LINO MAS 1 USE OF POLYGRAPHS AS 'LIE DETECTORS,' BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (PART 3--PANEL WITH SCIENTISTS)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 114
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 6, 2005
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: April 29, 1964
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050
LINO MAS I
USE OF POLYGRAPHS AS "LIE DETECTQS"'
BY THE. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
(Part 3-Panel With Scientists)
HEARINGS
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
r'ritited for the use of the
,douimittee du Government Operations
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 2
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
WILLIAM L. DAWSON, Illinois, Chairman
CHET HOLIFIELD, California
JACK BROOKS, Texas
L. H. FOUNTAIN, North Carolina
PORTER HARDY, JR., Virginia
JOHN A. BLATNIK. Minnesota
ROBERT E. JONES, Alabama
EDWARD A. GARMATZ, Maryland
JOHN E. MOSS. California
DANTE B. FASCELL. Florida
HENRY S. REUSS. Wisconsin
JOHN S. MONAGAN, Connecticut
RICHARD E. LANKFORD, Maryland
TORBERT H. M ACDON ALD, Massachusetts
J. EDWARD ROUSH, Indiana
WILLIAM S. -MOORHEAD, Pennsylvania
CORNELIUS E. GALLAGHER, New Jersey
WILLIAM J. RANDALL, Missouri
BENJAMIN S. ROSENTHAL, New York
R. WALTER RIEHLMAN, New York
GEORGE MEADER, Michigan
CLARENCE J. BROWN, Ohio
FLORENCE P. DWYER, New Jersey
ROBERT P. GRIFFIN, Michigan
GEORGE M. WALLHAUSER, New Jersey
JOHN B. ANDERSON, Illinois
OGI)EN R. REID, New York
FRANK J. HORTON, New York
BILL STINSON, Washington
ROBERT McCLORY, Illinois
ALBERT W. JOHNSON, Pennsylvania
CHRISTINE RAY DAVIS, Staff Director
JAMES A. LANIGAN, General Counsel
MILES Q. ROMNEY, Associate General Counsel
J. P. CARI.SON. Minority Counsel
RAYMOND T. COLLINS, Minority Professional Staff
FOREIGN OPERATIONS AND GOVERNMENT IlFORMATION S,UBCQMMITTEE
JOHN E. MOSS, California, Chairman
PORTER HARDY, JR., Virginia GEORGE DEADER, Michigan
HENRY S. IREUSS, Wisconsin ROBERT P. GRIFFIN, Michigan
JOHN S. MONAGAN, Connecticut OGDEN R. REID, New York
IJANTE B. FASCELL, Florida
SAMUEL J. ARCHIBALD, Staff Administrator
BENNY L. KASS. Counsel
JACK MATTESON, Chief Investigator
HELEN K. BEASLEY, Clerk
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 3
USE OF POLYGRAPHS AS "LIE DETECTORS" jN THE',
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
(Part 3-Panel With Scientists)
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1964
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
FOREIGN OPERATIONS AND
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washingtonz, D.Q,
The subcommittee met ,at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 304
Cannon Office Building, Hon. John E. Moss (chairman of the sub-
committee) presiding.
Present : Representatives John. E. Moss, Porter Hardy, Jr., Henry
S. Reuss, John S. Monagan, George Meader, Robert P. Griffin, and
,Ogden R. Reid.
Staff members present: Samuel J. Archibald, staff administrator;
,Jack Matteson, chief investigator; Benny L. Kass, subcommittee
counsel, and Marvin F. Weinbaum, staff investigator.
Mr. Moss. The subcommittee will be in order.
(Members of the subcommittee present at time of convening: Rep-
resentatives Moss, Reuss, and Griffin.)
Mr. Moss. This is a continuation of the subcommittee's inquiry into
the use of polygraphs-so-called "lie detectors"-by the Federal
Government.
We have heard testimony from non-Government experts in the
field of lie detection and from Army, Nvy, and Air Force witnesses
who are familiar with the use of the polygraph in government. Ad-
ditional Government witnesses will be heard at a later date.
Testimony so far reveals several significant areas of interest to
the subcommittee. These `include the training and qualifications of
polygraph examiners, the reliability and accuracy of the instrument in.
measuring emotions, and the widespread use of the instrument by
the Government for criminal investigations and in certain security
agencies for preemployment examinations.
