scientific methods of detecting
deception.
 UNIT I

A) INTRODUCTION TO SCIENCE OF LIE DETECTION

The Search for Truth

For as long as there are liars and deceitful persons, there are people who persist
to find out the truth and detect those who are lying.

Various methods have been developed using science and technology to establish
if a person is telling the truth. Such methods applied knowledge in various sciences such
as psychology, psychiatry, physiology, and pharmacology. The application of modern
technology such as electronics and computer science is gaining its popularity in the field
of lie and crime detection.

Although lie detection methods are scientifically base, these are not fully
recognized by the courts as a means of producing evidence to establish the truth. In fact,
most information developed using the scientific lie detection methods are not admissible
as direct or primary court evidence despite their expediency in crime detection and
investigation. This is something that is ironic in the Philippine setting.

Why do we seek the truth?

In decision-making success primarily depends in true information (simply known

as the truth). Decision-makers must possess the ability to evaluate the veracity of
information that they use in their decisions. The knowledge of truth is the fundamental
requirement in administering justice.

In crime detection, the task of determining the truth initially lies on the hands of the
field investigators.

Sometime in 1983, HANS GROSS, an Australian magistrate (judge) regarded as

the earliest advocate of criminal investigation as Science, published his CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATION. In this book, gross define search for truth as the basis and goal of any
form of investigation. (Weston & Wells, 1990).

In his earlier book System der Kriminalistiks. Gross emphasized that most part of
the investigator’s work involves battle against lies. The investigator has to discover the
truth and must fight the opposite, as “lies and deceits”. He encounters the opposite every
step of his investigation. (Trovillo.) 1939

Today, lying became a lucrative business and more and more people are lured
into it. As future law enforcers and criminal investigators, you have to learn more than
what ordinary people know about detecting lie and discovering the truth. By force of
necessity due to nature of your profession, you have to be knowledgeable about lies, truth
and deception.

B) DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS (LIES, TRUTH, & DECEPTION)

LIE DETECTION, is sometimes referred to as Deception Detection, this is simply

the system or practice of determining whether or not somebody is telling the truth during
questioning. By the nature of this definition, some author prefers to use (scientific) Truth
Verification instead of lie detection.

Most of you probably think that the field of lie detection is geared towards discovery
of lies and deceits. However, it would be better to say first because once the truth is
known, lie will be revealed eventually.

WHAT IS TRUTH?

Microsoft Encarta Reference Library (2004) procided the following meanings of

truth.

• True quality of something

• Something factual or something that correspond to factor reality
• True statements that corresponds to fact or reality
• Obvious fact or something that is clearly true to it hardly needs to be stated
• Something generally believed to be true

Truth can have a variety of meanings, from the state of being the case, being in
accord with a particular fact or reality, being in accord with the body of real things, events,
actuality, or fidelity to an original or to a standard. In archaic usage it could be fidelity,
constancy or sincerity in action, character, and utterance.

• Deception is a major relational transgression that often leads to feelings of betrayal

and distrust between relational partners. Deception violates relational rules and is
considered to be a negative violation of expectations. Most people expect friends,
relational partners, and even strangers to be truthful most of the time. If people expected
most conversations to be untruthful, talking and communicating with others would simply
be unproductive and too difficult. On a given day, it is likely the most human beings will
either deceive or be deceived by another person. A significant amount of deception
occurs between romantic and relational partners.

WHAT ARE LIES, DECEITS, AND FRAUD?

LIE is a falsehood or false statement made deliberately. It is a false impression made

deliberately. (Microsoft Encarta reference Library)
 This refers to anything that deceivers or create a false impression. It could be
something that gives a false or misleading impression with intent to deceive. In other
words, is an untruth or falsehood. (Webster Comprehensive Dictionary).

Lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an

untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others, often with the further
intention to maintain a secret or reputation, protect someone’s feelings or to avoid a
punishment or repercussion for one’s actions. To lie is to state something that one knows
to be false or that one does not honestly believe to be true with the intention that a person
will take it for the truth. A liar is a person who is lying, who has previously lied, or who
tends by nature to lie repeatedly – even when not necessary (Matte, 2004).

Lying is typically used to refer to deceptions in oral or written communication. Other

forms of deception, such as disguises or forgeries, are generally not considered lies,
though the underlying intent may be the same. However, even a true statement can be
used to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being overall untruthful rather than the
truthfulness of any individual statement that is considered the lie.

DECEIT is a dishonest practice. An act or practice of deceiving or misleading somebody.

It is something that is done to trick or mislead somebody. (Microsoft Encarta Reference
Library, 2004).

In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain
or to damage another individual. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction.
Fraud is a crime, and is also a civil law violation. May hoaxes are fraudulent, although
those not made for personal gain are technically not frauds. Defrauding people of money
is presumably the most common type of fraud, but there have also been many fraudulent
“discoveries” in art, archaeology, and science.

According to Alder Vrij (2004). A LIE can be made consciously or unconsciously.

On the other hand, deceit is an intentional act, which is intended to foster in another
person as false. Thus, an error of not telling the truth is not a lie.

Lie and deceit is therefore, synonymous and can be used interchangeably. Based
on their definition, there are means of committing deception.
METHODS OF DETECTING DECEPTION

There are various methods of detecting lies and deceit. Lie detection methods
available today may be grouped in four ways. (Llamas Jr., 2002).

