Acquaintance Tests

Introduction

Expand AllCollapse All

• Background

  Acquaintance tests have been used since the beginning of the polygraphy. There are many different types, and there has never been any research to determine which is the best. The “best” acquaintance test will be the one that achieves the goal of assisting in the discernment between truth and deception. That choice could vary by examinee, and there are instances when the examiner may choose not to use any acquaintance test at all. Below are some of the purposes of the acquaintance test.

  1. To familiarize the examinee with the testing procedures.
  2. To give the examiner a glimpse of the examinee’s normal physiological patterns.
  3. To set the proper instrument gains and centerings.
  4. To test for examinee cooperation (or countermeasures).
  5. To reassure the innocent, and focus the guilty.
  6. To increase or decrease the examinee’s responsivity.
  7. To give the examiner practice in conducting and interpreting Peak of Tension tests.
  8. To look for evidence of drugs, such as very unresponsive tracings or unusual tonic physiological levels.

  This guide contains instructions on four popular methods, and at least one of them will be right for a given examinee. Though still in use, we have not included any “card tests” or any method that might be regarded as trickery. Each of the acquaintance tests has different strengths, and it is the responsibility of the testing examiner to match the method with the examinee. That selection will depend on factors such as the examinee’s education, age, attitude, background, and previous experience with the polygraph. Interpretation guidance for acquaintance tests can be found in the guide entitled Adjunct Techniques.

• General Rules

  1. There should be no trickery involved in the acquaintance test, nor the appearance of trickery.
  2. If acquaintance tests are used, they should be given to all examinees, and conducted before other charts.
  3. Do not use responses on the acquaintance test as a template for response patterns typical of the examinee.
  4. To be effective, an acquaintance test must have a proper pretest and posttest. Ensure the examinee understands his role in the process, and the implications of the outcome of the acquaintance test.
  5. Under no circumstances should the examiner manipulate the tracings for effect.

• References

  • Barland, G.H. (1978). A fail-proof blind numbers test. Polygraph, 7(3), 203-208.
  • Decker, R.E. (1978). The Army stimulation test - A control procedure. Polygraph, 7(3), 176-177
  • Lee, R.E. (1999). The Calibration Verification of Sensitivity Acquaintance Test (CVOS). Journal of the American Association of Police Polygraphists.
  • Scarce, K.W. (1978). The True Blue Control Test. Polygraph, 7(3), 194-198.

• Suggested Reading

  • Elaad, E., & Kleiner, M. (1986). The stimulation test in polygraph field examinations: A case study. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 14(4), 328-333.
  • Kirby, S.L. (1981). The comparison of two stimulus tests and their effect on the polygraph technique. Polygraph, 10(2), 63-76.
  • Law, J.G. (1977). Report on a new stimulation test. Polygraph, 6(2). 132-148.
  • Matte, J.A. (1996). Forensic psycho-physiology using the polygraph: Scientific truth verification – Lie detection. J.A.M Publications: Williamsville, NY. Polygraph, Volume 7, Issue 3 (1978).
  • Widup, R., & Barland, G.H. (1994). Effect of the location of the numbers test on examiner decision rates in criminal psychophysiological detection of deception test. Department of Defense Polygraph Institute: Ft. McClellan, AL. DoDPI94-R-0015.