In reviewing the testimony on training and qualifications of Fed-
eral polygraph examiners there is strong evidence of a complete lack
of standardization in setting minimum requirements, There is a
wide variation, among Federal agencies in the requirements for class-
room polygraph training-ranging from 5 days in some instances-to
7 weeks in others. The hearing record shows that the experts sharply
disagree on desirable requirements for polygraph examiners..
The ty.p of polygraph generally in use by the Federal Government
records physiological functions in the subject being tested. The
graphs depict pulse and blood pressure, respiration, and minor changes
in skin dampening. It is stated that these physiological changes are
generated by emotional reactions. By interpretation of these record-
ings the examiner claims to be able to determine the guilt, innocence,
or moral character of the person being examined. So far there is
no adequate showing in the hearing record to indicate that. the con-
clusions reached by the polygraph examiner are based on scientific
fact. To further explore this problem, the subcommittee today has
convened a panel of specialists in the field of psychiatry and psychology
who have done research in the use of polygraphs. They are :
Dr. John I. Lacey, chairman of the department of psychophysiology-
neurophysiology, Fels Research Institute, and professor of psycho-
physiology, Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio;
Dr. H. B. Dearman, psychiatrist, Johnson City, Tenn.;
Dr. Joseph F. Kubis, professor, department of psychology, Ford-
ham University ; and
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 8
It is difficult to answer how accurate the lie detector is in terms of
the probabilities of falsely diagnosing guilt or falsely diagnosing in-
nocence. Given an accuracy of say, 50 percent in a balanced situation
designed to maximize correct answers, you can choose to set your cut-
off point in such a way as to minimize either error.
I would like to separate the scientific issue of accuracy from the
almost administrative decision of what you will do with the data.
This is much the same thing as college board data predicting college
performance. A very high score on the college boards predicts rea-
sonably accurately that an individual will do well in college; however,
a low college board score does not predict at all well that an individual.
will do badly. This information is available to the dean who makes
the decision. If he has to choose a very few students from a large
number of applicants, he may well decide to take only students with
good college board scores knowing full well that he may be eliminat-
ing some very good potential students. By so doing, he will be reason
ably certain of eliminating false positives at the cost of. making a high
proportion of false negatives decisions. By the same token, under
different circumstances with fewer applicants, the dean may feel it is
essential not to lose any potentially good students and in that case,
of necessity, he will choose a different cutoff point therefore also
admitting more students who are potentially unable to do the work.
All the educational testing services can do in this instance is to obtain
the data and report the findings to the dean. The administrative de-
cision is a separate issue. It may be useful to look at lie detection
data in a similar way. h work as
Mr. Kass. Dr. Kubis, you have done studies in polygraph
detection; is this correct?
Dr. Kunis. That is right.
Mr. KAss. How scientific is this method?
Dr. KuBis. Well, if you would consider method, you would have to
.consider the instrument, the individual, and his operation of the
instrument. Now, in terms of instrumentation, as Dr. Lacey has
pointed out, the field has not progressed as it should have from a
scientific point of view. 'There have been many opportunities for it
to progress. There may have been a great investment of money in the
types of instruments that. have been manufactured, and those in
struments are still in operation. There have been some minor im-
provements but they are not very great.
In terms of some of my own research, it, seems conceivable that
people now are relatively knowledgeable about these various pro-
cedures and can, as it, were, fool the lie detector operator. They don ',t
fool the machine. The machine only records what it records but they
may fool the lie detector operator who is interpreting the curves that
are generated by the machine. In other words, people-once they
know what is being recorded, especially if they are guilty, or if they
are playing a game as in experimentation-will try to find methods
of beating the procedure-not, the machine-beating the procedure
which involves the interpretation of the examiner.
In this particular case, we have machine a which only records the
physiological responses and an individual who tries to interpret the
recordings of the machine.
When you ask how scientific is this procedure, it would seem that in
terms of the exacting criteria of science it is not so very scientific.
These men are practically oriented and are trying to make practical
.decisions. They have a number of hunches, a number of criteria or
ways of interpreting data which. are peculiar to them. And having
had some success, which was probably above chance, they are acting
according to,this procedure.
