These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
2. The effect of selected variables on interpretation of polygraph records. Horvath F J Appl Psychol; 1977 Apr; 62(2):127-36. PubMed ID: 845110 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of biofeedback on the detection of deception. Timm HW J Forensic Sci; 1987 May; 32(3):736-46. PubMed ID: 3598524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Tonic arousal during field polygraph tests in guilty vs. innocent suspects in Japan. Hira S; Furumitsu I Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback; 2009 Sep; 34(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 19499326 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A psychophysiological study of determinants for detection of deception. Yamaoka K Bull Tokyo Med Dent Univ; 1976 Mar; 23(1):11-22. PubMed ID: 1065507 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Multilevel models for repeated measures research designs in psychophysiology: an introduction to growth curve modeling. Kristjansson SD; Kircher JC; Webb AK Psychophysiology; 2007 Sep; 44(5):728-36. PubMed ID: 17596179 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Psychophysiological and vocal measures in the detection of guilty knowledge. Gamer M; Rill HG; Vossel G; Gödert HW Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Apr; 60(1):76-87. PubMed ID: 16005091 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An experimental comparison of the psychological stress evaluator and the galvanic skin response in detection of deception. Horvath F J Appl Psychol; 1978 Jun; 63(3):338-44. PubMed ID: 690061 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of physiological indices in detection of deception. Thackray RI; Orne MT Psychophysiology; 1968 Jan; 4(3):329-39. PubMed ID: 5636306 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Cross-modal physiological effects of electrodermal lability in the detection of deception. Waid WM; Wilson SK; Orne MT J Pers Soc Psychol; 1981 Jun; 40(6):1118-25. PubMed ID: 7264879 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of polygraph data obtained from individuals involved in mock crimes and actual criminal investigations. Pollina DA; Dollins AB; Senter SM; Krapohl DJ; Ryan AH J Appl Psychol; 2004 Dec; 89(6):1099-105. PubMed ID: 15584845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Truth and deception: a reply to Lykken. Raskin DC; Podlesny JA Psychol Bull; 1979 Jan; 86(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 377355 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Polygraph lie detection on real events in a laboratory setting. Bradley MT; Cullen MC Percept Mot Skills; 1993 Jun; 76(3 Pt 1):1051-8. PubMed ID: 8321576 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Physiological measures and the detection of deception. Podlesny JA; Raskin DC Psychol Bull; 1977 Jul; 84(4):782-99. PubMed ID: 331381 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. An evaluation of field techniques in detection of deception. Barland GH; Raskin DC Psychophysiology; 1975 May; 12(3):321-30. PubMed ID: 1153638 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. New measures improve the accuracy of the directed-lie test when detecting deception using a mock crime. Bell BG; Kircher JC; Bernhardt PC Physiol Behav; 2008 Jun; 94(3):331-40. PubMed ID: 18343464 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Human versus computerized evaluations of polygraph data in a laboratory setting. Kircher JC; Raskin DC J Appl Psychol; 1988 May; 73(2):291-302. PubMed ID: 3384775 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Countering countermeasures in the concealed information test using covert respiration measures. Elaad E; Ben-Shakhar G Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback; 2009 Sep; 34(3):197-208. PubMed ID: 19543828 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combining physiological measures in the detection of concealed information. Gamer M; Verschuere B; Crombez G; Vossel G Physiol Behav; 2008 Oct; 95(3):333-40. PubMed ID: 18638496 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]