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.
165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1816590)
1. A comparison of field and laboratory polygraphs in the detection of deception. Patrick CJ; Iacono WG Psychophysiology; 1991 Nov; 28(6):632-8. PubMed ID: 1816590 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Temperature effects on polygraph detection of concealed information. MacNeill AL; Bradley MT Psychophysiology; 2016 Feb; 53(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 26435532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Alice-in-Wonderland terminological usage in, and communicational concerns about, that peculiarly American flight of technological fancy. The CQT polygraph. Furedy JJ Integr Physiol Behav Sci; 1991; 26(3):241-7. PubMed ID: 1954164 [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. Science and the CQT polygraph. A theoretical critique. Saxe L Integr Physiol Behav Sci; 1991; 26(3):223-31. PubMed ID: 1954162 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The comparison question polygraph test: a contrast of methods and scoring. Honts CR; Reavy R Physiol Behav; 2015 May; 143():15-26. PubMed ID: 25703188 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Antisociality, underarousal and the validity of the Concealed Information Polygraph Test. Verschuere B; Crombez G; Koster EH; De Clercq A Biol Psychol; 2007 Mar; 74(3):309-18. PubMed ID: 17030398 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The protection of innocent suspects: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Vrij A Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):20-1. PubMed ID: 25224520 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cognitive and emotional aspects of polygraph diagnostic procedures: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Elaad E Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):14-5. PubMed ID: 25093905 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy rate of lie-detection in China: estimate the validity of CQT on field cases. Mao YY; Liang YD; Hu ZQ Physiol Behav; 2015 Mar; 140():104-10. PubMed ID: 25447427 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Good intentions that fail to cope with the main point in CQT: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Ginton A Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):25-8. PubMed ID: 25264350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Alcohol and the physiological detection of deception: arousal and memory influences. O'Toole D; Yuille JC; Patrick CJ; Iacono WG Psychophysiology; 1994 May; 31(3):253-63. PubMed ID: 8008789 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Control Question Test in polygraphic examinations with actual controls for truth. Bradley MT; MacLaren VV; Black ME Percept Mot Skills; 1996 Dec; 83(3 Pt 1):755-62. PubMed ID: 8961312 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The current status of research in forensic psychophysiology and its application in the psychophysiological detection of deception. Yankee WJ J Forensic Sci; 1995 Jan; 40(1):63-8. PubMed ID: 7876805 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Psychopathic traits and autonomic responding to concealed information in a prison sample. Verschuere B; Crombez G; De Clercq A; Koster EH Psychophysiology; 2005 Mar; 42(2):239-45. PubMed ID: 15787861 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of perceived efficacy and prospect of success on detection in the Guilty Actions Test. Zvi L; Nachson I; Elaad E Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):35-45. PubMed ID: 25543067 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Psychophysiological detection of deception and Preliminary Process Theory: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Patnaik P; Kircher JC Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):22-4. PubMed ID: 25196828 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Does the Guilty Actions Test allow for differentiating guilty participants from informed innocents? A re-examination. Gamer M Int J Psychophysiol; 2010 Apr; 76(1):19-24. PubMed ID: 20114064 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Preliminary process theory does not validate the comparison question test: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Ben-Shakhar G; Gamer M; Iacono W; Meijer E; Verschuere B Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):16-9. PubMed ID: 25151652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]