Polygraphs

In 1920, the price of a lie detector would have varied depending on the specific type and complexity of the device. Polygraph machines, which are commonly associated with lie detectors, were first developed in the early 20th century. These early versions were likely custom-built and would have been relatively expensive due to the specialized technology involved. However, without specific historical pricing data, it is challenging to provide an exact price for a lie detector in 1920.

A lie detector, also known as a polygraph, typically consists of various components. The main materials used include sensors or electrodes to measure physiological responses like heart rate and sweat production, ink or paper to record these responses, and wiring to connect the sensors to the recording device. Additionally, lie detectors often include a blood pressure cuff and a breathing tube to monitor additional physiological cues.

In many cases, a pathological liar actually believes what they are sayingis true. This is a severmental disorderwhichrequires in-depth therapy. In that case, I believe it is possible for the lie to go undetected. Still, there are differences in opinion as to whether a pathological liar actually knows that what they are saying is indeed a lie. In other words, some would say the pathological liarknows that what they are saying is a lie, but can not help themselves and therefore state the lie. In this case, I believe the lie would be detected. AnswerYes some people can beat the lie detector test because it's not 100% accurate. As the above poster said a pathological liar may beat it, and also a well-trained person who controls their mind and heart rate can also beat it. There is experimentation's in the Army where soldiers are trained to beat any method of obtaining information. The brain is a wonderful thing.

If your friend asks you to go through a lie detector test, it's important to consider your boundaries and personal comfort level. You have the right to decline if you are not comfortable with the idea. Openly communicate your concerns and reasons for not wanting to participate, and suggest alternative ways to address the issue or build trust between you and your friend.

Finding information on lie detectors is easy. A police station can give you information on lie detectors. There are now lie detectors for cell phone applications. However, using the applications on phone is not a good source of proof to tell if someone is lying or not.

Yes, you can change your mind and deny taking a polygraph test even if you previously agreed to it. It is your right to refuse any form of testing or questioning. It is important to consult with legal counsel or seek advice before making a decision as there may be implications depending on the context or circumstances surrounding the test.

A polygraph instrument measures three basic bodily functions but may also measure additional (optional) features. At a minimum, the polygraph must measure (1) relative blood pressure by placing a blood pressure cuff on the upper arm, (2) electrodermal response by placing metal plates on the fingers or self-stick pads on the palm of the hands, and (3) breathing patterns by placing two soft rubber tubes across the upper and lower abdomen. Additional features may also be measured, but these are the basics. - Michael Martin (President, Global Polygraph Network)

Some can.

Sometimes sociopaths (antisocial personality disorder) can lie but still pass a lie detector test, but the reason isn't because they're experienced liars, but because feel little or no guilt about deceiving people, so they register few biological stress indicators.

"Compulsive liar" isn't a mental health diagnosis, but a descriptive term for someone who lies habitually, regardless of the reason. While some of these people may be sociopaths, many more are people who experience guilt, anxiety, fear and other feelings related to their deceptions that would make it virtually impossible for them to fool a polygraph examiner.

Polygraph or 'lie detector' machines is a technology is that is still not generally liked or trusted technology. Trained, experienced people make a living from polygraph use is still hard. Talking with some who are already working in the field would be best able to help you

Although the use of polygraph results as evidence in court is regularly challenged - it IS a useful tool and is used in the preliminary stage of many criminal investigations.

Yes, it is possible.