Now, if they were scientific-and it depends on what we mean
by scientific-they might try to put all of this data into some nu-
merical form. They would then try to integrate these sets of numbers,
to get a single number. 'Then they would try to compare this single
number with a number that they feel is a critical point. At ttiha.t point
they should make the decision whether he-the suspect-is or is not
saying what he believes. I am trying to get rid of the notions, as
Dr. Orne has been trying, of guilt or innocence. I think it is a matter
of verification of what the suspect knows of what he believes he
knows.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T,TNO MAS I 1
We have done a fair amount, of work on what you might C, 11 the
voluntary control of the read-out. This has nothing to do with lie
detection. It i s basi c psych ophysi of ogi cal work.
I am sure Dr. Lacey will confirm this kind of phenomenon, that
the control, the voluntary volitional control of these parameters is
considerably greater than wenormally give them credit for.
Dr. DEARMAN. I can't unite agree with that for the simple reason
that if you cut the sympathetic nerve to the heart you get. a, slowing of
the heartbeat. When Dr. Orne. says you tell a man to think about
something, being afraid, certainly it i_ going to speed up. It is
going to speed un automatically because this is a stress situation.
In other words. if he thinks of the death of a family member, this
is the tliino' that causes the autonomic nervous system to kick nn. In
other words, without an emotion, it, -wouldnt work if you could be
entirely objective.
Dr. LACEY. What. wouldn't work?
Dr. DPAPMAN. You cnnlld 'be entirely objective about something
and say, being scared and knowing about scaring. I don't. think you
would get an autonomic response because, as Cannon said. the anto-
nomic nervous system is the nervous system used for the "fight or
flio'ht" response. Just like a football nlayer getting ready for the
kickoff, -he is very nervous until this 'happens. WWrhen lie kicks the
ball, then-he settles down.
Dr. -LACnv. I think at this moment. -in time you have opened a
Pandora's box. You are at the point of eonsiderable disagreement
among those enoao'ed in the daily study of the problem of the relation-
ship of autonomic functions to the central nervous system. of what
the autonomic responses are there for. The Cannon theory of fight
or flight. I aan afraid.-Dr. De.armaan, is not. one that holds up in daily
laboratory-investioation. I think most neolile investigating this area
today would not feel flint this formulation even begins to encompass
what we see. -It is perfectly possible. for example, to administer a
word association test in which as carefully as possible one eliminates
all words with "emotional" connotation : success, mother, love, feces,
and so on. Eliminate all these words, administer the words calling
for the first asfiociatinn that. comes to mind and one will elicit, for
example, beautiful GSA's. If one tries to find ghat this correlates
with, one can find as did Rerlvne, for example
As did Rerlvne, that the magnitude of the GSR elicited depended
Mr. LASS. Excuse me, Dr. LaceY, as did
Dr. LACEY. Rerlvne, R e r l y n e, T niversity of Toronto.
Dr. LACEY. Rerlvne, B-e-r-l-y-n-e, TTniversity of Toronto. (Con-
upon what is known as the response uncertainty of the word. Words
which in our culture evoke a nnultinlicity of responses, elicit larger
'GSR's than words ithich in our culture do not evoke a multiplicity
,Of association.
If I give you a, word association test and I say "black," you will
,say "white." "That is an extremely popular response;'it will not be
accompanied by a, large GSR.
Dr. DEArMMAN. It might be if Thad some sheer animosity toward
a colored person.
Dr. LACnv. "That is correct.
Dr. Dl-Ar,MAN. If you say something is irrelevant or relevant, you
have to say irrevelant. or relevant, to whom ? Do I drink coffee? This
guy got ai 1)eating every time he drank coffee. Well, anybody would
get a response to that.
This thing' has meaning to a person that we don't know.
Dr. LACEY. That is correct,. I am. giving ,you a, group result. By
the very fact that it is a group result,, it bears with it a little more
certainty than the study of any single case.
The single-case study always elicits dramatic leads in hypothesis
for further test.
All I aan saying is, as you can already see, we are now in an area
of disagreement. I think the committee had better be aware that there
is disagreement.