1. Cross-checking information with testimonies, physical evidence, or other

existing information.
2. Psychological method (evaluation of the emotional, behavioral and cognitive
reaction of a person).
3. Interrogation (testing the credibility of the suspect’s statements).
4. Using “lie detection” instruments

Dr. Pedro Solis, in his book Legal Medicine, provided a more elaborate classification of
lie detection methods available today.

1. Methods involving te use of scientific devices that record psycho physiological

responses, these methods include:
a. WAT (Word Association Test)
b. PSE (Psychological Stress Evaluation)
c. Polygraph Method (Polygraphy)
2. Methods involving the use of substances that “inhibit the inhibitor”
a. Administration of “truth serum”
b. Narcoanalysis/Narcosynthesis
c. Intoxication with alcohol
3. Hypnosis (hypnotic induction)
4. Scientific Observation
5. Scientific Interrogation

However, there are new sophisticated techniques of detecting deception not mentioned
by Solis. These include:

1. Computerized Voice Stress Analysis (CVSA)

2. Brain Scanning
3. Iris Analysis
4. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Lie Detection is also called Deception and Scientific Truth Verification. As scientific lie
detection is now included as one area of forensic science. Forensic lie detection is better
known in the academe as Forensic Psychophysiology. The most popular field of
forensic psychophysiology is the polygraph method. According to Dr. William J. Yankee
of the Dept. of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI).Polygraph examination is one of the
most complex psychophysiological examinations ever developed. (Matte, 1996).
 In advance countries, the following are preferred descriptions of lie detection
through polygraph examination.

1. PVE (Psychophysiological Veracity Examination)

2. PDD (Psychophysiological Detection of Deception)
3. PCA (Psychophysiological Credibility Assessment)

Lie Detection and Psychophysiology

Lie Detection test customarily involves the process of recording the

psychophysiological reactions of a person while being questioned and scientific
interpretation of the person’s reactions by trained experts.

Scientific lie detection methods primarily and extensively utilize the combined
knowledge of psychology and physiology. This led the term psychophysiology.

The field psychophysiology is focused on studying the functions of human

nervous system and the bodily reactions of a person as influenced by his mental
responses to specific stimulus. In simpler words, it is a field of science dealing with the
relationship between psychology and physiology.

Why is psychophysiology closely associated with lie detection?

Oftentimes, nervousness is psychological reaction used as symptom of deception.

However, nervousness per se cannot be measured. What we can actually measure are
bodily reactions such as sudden change in heartbeat and breathing pattern.

We may say that the person is deceptive if we detected that his pulse and
respiration suddenly increased but such conclusion is disputable unless we trace the
cause of significant changes in physiological reactions. Our deduction is positive if we
identified that the cause is anxiety or similar stress reaction that is psychological in nature.
Hence, there is direct relationship between human physiology and psychology that is
functional in explaining the theory of lie detection.

Emotions are an indispensable part of the body’s adjustive machinery. Strong

emotions especially fear, usually hamper sound thinking in at least three ways.

1. Whenever we interpret a situation as critical, we become so concerned with the

threat that we are unable to concentrate on the problem.
2. The redistribution of the blood supply occurring with strong fear tends to decrease
the supply to the higher brain centers and to leave them undernourished so that
they cease to function effectively.
3. Emotions tend to reduce the control of behavior, by thought.
 - Under strong emotional tension we have an urge to do something immediately
even if it is wrong rather than wait until we can consider the situation in the light of
accumulated experience.

The system that prepares the body’s defenses to meet, these emergencies is none
other than the sympathetic subdivision of the autonomic nervous system (a motor
system).

In polygraph situation, it is fear, fear of detection, fear of consequences if the

individual is detected, that causes the sympathetic system to activate in order to prepare
the body to meet the emergency. Therefore, a sense of guilt is not an essential element
to activate the sympathetic system.
 ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY OF HUMAN NERVOUS SYSTEM

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM (Cornista & Lupato 2000)

It is a complex combination of cells whose primary function is to allow an organism

to gain information about what is going on inside and outside the bod and to respond
appropriately.

Three basic functions of the nervous system

1. Receiving information, or input. (a small object)

2. Integrating or processing that information. (is it a candy?)
3. Guiding actions, or output. (wave it away with a smile)

The human nervous system is composed of the central nervous system and
peripheral nervous system. The central nervous system (CNS) consists of the brain and
the spinal cord.

1. The CNS processes and coordinates all incoming sensory information and
outgoing motor commands.
2. CNS is the seat of complex brain functions such as memory, intelligence,
learning and emotion.

The peripheral nervous system (PNS), includes all neural tissue outside the
central nervous system. It is responsible for providing sensory (afferent) information to
the CNS and carrying motor (efferent) commands out of the body tissues.

The PNS has two sub-divisions: the Somatic Nervous System and the
Autonomic Nervous System. Their respective functions are as follows:

1. Somatic Nervous System – controls voluntary motor commands, such as

moving muscles to walk or talk.
2. Autonomic Nervous System – controls involuntary motor commands, such
as digestion and heartbeat.

