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.
178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8792199)
1. The North American polygraph and psychophysiology: disinterested, uninterested, and interested perspectives. Furedy JJ Int J Psychophysiol; 1996; 21(2-3):97-105. PubMed ID: 8792199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. The 'control' question 'test' (CQT) polygrapher's dilemma: logico-ethical considerations for psychophysiological practitioners and researchers. Furedy JJ Int J Psychophysiol; 1993 Nov; 15(3):263-7. PubMed ID: 8119845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Psychology and the lie detector industry: A fifty-year perspective. Iacono WG Biol Psychol; 2024 Jul; 190():108808. PubMed ID: 38718884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Some elementary distinctions among, and comments concerning, the 'control' question 'test' (CQT) polygrapher's many problems: a reply to Honts, Kircher and Raskin. Furedy JJ Int J Psychophysiol; 1996; 22(1-2):53-9. PubMed ID: 8799768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Credibility assessment: preliminary process theory, the polygraph process, and construct validity. Palmatier JJ; Rovner L Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):3-13. PubMed ID: 24933412 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Comparison Question Test versus the Concealed Information Test? That was the question in Japan: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner (2015). Ogawa T; Matsuda I; Tsuneoka M Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Jan; 95(1):29-30. PubMed ID: 25242502 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Polygraph Accuracy of Control Question Test in Criminal Cases. Sun ZY; Zhang F; Zhang FX; Luo R; Mao YY; Hu ZQ; Gu Y Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Jun; 35(3):295-299. PubMed ID: 31282623 [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. 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]
17. Clinical judgment and decision-making in CQT-polygraphy. A comparison with other pseudoscientific applications in psychology. Ben-Shakhar G Integr Physiol Behav Sci; 1991; 26(3):232-40. PubMed ID: 1954163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Evaluating polygraphy from a psychophysiological perspective: a specific-effects analysis. Furedy JJ Pavlov J Biol Sci; 1987; 22(4):145-52. PubMed ID: 3438101 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Deception detection: State of the art and future prospects. Masip J Psicothema; 2017 May; 29(2):149-159. PubMed ID: 28438235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]