Mr. LASS. You say we: have opened up a Pandora's box of disagree-
ment. Isn't this same disagreement possible to 'come up practically
in the polygraph situation?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 12
Dr. LACny. Absolutely, I would think so.
Dr. ORNE. Just one thing. I don't think we are really disagreeing
this much because there is an empirical basis for answering the ques-
tion. I am not talking about data off the top of my head, the data is
available, it is public. I refer you to a paper from our laboratory in
the Journal of Psychosomatic Medicine which reported the study I
am talking about. 117-hat we were doing specifically was comparing the
effect of hypnotically induced emotions on heart rate, GSR respiration,
and so forth, with the change individuals could evoke at will. The
remarkable finding was the extent of autonomic changes which in-
dividuals could produce without any special procedure.
I don't think that it matters, and I am perfectly willing to take this
as a scientific controversy, what the intervening variable is; namely,
how you do it. From the point of view of this committee, it is rele-
vant that you can do it and it is not automatic. In other words, if I
ask you to please be afraid, you can make your own heart beat more
rapidly within two beats and most normal persons have this ability,
I would therefore say for our purposes we may view it as a fairly
voluntary response and it, would be giving the wrong idea to present
it as an involuntary response even though it may be mediated by
recalling past, experience.
Since we a.11 have this ability at all times, we may consider the ability
of the individual to produce a GSR response at. will, to inhibit respira-
tion at will, to increase his heart beat at will as within the repertoire
of the normal intact human being.
Dr. L ci:Y. This is one of the areas of disagreement I am referring
to, that the old line autonomic nervous system is entirely automatic.
I just think it is so clear today that it is not. Dr. Orne has contributed
a great deal of information in this field in studies of what he calls
"The Demand Characteristics of the Experiment." It is so clear that
whatever the mediating process, as Dr. Orne says, the organism has
methods at its disposal for augmenting or inhibiting a variety of
physiologic responses.
Mr. Fuss. Dr. Lacey, if I understand you correctly-and I am not
a scientist-you are saving that in the individual, some individuals,
or within the same individual, the autonomic nervous system may be
automatic and at other times not?
Dr. LACTY. No; the word "autonomic" is something of a misnomer.
It arose because of certain structural peculiarities of the nervous
system seen when one opens up, say, a dog or cat or man, and looks to
see how the nerves are distributed. There are certain definite struc-
tural and functional peculiarities to that branch of the nervous system
which has come to be given a- separate chapter discussion in the text-
books on physiology. This is what we mean by the autonomic nervous
system.
Today, at the frontiers of psychophysiology and nenrophysiology
far less attention is being paid to these structural and functional pe-
culiarities and much more to the functional similarities and to the
interconnections between the central nervous system and the autonomic
nervous system.
All autonomic functions with which I am familiar are integrated at
all ,levels of the nervous system. You can elicit them in an anesthetized
animal from the cortex, su'bcortex, from the brain stem.
These are all interconnected and these interconnections provide the
physical basis for the kind of phenomenon that Dr. Orne has presented
in his work so very convincingly.
Let me (rive you an extremely simply example to show you how
sensitive these responses can be to-I will use Dr. Orne's phrase, I
like it-to "the demand characteristics of the experiment."
Any new intrusion in the environment, any new stimulus, will evoke
quite a few physiologic responses. Our Russian colleagues have it,
for example, that a novel stimulus will evoke vasoconstriction in the
digit, vasodilation in the temple and GSR. This is one of their criteria
for what they call the orienting reflex. Repetition of this stimulus, if
no particular meaning is given to it and if it does not change, if the
organism has nothing to do with that stimulus, repetition of that
stimulus will rapidly result in a- diminution, indeed a disappearance
of these physiological aspects of the orienting reflex.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LTNO MAS 17
Mr. Reuss. If I may say so, that, is a responsive answer to the,
question I was asking: Using your best knowledge of the art of lie,
detection as practiced in the United States today, is this, in your
opinion, a currently valid procedure in terms of crime detection, in
terms of employees screening, and in terms of individual rights, taking:
all those together?