The Autonomic Nervous System, which acts as a self-regulating (autonomic) response

of the body, is further divided into two branches:

a) Sympathetic Nervous System – also called the fight or flight

mechanism, increases alertness, stimulates tissue, and prepares the
body for quick responses to unusual situations.
b) Parasympathetic Nervous System – also called the rest and repose
system, conserves energy and controls sedentary activities, such as
digestion.
Autonomic Nervous System

It directs all activities of the body that occur without a person’s conscious control
such as breathing and food digestion. It has two parts: the sympathetic division, which is
most active in times of stress, and the parasympathetic division, which controls
maintenance activities and helps conserve the body’s energy.

The sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system acts opposite with each
other. When the person is under the influence of physical stimulus (exertion) or emotional
provocation (such as excitement, fear and anger), the sympathetic branch dominates and
over-rides the parasympathetic component. In effect there will be changes in the:

1. Pulse (heart beat)

2. Blood pressure
3. Breathing
4. Response-time
5. Voice, and
6. Other physiological reactions

When the conditions of stress are no longer present, the parasympathetic branch
works to restore things to normal. Thus, the parasympathetic branch is dominant when
things are normal and the person is calm, contented and relaxed. (Solis 1987)
NEURONS: The basic unit of the Nervous System. The nervous system is made up of
billions of structural units called NEURONS. Neurons are cells especially adopted to
transmit messages from one part of the body to another in the form of electrochemical
impulses. This has three distinct parts which include:

1. Cell Body – The central part of the neuron which contains the nucleus. The
nucleus is a dense area within the cell body which contains structures necessary
to the life and development of the neuron.
2. Dendrites – These are small extensions on the cell body that receive messages
from other neurons and carry towards the cell body.
3. Axons – are relatively elongated part of a neuron that carry messages away from
the cell body.

Many neurons are covered or insulated by a fatty, whitish substance called myelin
sheath. The tiny gaps or space between the axon terminals of one neuron and the
receptive site (dendrite, cell body, and axon) of another neuron are called synapses.
They are so small that it cannot be seen without an electron microscope.
 THE PHENOMENON OF LYING

“If someone tells you he always tells the truth, you know you have a liar on your hand.”
(Croucho Marx)

“The sin of lying is one of the most damnable and common sins of human race.” (Echols,
1946)

“Warfare is the way of deception. Thus, although you are capable, display incapability to
them. When committed to employing your forces, feign inactivity. When your objective is
nearby, make it appear as if distant: when far away, create the illusion of being nearby.”
(Sun Tzu, 510 BC)

Anyone can tell a lie. However, making someone believe your lie is difficult to do.
To convince someone that your story is true, you must be able to adequately and
effectively communicate with him. To do this, you must have a reason or motive.

WHY DO WE LIE?

Most of us avoid the truth because we anticipate pleasure or we want to avoid

pain. When it comes to lying, of pleasure usually involves a selfish agenda. Most of us lie
for purposes of self-interest and self-promotion, such as when we lie on a job resume.
Some of us lie because we felt that if we tell the truth, we won’t get what we want. The
avoidance of pain or discomfort often causes us to lie. We often lie because we fear
punishment. If we frequently fear punishment, lying may become a habit, which is lying
by reflex. Most of us lie to avoid awkward situations or interpersonal conflict. We
sometimes lie to ensure privacy such as when a salesman calls to tell something.
(Caruso, 2005)

Benedict Carey of Los Angeles Time March 8, 2003. He identified at least four
honest reasons why we lie:

• Avoid hurting other people’s feelings.

• Cover our own embarrassment
• Reassure the needlessly anxious
• Spare unnecessary headaches

We can tell a lie if we have a motive or purpose. Most of us (if not all) agree with
this statement of Dr. David Lieberman, an American Psychologist. We lie because it is
compatible with reason and necessity. Lying for most of us become a social necessity in
our daily interaction with others, especially when we mean no harm to them. In, Latin, this
is called, “dannum absque injuria.” (Llamas Jr., 2002).
 However, lying becomes less appropriate when used in all-purposed coping
strategy. People lie includes the following: (Llamas Jr., 2002)

• To gain profit and advantage, especially over matters like money, property,
wealthy, power, or influence.
• To evade punishment, avoid pain, injury, embarrassment or failure.
• To improve or enhance one’s image, qualification or credibility.
• To gain or maintain patronage, respect, trust and confidence to others
• To protect others

Mike Hardcast’s “Top 10 Fact Sheet on Lies and Lying”

([Link]

1. Lying is the number one reason why people lose trust.

2. The most common reason why people lie is to avoid confrontation. Getting into
trouble is never fun but lying to avoid it is always a “band-aid solution”.
3. Another common reason why people lie is to make them seem “better” or more
interesting.
4. One lie can knock out whole relationships destroy your life or even limit your future
in unforeseeable ways.
5. Lying is a gamble. Every time you lie, you gamble with being caught.
6. Lie has a way of getting out and coming back to haunt you.
7. The worst lies are the ones you tell yourself. When you lie to others you are also
lying to yourself.
8. Chronic lying can be a signal of psychiatric or social disorder.
9. Lies can damage your self-image and cause inner conflicts that can drastically
change the view, and act upon, the world and other people.
10. Little white lies are lies that are told about superficial things and are told the truth
would only serve to hurt another person. Like telling another friend that the haircut looks
good when you don’t really like it.