Polygraph results have consistently been held by the courts to be inadmissible at trial. There are some jurisdictions that allow them under limited circumstances, but in most jurisdictions they are per se inadmissible. The science has not been proven to be reliable, even under the most lenient standards, and the danger of unfair prejudice (confusing and misleading the jury) greatly outweighs any probative value. Every so often a defense attorney will have a client that passes a polygraph, or a co-defendant or third party that fails a polygraph, and they want desperately for the jury to hear these polygraph results. I have had both situations and have used the polygraph results in pre-trial negotiations, but resist the urge to ever ask a court to admit the results in front of a jury. This is a two-edged sword, and the government's side of the blade cuts deeper than the Defendant's. If the courts begin to admit polygraph examinations for defendants, they will surely begin to admit them for the government as well, and you can bet it would happen loud and often. What are the problems with polygraph examinations? First of all they are not reliable. Contrary to popular belief, they do not tell the examiner whether the subject is telling the truth or lying. They can indicate deception based on physiological reactions to the questions posed, but even an indication of deception or lack of deception can be skewed by an individual's physiology or the bias of the examiner. Some people are inherently nervous, and others are unshakable. Some people can control their physical reactions. My biggest problem with polygraph examinations by the government is that they are often nothing more than an interrogation tool. While polygraph results are not admissible in court, statements made by the defendant during the course of the examination probably are admissible. A common tactic is to wire up the subject, begin questioning him or her, tell them that the machine proves that they are lying, and then continue interrogation of the subject until a confession is obtained. Often clients insist that they want to take a polygraph for the government, to prove their innocence. And I don't blame them - it may be that they know that they are innocent, and they are convinced, like most people, that polygraphs are infallible lie detector tests that will prove their innocence to the police or the prosecutors. They don't understand that 1) under the best of circumstances the machines are not 100% reliable, and 2) in the eyes of an FBI agent, SLED agent or investigator for the local sheriff's department, they are guilty and the polygraph is nothing more than a tool to obtain additional evidence. This is not to say that polygraphs are not useful, because they are. We use respected independent polygraph examiners in some cases, where a client insists on a polygraph, but rarely will we consent to allow a government polygraph/interrogation. If the results from the independent polygraph examination show no deception, we will allow the government's examiner to review the charts and discuss the interview with the independent examiner. If the results are not favorable (this does not necessarily mean that the person is guilty), the government does not need to know about it and they do not then have the opportunity to interrogate the client.

Yes, there are a few methods which have been used to cheat on polygraph tests. The most common method is the 'Tack in the Shoe', where the person being polygraphed places a tack in their shoe, and whenever asked a question, they could step their heel on the tack and then answer the question falsely, as the lie is masked by the pain of the tack inside the person's heel.

An instrument for multiplying copies of a writing; a manifold writer; a copying machine., In bibliography, a collection of different works, either by one or several authors., An instrument for detecting deceptive statements by a subject, by measuring several physiological states of the subject, such as pulse, heartbeat, and sweating. The instrument records these parameters on a strip of paper while the subject is asked questions designed to elicit emotional responses when the subject tries to deceive the interrogator. Also called lie detector

No. They can be fooled which is why they are not admissible as evidence in a court of law (at least in the US)

YES!! but it depends on the town your in if its really small no but they might make you go to the academy in the nearest town and then yes you will have to they ask the most messed up questions...

to see if people were lying

A lie detector is designed to detect the small changes in your body when you lie, as opposed to when you tell the truth. For most people, a deliberate lie will cause stress in the nervous system, and this may be seen as changes in pulse rate, breathing, or sweating. More complex instruments (such as an EEG) can detect the changes in the nerve impulses directly, but are harder to interpret.

To check if they are as dumb as the 1 asking this q.

A polygraph test is commonly called a 'lie detector'. The passage of time would not affect your chance of passing the test. The test measures skin response, heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc., to judge whether you are lying. If you know you are lying, then there is little difference between a day and a year. Your reaction will be the same.

This is very different from a blood, urine, hair, etc. test.

Laurel Coppock

One legit angle might be cases involving memory loss from automobile or other accidents which may have taken human life- so-called Vehicular homicides. they usually call in Pyschiatrists and there is always the possibility the person being tested may be faking amnesia ( memory blot outs or loss). Another possibility is the test subject may be in fear for their own life ( from accident) and will tell the police anything they want to hear- to get them off their back- nerves, or whatever. there are balancing acts between Police fact-finding and medical compassion. if the test subject is drunk- well you know Sarge, I was coming down the Boulevard and I saw this huge Pink Dinosaur and I put on the brakes, but... oh boy.

No. Not the sole results of the polygraph. However, they can be used by law enforcement as an investigative tool. The results that are produced by those interviews, if investigation substantiates them, ARE admissable.