Dr. Orne, I Mess I should return to you:
Dr. ORNP. I think many of the points which Dr. Lacey made quite
earlier are the reasons for my difficulty. Unfortunately, the question
of validity implies does it work. Now, if you were to sak is it, valid'
to tap wires. I would have to sav, well, it gives you the information,,
there is no doubt about that. If you were to say do I agree that, it
should be done. I would say no. I would not say it is invalid. T would
say it is not, right, it is improper, I don't like it.
Mr. RETTPC. Let us take your example. I, too, have a view on wire-
tapping which is irrelevant here. But. as you say, if you tap a wire
and make a recording of what the suspect says, this is most helpful.
This accurately records what lie said and particularly if. in the course
of"it, lie is plotting a crime or confesses a crime, this is-moral con-
siderations aside-handv to have. However, what -is your view, moral:
copsiderations aside, of the efficacy of the so-called lie detector as
practiced in the TTnited States today for the purpose for which it is
.practiced, employee screening and detection of wrongdoing? Does
it do a good job or poor job?
Dr. ORrrr:. This is what I want to separate. I would sav we have
relatively little data on the practice of lie detection in the United
.States todav. We have data that indicates under proper circum-
stances in the laboratory you can assign reliable Y)rnball;]i ties to,
whether von can categorize neople. There is no doubt about this.
I think all of us would agree on that.
Mr. Rvuss. However, my question was not concerning laboratory
tests which admittedly show a considerable degree of success by the
so-called lie detector indicating whether somebody has turned over a
red card or a black card, and so on. I am concerned with how it is
actually practiced today. You l,ave been studying this, as have your
colleagues, for years and have, if I may say so, a unique knowledge of
it. That is why you are here today. -This brings me to my question.
As practiced today. having regard for the training or lack of it, of
the operators. having regard for the claims of success of its pro-
ponents, -having regard for the uses for which the tests are conducted,
'is it a valid procedure?
Dr. ORNE. Allow me to give you the data and the reasons for it.
In the laboratory. we know that the more motivated the subject is the
easier he is to pick up. In other words, if you do not, care about
being picked up in the laboratory situation, you are very difficult to
detect. If I give you $10-if you fool me-you become very easy to
detect.. It is an interesting paradox; that, what makes the detection
of deception possible is the attempt to deceive. Since this is the case,
one would expect, because we have no data from the field really, the
xtrapolate. One
,statistics are just not, useful, therefore we have to extrapolate.'
would sav on the one ]land. well. because in the real life situation the
suspect is much more motivated, the detection of deception should be
easier. On the other hand, the conditions in real life are imperfect,
the data may be contaminated. It is easily possible tobias this kind
of data.
If I ask you, let ns say, it is number 1, is it number 2, is it number
3, is it number 4- in a -loud voice-I am going to get a response re-
gardless of anything else. Just by changing the tone, by changing
emphasis, and so on. This is on the negative side of the ledger.
How these two variables-in fact workout I mean there are rea-
sons to believe it, should work better in real life if conditions are not
well controlled. However, we know that this is not, always the case,
and, therefore, it.is difficult to weigh these factors. No one has yet
taken the data.of real life and analyzed it properly.
On the one hand, the lie detection people would like to say : Every
time we make a decision, this is right. So they arrive at, you know,
99 percent. accuracies which, in our view, are not correct.
At the same tine- if you take, as was done, where decisions have
been verified and compare this to the total sample, analyzed-it does
not tell you anything, either.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
L INO MAS 24
Mr. REID. Are you aware of anything in the Federal Government
where this kind of administrative decision is made where there is a
standardization as to professional standards and some understanding
of what, we are really doing? Are you aware of anything in the Fed-
eral Government. which attempts to do what you are talking about?
Dr. LACEY. In lie detection or in other areas?
Mr. REID. In lie detection.
Dr. ORNE,. No. I would say this kind of observation has never
been made in the literature. This is why I am trying to make this
point. It is because people have kept trying to talk about accuracy
rate without recognizing that you can shift these by an administrative
decision which leads you to very different conclusions, given the same
data.
Mr. REID. And perhaps very erroneous conclusions.
Dr.ORNE. Yes.