AUGUSTINE’S TAXONOMY OF LIES

Augustine of Hippo wrote the two books about lying: On Lying (De Mendacio) and
Against Lying (Contra Mendacio). He describes each book in his later work, Retractions.
Based on the location of the De Mendacio in Retractions, it appears to have been written
about A.D. 395. The first work, On Lying, begins: “Magna quæstio est de Mendacio”.
From his text, it can be derived that St. Augustine divided lies into eight categories, listed
in order of descending severity:
 • Lies in religious teaching.
• Lies that help others and help no one.
• Lies that harm others and help someone.
• Lies told for the pleasure of lying.
• Lies told to “please others in smooth discourse.”
• Lies that harm no one and that help someone.
• Lies that harm no one and that save someone’s life.
• Lies that harm no one and that save someone’s “purity”.

Augustine believed that “jocose lies” are not, in fact, lies.

PSYCHOLOGY OF LYING

The capacity to lie is noted early and nearly universally in human development.
Social psychology and developmental psychology are concerned with the theory of mind,
which people employ to simulate another’s reaction to their story and determine if a lie
will be believable. The most commonly cited milestone, what is known as Machiavellian
intelligence, is at the age of about four and a half years, when children begin to be able
to lie convincingly. Before this, they seem simply unable to comprehend why others don’t
see the same view of events that they do --- and seem to assume that there is only one
point of view, which is their own.

Young children learn from experience that stating an untruth can avoid punishment
for misdeeds, before they develop the theory of mind necessary to understand why it
works. In this age of development, children will sometimes tell outrageous and
unbelievable lies, because they lack the conceptual framework to judge whether a
statement is believable, or even to understand the concept of believability.

When children first learn how lying works, they lack the moral understanding of
when to refrain from doing it. It takes years of watching people tell lies, and the results of
these lies, to develop a proper understanding. Propensity to lie varies greatly between
children, some doing so habitually and others being habitually honest. Habits in this
regard are likely to change in early adulthood.

Those with Parkinson’s disease show difficulties in deceiving others, difficulties

that link to prefrontal hypometabloism. This suggests a link between the capacity for
dishonesty and integrity of prefrontal functioning.

Pseudologia fantastica is a term applied by psychiatrists to the behavior of

habitual or compulsive lying.

Mythomania is the condition where there is an excessive or abnormal propensity

for lying and exaggerating.
 A recent study found that lying takes longer than telling the truth. Or, as Chief
Joseph succinctly put it, “It does not require many words to speak the truth.”

MORALITY OF LYING

The philosophers Saint Augustine, as well as Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel

Kant, condemned all lying. However, Thomas Aquinas also had an argument for lying.
According to all three, there are no circumstances in which one may lie. One must be
murdered, suffer torture, or endure any other hardship, rather than lie, even if the only
way to protect oneself is to lie. Each of these philosophers gave several arguments
against lying, all compatible with each other. Among the more important arguments are:

1. Lying is a perversion of the natural faculty of speech, the natural end of which is to
communicate the thoughts of the speaker.
2. When one lies, one undermines trust in society.

LYING IN THE BIBLE

The Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible both contain statements
that God cannot lie(Num 23:19, Ps 89:35, Hab. 2:3, Heb 6:13-18).

Various passages of the Bible feature exchanges that are conditionally critical of
lying (Prov 6:16-19, Ps. 5:6), (Lev 19:11, Pr. 14:5, Pr. 30:6, Zep 3:13), (Isa 28:15, Da
11:27). Most famously, in the Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not bear fault witness”
(Exodus 20:2-17, Deutronomy 5:6-21), a specific reference to perjury.

Other passages feature exchanges where lying seems to be conditionally

promoted. (However some Christians would argue that lying is never promoted, but that
even those who are righteous in God’s eyes sin sometimes.) Old Testament accounts of
lying include:

• Rahab lied to the king of Jericho about hiding the Hebrew spies (Joshua 2:4-5)
and was not killed with those who were disobedient because of her faith
(Hebrews 11:31).
• Delilah repeatedly accused Samson of lying to her (Jg. 16:10, 13) as she
interrogated him about the source of his strength.
• Abraham instructs his wife, Sarah, to lie to the Egyptians and say that she is
his sister (Gen 12:10), which leads to the Lord punishing the Egyptians (Gen
12:17-19). However, it can be argued that this was not actually a lie as she
 was, in fact, his half-sister (During the time of Abraham, it was not unheard of
for one to marry their half-brother or half-sister.)

In the New Testament, Jesus refers to the Devil as the father of lies (John 8:44)
and Paul commands Christians “Do not lie to one another” (Colossians 3:9, Cf. Leviticus
19:11). St. John Revelator reports that God said “..all liars shall have their part in the lake
which burneth with fire and brimstones: which is the second death.” (Rev 21: 8)

Whereas most Christian theologians conclude that the Bible does not contain any
intentional untruths, some scholars believe differently. Among those who conclude that
the Bible contains lies and intentional untruths is Thomas Jefferson. He edited his own
version of the Bible, Jefferson wrote of “so much untruths, charlatanism and imposture,”
“roguery”, “dupes and impostors”, “corruptor”, and “falsifications”.

PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL SIGNS/SYMPTOMS OF DECPETION

In one worldwide research that was conducted which involved more than 2,000
people from nearly 60 countries, this question was asked: “When can you tell when people
are lying?” (Lock, 2004).

Gaze aversion is the most prevalent typical sign of deception. However, it does
not always mean that a person who can maintain eye contact is not lying.

Aside from gaze aversion, there are other telltale signs of deceptions that can be
unconsciously manifested by a liar.

Two categories: verbal and non-verbal

A. Verbal Symptoms of Deception

1) Manner of answering question
2) Repetition of question
3) Incomplete statements or fragmented sentences
4) Overly polite
5) Swearing truthfulness of assertions
6) Vague response
7) Use of “I don’t remember”, “Not that I remember” expression is often used by lying
suspects
8) Assertiveness
9) Inconsistencies
10) Slip of the tongue
11) Tirades
12) Pause
 13) Speed of speech

B. Non-verbal Symptoms of Deception

1) Emblems
2) Manipulators
3) Breathing
4) Sweating and flushed face (may indicate anger, embarrassment or extreme
nervousness. Sweating with pale face may indicate shock or fear.)
5) Dryness of the mouth
6) Frequent swallowing
7) Facial muscle twitching
8) Gaze aversion
9) Closes eyes
10) Hesitates to think
11) Shakes head
12) Fidgeting
13) Shifts/crosses legs

These telltale signs of deception can be shown simultaneously or one at a time by a

deceptive subject while being questioned. The manifestations depend on the degree and
type of lie the suspect is using.

TYPES OF LIES

1. Direct Denial – is a lie that results to emotional disturbance. The disturbance is

caused by conflict of a person’s conscience in his attempt to deceive. This lie is
manifested by the response – I DID NOT DO IT – to evade inner conflict while seeming
to answer the question.
2. Lie of Omission – the type of lie commonly used because it is easy to tell. The act of
telling what transpired but omitting details that are incriminating.
3. Lie of Exaggeration – is the type of lies used by a person who overplays what actually
happens. This could be in the form of a testimony where details are added to intensify
the impact of the story.
4. Lie of Minimization – involves acceptance of a person that something happen but
downplays the implication or seriousness of the offense.
5. Fabricated Lie – also called lie of fabrication, is the type of lie that is most difficult
to use. This involves the act of creating a story or series of events that never
transpired.
 OTHER TYPES OF LIES

1. White Lie – benign lie, honest lie, harmless lie, etc. It is the type of a lie perceived
or intended not to harm, but told in order to avoid distress or embarrassment. It is
usually in the form of a remark or comment that is not true however it must be uttered
to maintain friendship or harmony at home or in a workplace.
2. Red Lie – sometimes called misinformation. This is a line of information that is
seemingly valuable but it is intended to destroy a political belief or ideology. This can
also be better known as Politics Propaganda.
Strictly speaking, propaganda refers to an information or publicity put out by an
organization or government to spread and promote policy, idea, doctrine, or cause.
However, most propaganda is misleading publicity since these are in the form of
deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread.
3. Malicious Lie - is a chronic (constant) lie that is intended to mislead justice. It is
usually in the form of pure dishonest statement for the purpose of obstructing justice.

GENERAL CLASSIFICATION OF LIES

Basically lying can be classified into three ways and say why people lie.

1. Habitual Lying: Some people use to tell lies as a habit whether good or bad. It is
purely a habit of lying for nothing and are not to take it seriously that it would be against
the interests of others and harmful for them. It is difficult to make them realize that it
is not good.
2. Compulsive Lying: in a few cases people are compelled to tell lies, the compulsion
being out of a self-based need or an external force. Such type of lying is known as
compulsive lying.
3. Delusive Lying: this type of lying is of worst nature because it is harmful to others. It
is highly deceptive in consequences with utmost bad intention of cheating others and
avoiding punishment.

LIES CAN ALSO BE CATEGORIZED IN FOUR TYPES

a) Pro-Social: lying to help someone

b) Self-enhancement: lying make you look better while not hurting another.
c) Selfish Lie: lying to personally benefit at the expense of another.
d) Anti-social Lie: lying to deliberately damage another.

Types of Liar

1. Panic Liar – this is a person who panics when questioned about his involvement
concerning a crime but immediately denies the truth to avoid shame or humiliation
 that it might cause to his family. A panic liar decides to circumvent the truth in order
to avoid humiliation consequences of his confession to himself or to his family.
2. Occupational Liar – this is an individual whose job is to tell lie and deceive other
people. One who is being paid to tell lies. He is practical liar – he will tell lie if doing
it provides a higher pay-off than telling the truth.
3. Tournament Liar – is a person who uses the act of lying to test his ability and
prove to himself that he is capable of deceiving the police or authorities. One who
is gratified by telling lies to mislead others. His view is that telling lies is one form
of contest.
4. Ethnological Liar – is a person trained to lie.
5. Psychopathic Liar – is an individual who has no conscience thus, capable of lying
to the point of causing death to other people.
6. Pathological Liar – is a sick person who tells a lie, simply because he cannot
distinguish what is right from what is wrong.
7. Black Liar – is one who enjoys pretending and better known as hypocrite.