Mr. Moss. Mr. Reid, it. might interest you to know that on April 27,
the Department of Defense acted by memorandum directed to each of
the service secretaries, to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
and to the Director of the National Security Agency to at least clarify
some of the policies governing the use of polygraphs. The instruc-
tion is as follows :
No examination with the aid of a polygraph shall be conducted without ad-
vising the subject to be interviewed (1) that he hhs a right under the fifth
amendment to the Constitution or, as appropriate, article 31. of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice to refrain from doing anything that may tend to in-
criminate him ; (2) that the polygraph examination will be conducted only with
his prior, written consent; (3) whether the area in which the polygraph exam-
ination is to be conducted contains a two-way mirror or comparable device,
and (4) whether the examinations will be monitored or recorded in whole or in
part by any means.
It is signed by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Cyrus Vance.
Mr. Reuss. What is the date of that?
Mr. Moss. April 27.
Mr. Reuss. This is news to me and most welcome news. I certainly
want to commend the Defense Department for that directive.
Mr. Moss. Mr. Meader.
Mr. MEADER. Dr. Dearman, you may be aware that a. letter that
you sent to the chairman under date of April 5, 1,964, was inserted in
our record. It appears otn pages 44 and 45 of the hearings. (See
pt. I, hearings.) I interrogated the witnesses, one of whom was a Mr.
Inbau, I believe he was a professor of law at Northwestern University,
and I wanted to read a paragraph. from your letter. It bears on the
directive that the chairman has just read. You said, and I quote:
In my opinion, the use of the polygraph violates the fourth amendment as
regards search and seizure. I am also of the opinion that its use violates the
fifth amendment. I am aware that proponents of the use of the polygraph fall
back on the statement that no one is forced to take a polygraph test and use
this as a means of satisfying the constitutional requirements. However, this
is of little or no avail because the examinee does not realize that not only will
his conscious thoughts and his autonomic responses to them be recorded but
his unconscious thoughts will also be delved into and consequently he will give
autonomic responses to unconscious thoughts or, to put it another may, he
will be giving autonomic responses to thoughts of which he is totally unaware.
This is never explained to the examinee and I doubt if the examiner himself is
aware that this is taking place.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. MEADER. I don't know if you have read our record but the law
professor thought you ought to stick to psychiatry and not pronounce
constitutional interpretations.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, sir.
May I say something here, Sir?
Mr. MEADER. Yes. I want you to develop this because the question
of the invasion of an individual's rights is one that is very important
to me. You make the point of the unconscious thoughts.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes.
Mr. MEADER. Now, if the examiner advised the examinee that not
only were his conscious thoughts but. his unconscious thoughts to be
recorded and he still consented, would you think that was it violation
of the fifth amendment or the fourth amendment?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 25
Dr. DEARMAN. It is according to how much explaining you went
iiito with him. In other words, if you could explain to him that you
were going to find out things about himself that he was not aware,
and after this if he wanted to take it, then I would not think that was
a- violation. But you would have to go into great detail to do this.
May I say here that Professor Inbau also said that the use of the
lie detector was no more an intrusion into the mind than that of
the psychiatrist.
So I would just like to read you something here. When the poly-
graph examiner comes in he-tells himn he can take the test or not take,
the test. When I see a patient who is involved with the law or that
I think will become involved- with the law, I read him these seven
statements: (1) That, Fain a doctor who is specialized in psychiatry;
(2) that I am interested in understanding how he happens to be sent
to me; (3) that I will take notes or make a tape recording of what
you tell me; (4) that I will send a letter stating my opinion to your-
attorney or representative; and if the attorney or representative re-
quests it, I will send a copy of the complete psychiatric work-up; in.
case of court action, the judge or anyone lie designates in the court,
may also get a copy of the letter or complete record if they so desire;-
(5) that I may have to testify in court; (6) that you do not have to
answer questions; that. if you would rather not have a certain answer-
written down or recorded you should explain that you would prefer-
not to answer that particular question, and that it is all right for you_
to do so; and (7) that I will give my opinion, based on my examina-
tion of you, and that, it may or may not be to your liking; that even,
though you may be paying my fee I will give as objective an op'imon
as is humanly possible for me to do, and in cases in which I appear,
in any, court I consider myself an expert for the court and not for any
individual.
After I have read him the statements, then, of course, the questions:
come. I explain to him my reasons for doing so.