EARLY METHODS OF DETECTING DECEPTION

The problem of determining who is lying and who is telling the truth is as old as
civilization. Since the birth of the first civilization, man has been searching ways to verify
facts, which is necessary to know the truth and detect deception. Early people had their
own ways to decide who were guilty and who were innocent. Suspected people who were
found to be lying were judged as the guilty party concerning crime under investigation.

The idea that a person’s truthfulness can be detected may not be much more than
a throwback to ancient ideas of trial by ordeal. Primitive methods of detecting deception
were usually in the form of fortune and trial by ordeal. Some author takes trial separately
from ordeal. Trial by ordeal involves the practice of settling a dispute using divine
intervention or Judicium Dei (God’s Judgment).

Ordeal refers to the antiquated trial rooted on the practice of referring disputes to
God’s Judgment, determined either by lot or by certain trials. It is usually placing a suspect
or an accused to life-threatening danger. Whatever the outcome is it reflects divine
judgment. Today, ordeal is basically regarded as a physical test that usually involves
painful experience.

Throughout Europe, before the 14th century, ordeal existed in various forms under
the sanction of law and was closely related to oath. The most prevalent kinds of ordeal
were fire, water, and the wager of battle.

1. Red Hot Iron Ordeal – practiced in North Bengal. The accused had to carry a bar of
red-hot iron in his hands while he walked nine marked paces. In the unlikely event of
 no burns appearing on his hands, he was adjudged innocent. Otherwise, he was
promptly hanged.
2. Wager of Battle – the judgment of God was thought to determine the winner, and the
defeated party was allowed to live a recreant, that is, on retracing the perjury that had
been sworn.
3. Ordeal by Balance – practiced by the Institute of Vishnu, India. A scale of balance is
used in one end of the scale is placed and in the other end is a counter balance. The
person will step out of the scale and listen to a judge to deliver an exhortation on the
balance and get back in. If he was found lighter than before, then he should be
acquitted.
4. Ordeal by Water – the water was symbolic of the flood of the Old Testament, washing
sin from the face of the earth, allowing only the righteous minority to survive.
There are two kinds of ordeal by water, The Boiling Water and the Cold Water.
Ordeal by water was the usual mode of trial allowed to members of the lower class.
a. Boiling Water – according to Athelstan, the first King of England, the ordeal of
boiling water consisted of lifting a stone out of the boiling water, with the hand
inserted as deep as the wrist. More serious offense demanded that that arm was
submerged up to the elbow. The burn was bandaged for three days before fateful
examination.
b. Cold Water – this ordeal has a precedent in the code of Hammurabi, where a man
accused of sorcery is to be submerged in a stream and acquitted if he survives.
The practice occurred in Frankish law and was abolished by Louis the Pious in
829. The practice did re-appear in the Late Middle Ages, however. In the
Dreieicher Wildbann of 1338, a man accused of poaching is to be submerged in a
barrel three times, and to be considered guilty if he sinks to the bottom.

5. Ordeal by Rice Chewing – it is performed with a kind of rice called sathee, prepared
with various incantations. The person on trial eats the sathee, with the face to the east
and then spits upon a pea leaf. If saliva is mixed with blood or the corner of his mouth
swells or he trembles, he is declared to be a liar. Indians practice this ordeal.
6. Ordeal of the Red Water – the ordeal of the “sassy bark” or red water is used in the
wide region of Eastern Africa. The accused is made to fast for twelve hours, and then
swallows a small amount of rice. He is then immersed into dark colored water. The
water is actually emetic and if the suspect ejects all the rice, he is considered innocent
of the charge. Otherwise, the accused is guilty.
7. Ordeal by Combat – the aggrieved party claimed the right to fight the alleged offender
or to pay a champion to fight for him. The victor is said to win not by his own strength
but because of supernatural powers that had intervened on the side of the right, as in
the duel in the European Ages in which the “judgment of God was thought to determine
the winner.” If still alive after the combat, the loser might be hanged or burned for a
criminal offense or have a hand cut off and property confiscated in civil actions.
In England, King Henry III abolished all legal ordeals except Ordeal by Combat.
This ordeal was vividly dramatized in the movie “Ivanhoe” based on the novel of the
same title.
8. Ordeal by Corsnaed (Ordeal by Blessed Bread) – a priest puts the corsnaed or
hallowed bread into the mouth of the accused, with various imprecations. If the
accused swallowed it he was freed from punishment.
9. Ordeal of Ingestion - Franconian law prescribed that an accused was to be given dry
bread and cheese blessed by a priest. If he choked on the food, he was considered
guilty. This was transformed into the ordeal of the Eucharist (trial by sacrament)
mentioned by Regino of Prüm ca. 900: the accused was to take the Eucharist after a
solemn oath professing his innocence. It was believed that if the oath had been false,
the criminal would die within the same year. This was applied chiefly among the clergy
and monks. When they took the host it was believed that God would smite the guilty
with sickness or death. Others believe that if the accused is innocent, when given a
poisonous drink for him to take in, Angel Gabriel will descend the accused from taking
in the poisonous drink.

Another version states: "The priest wrote the Lord's Prayer on a piece of bread, of
which he then weighed out ten pennyweights, and so likewise with the cheese. Under
the right foot of the accused, he set a cross of poplar wood, and holding another cross
of the same material over the man's head, threw over his head the theft written on a
tablet. He placed the bread and cheese at the same moment in the mouth of the
accused, and, on doing so, recited the conjuration: 'I exorcize thee, most unclean
dragon, ancient serpent, dark night, by the word of truth, and the sign of light, by our
Lord Jesus Christ, the immaculate Lamb generated by the Most High, that bread and
cheese may not pass thy gullet and throat, but that thou mayest tremble like an aspen-
leaf, Amen; and not have rest, O man, until thou dost vomit it forth with blood, if thou
hast committed aught in the matter of the aforesaid theft.'"
 Numbers 5:12–27 prescribes that a woman suspected of adultery should be made
to swallow "the bitter water that causeth the curse" by the priest in order to determine
her guilt. The accused would be condemned only if 'her belly shall swell and her thigh
shall rot'. It is known as the Sotah. One writer has recently argued that the procedure
has a rational basis, envisioning punishment only upon clear proof of pregnancy (a
swelling belly) or venereal disease (a rotting thigh).
10. Ordeal of the Bier – it was an ancient belief that the slain dead could point out their
killer. In England, it was customary for the accused to approach the bier where the
corpse lay. In the view of the witness, the wounds of the victim were observed to see
if they began to bleed again. They believe that the murderer is near which causes the
blood to flow out from the wound of the victim. This ordeal was recorded well by
Shakespeare in “Richard III.”
11. Ordeal of the Needle – a red-hot needle was made to pierce the lower lip of the
alleged criminal and if blood flowed from the wound, he was deemed guilty, but if none
he is innocent. Wanaka, eastern Africa practiced this ordeal.
12. Ordeal by Heat and Fire – the accused walked bare footed over red hot coals, or was
made to walk through fire, if he was unharmed by fire he was considered innocent.
13. Trial of the Cross – the ordeal of the cross was apparently introduced in the Early
Middle Ages by the church in an attempt to discourage judicial duels among the
Germanic peoples. As with judicial duels and unlike most other ordeals the accuser
had to undergo the ordeal together with the accused. They stood on either side of a
cross and stretched out their hands horizontally. The one to first lower his arms lost.
This ordeal was prescribed by Charlemagne in 779 and again in 806. On the other
hand, a decree of Lothar I, recorded in 876, abolished the ordeal so as to avoid the
mockery of Christ.
14. Trial of the Waxen Shirt – the accused was dressed in cloth covered with wax and
walked barefooted over burning coals. If he was unhurt by the fire and the wax did not
melt, he was considered innocent.
15. Hereditary Sieve Method – Hans Gross, the Father of Criminalistics, in his famous
book in criminal investigation in which beans thrown into a sievel. If the beans jump
out of the sieve, the owner of the sieve is innocent. If the beans remained in the sieve,
the person is named a thief.
16. Donkey’s Tail Order – as a psychological theory, a donkey is placed in a room alone
and observed. If the donkey cried a judgment of guilt in crimes, is pressured. It is
believed that deep inside one’s conscience, he is guilty.
17. Ordeal of the Tiger – practiced in Siam, the accused and the accuser are placed in
a cage. If a tiger spare one of them he is considered innocent.

OTHER COUNTRIES PRACTICING ORDEAL

Burma – the ordeal by divination is being practiced in this country, whereby the two
contesting parties are furnished with candles of equal size and lighted simultaneously,
the owner of the candle and the outlasts the other is adjudged to win his cause.

Madagascar – legal authorities practiced Trial by Ordeal. The supposed criminal was to
drink, a poisonous fruit called “tangena”, a small dose can be fatal. By managing the size
of the dose, those who administer it can decide result.

Borneo – the accuser and the accused were presented shellfish placed on a plate. An
irritating fluid was then poured on the shellfish and the litigant whose shellfish moved first
was adjudged the winner.

Greece – a suspended axe was spun at the center of a group of suspects. Soon as the
axe stopped, whoever was in the line with the axe’s blade was supposed to be guilty out
by the Divine Providence.

Nigeria – the priest greased a cock’s feather and pierced the tongue of the accused, if
feather passed through the tongue easily, the accused was deemed innocent. If not, the
accused is guilty. Another method practiced in the same country is the pouring of the
corrosive liquid into the eyes of the accused who was supposed to be unharmed if
innocent. Pouring of boiling oil over the hand of the accused with usual requisites for guilt
or innocence is also practiced.

In the middle of the 13th century, the ordeal had died out in England and on the other
Continents.
 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF LIE DETECTION

DATE PERSONALITY CONTRIBUTION/EVENTS

1791 Galvani - Developed the GSR (Galvanic Skin Reflex)

1730 Daniel Defoe - An essay “Effectual Scheme for the

Immediate Preventing of Street Robberies
and Suppressing all Other Disorder of the
Night.”
- Taking pulse of a suspicious fellow
1878 Angelo Mosso - Plethysmograph

1892 Sir James - Clinical Polygraph

Mackenzie
1906 - Clinical Ink Polygraph

1895 Cesare Lombroso - Hydrosphymograph (first person to have used

the instrument)
1914 Vittorio Benussi - Discovered a method of calculating the
quotient of inhalation to exhalation.
(PNEUMOGRAPH)

- Focused his research efforts to hypnosis as a

tool to investigate perception.
1915 Dr. William Marston - American attorney and psychologist.

- Discontinuous systolic blood pressure

1917 - Uses R/I question first

- Invented the first lie detector
- Claimed to be able to detect verbal
deception by using a machine to measure
an increase in systolic blood pressure
1921 John Larson - Canadian Psychologist

1928 - Developed the Larson Polygraph

- Developed the MAP TEST to locate victims’

body (searching or probing peak of tension
test)
1925 Leonarde Keeler - Gained first-hand experience in polygraph
interrogation.

- Developed metal bellows also known as

1926 TAMBOUR

- Keller Polygraph become known in the market

1938 - Developed the psychogalvanometer (similar to
psychograph – a device that records
involuntary trembling of the finger).

- Patented the prototype of the modern

1939 polygraph

- Founded the world’s first polygraph school in

Chicago Illinois (Keeler Polygraph Institute)

- Developed the following questions (POT)

1948
a. Guilty Knowledge Test/Known Solution
POT

b. Concealment Test

c. Card Test

* These are also known as stimulation

knowledge test/concealed knowledge test

- Father of Modern Polygraph

1946 John Reid - Designed the 1st movement sensing chair

- Lawyer from Chicago Illinois

1947 - Developed the CQT and Relevant Irrelevant

Question Test; RCQT; GCT (Guilt Complex
Test)
1970 Dr. Joseph Kubis - 1st researcher to use potential computer
application for the purpose of polygraph chart
analysis
1980 Dr. John Kircher - Developed the computerized polygraph at
and David Raskin University of UTAH
1988 - Developed the CAPS (Computerized Assisted
Polygraph System) with algorithm
1992 - The Computer Age for Polygraph

1993 Dr. Dale Olsen and - Developed the POLYSCORE at Hopkins

John Harries University

2003 DoDPI - Developed by the US Department of Defense

Polygraph Institute Polyscore 5.1
1904 Max Wertheimer - German Scientists
and Julius Klein - Suggested the use of WAT and a recording
device called psychograph
1908 Veraguth - First scientist to use the WAT with the
Galvanometer
- First to use the term “Psychogalvanic Reflex”
1936 Christian Ruckmick - Used the term “Electrodermal Response”
- First to conduct legitimate laboratory study
1938 involving POT
Father Walter - Developed the Pathometer (Skin Resistance)
Summers - Developed the emotional standards (control
questions)
1930 C.W. Darrow - Developed the Darrow Behavior Research
Photopolygraph (C.H. Stoelting Company
Chicago, Illinois)
1938 Capt. Clarence Lee - Designed Berkely Psychograph with chart
drive (Kymograph)
1968 Dr. William J. - Report of the Computerization of the
Yankee Polygraphic recordings to the Keller
Polygraph Institute.
1969 Biometrics Inc. - Developed the CAM (Cardio-activity Monitor)

1971 Dektor Counter- - Developed PSE (Psychological Stress

Intelligence and Evaluator) in Georgia
Security, Inc.

1980 Paul Minor - Chief of Polygraph Examiner of the FBI

- Modified R/I Technique (includes control
question of measured relevance to the target
issue but not designed to cause an arousal).
MRIT
1977 Prof. James Allan - Developed the QTZCT (Quadri-Zone
Matte Comparison Technique) renamed in January
1995 or QTrack Zone
- “Fear of Error” by the innocent
- “Hope of Error” by the guilty
- SKG (Suspicion-Knowledge-Guilt)
1980’s NITV - National Institute of Truth Verification
- Developed the CVSA
1960 Cleve Backster - Pioneered “hypno-interrogation”, “narco-
(Grover Cleveland interrogation”
1961 Backster) - Developed BZCT (Backster Zone Comparison
Tachnique)
- Sacrifice relevant question
- Earlier in life control question or the Exclusive
Earlier in life Control Question that uses
timeline
1965 Richard O. Arther - First polygraphist to record simultaneously on
a regular basis chest and abdominal breathing
patterns.
- Developed the Arther II Polygraph, the first
instrument since 1938 to contain “stimulus
marker”.
United States - Currently the leader in forensic psychophysiology

1986-1988 - Worked on the 1st commercial US made computer polygraph

system (CPS)
1991 - CPS introduced into the market by the Stoelting Company

China (May 1991) - First country that followed US manufacture CPS

- Chinese Ministry of Public Security Science and Technology
Department manufactures the PG-1 model psychological
measuring device
Russia - Ministry of Internal Affairs opened in 1933 a polygraph institute in
Moscow for the training of forensic psychophysiologists
- INEX and AVEX
1995 - Forensic psychophysiology using the polygraph was the first to
introduce in Malaysia when the Royal Malaysian Police (RMP)
purchased a Lafayette LX200W CPS
 - Dr. Charles Cady – recommended the use of chloroform to
Lincoln’s assassination.
1897 - Sticker – conducted the earliest application of psychogalvanometer
(PGR) to forensic problems.
- Ronald E. Decker – initiated the Reid Polygraph Technique and
called it the “Modified General Question Test (MGQT)”