I explain to a patient he, in effect, is putting himself in the position
of testifying against Himself.
At this point lie usually tells me that he has nothing to hide and he,
will tell the truth.
I then further explain that in talking to me he is going to reveal to,
me things about himself of which lie is unaware, that in effect he is-
going to tell more of the truth than he himself realizes.
The polygraph examiners do not do this.
Mr. MEADER. You, in effect, say that if a polygraph examiner did
instruct the exam-Mee in accordance with the instructions that you give
to your patients, and the examinee thereafter consented to the exam-
ination, there would be no violation of the fourth amendment or the
fifth amendment?
Dr. DE,.ARMAN. Correct, sir, but the examiner has to know enough
'.about human personality to explain what might happen. He has
to give an example. Let us take a person who is involved in some
psychopathic act. This is the first time it has ever happened. He
'comes in to see me. In talking to me, lie might tell me when lie was
a small child he used to pull the heads off cats or rats and what great
delight lie took in doing this. He would think this has nothing at
all to do with what I was seeing him for, when in effect, it has a lot
to do with it.
Mr. Mir arms,. In other words, you are saying, aren't you, that unless
a psychiatrist gives the polygraph examination, it would be uncon-
stitutional because no one but a, psychiatrist has the capacity to ex-
plain to an examinee that his unconscious thoughts may be recorded?
Dr. DEAuMAN. I agree with you, sir.
Mr. MEADER. I see a little disagreement here.
Dr. Orne?
Dr. ORNE. Speaking as a. psychiatrist., also, I would think this is
a very interesting statement to read to a prospective patient whom you
are evaluating for the court.
I think as far as current- psychiatric practice in the tni'ted States,
it should be clear for the record that I would venture there are only
:a very few or a, small group of psychiatrists who would be explicit in
this form. I think all psychiatrists who have done any evaluation
of patients somehow communicate this, and this is certainly within
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 26
the ethics of the profession. Nobody disagrees with it. But, and I
think this should be made explicit, if one is following this logic one
gets to a very difficult position 'because, as a psychiatrist, it, should be
clear that the fact that you read this kind of statement to a prospective
patient and the fact that you in good faith try to explain, we know
enough about selective perception, about people hearing what they
choose to 'hear; that, one can argue that there is no way you can com-
municate it to him following the same path of logic, and that the fact
that you go through the motions of reading this kind of document
is not really the crucial thing at all. I could read somebody this and
then proceed to violate his rights by using information against him
maliciously, a whole bunch of 'things, from which he would be in no
Wray protected by this. He is protected by my own ethics, if you
will, and he is protected by these whether or not I read the state-
ment, because this, for the most part, has been explained to him before
he even gets to see me if lie has an attorney. The attorney certainly
has explained this to him because this is the standard position.
I think that we maybe kidding ourselves and I would like to make
this explicit. I, personally, do not think that it would really protect
the individual any more to tell him this. Fine. By all means let us
tell him this, but it would not protect him from subtle pressure to
take the examination, it. would not protect him from the way he is
asked, and the perfunctory reading certainly would not do it. Even if
the individual were equipped to explain, and I would object to the
ftict that this would have to be a psychiatrist to explain it, I think
other people are competent to explain this kind of statement, but
even if it were explained to him, the only protection would be in the
ethics of the individual explainer.
Mr. MEAnrR. Let me ask, Dr. Orne, you listened to my reading
of the paragraph from Dr. Dearman's letter, do you agree with that?
Dr. ORNr. I am not competent to make moral judgments. I do
not choose to make them as a scientist. I am merely trying to testify
on points of fact, what I view to be observations of the present
practice.
Mr. MEADTR. Do you agree with this statement, then, as a scientist:
The examinee does not realize that not only will his conscious thoughts and
his autonomic responses to them he recorded but his unconscious thoughts will
also be delved into and, consequently, he will give autonomic responses to un-
conscious thoughts.
Dr. ORNE. I would say that this is a possibility which occasionally
occurs. I think that Dr. Dearman has written up a very interesting
example where this occurred. I do not think this is the usual thing
that occurs.
There is one problem I would like to ask rather than answer and
I wish Dr. Dearman would explain it-what we do when we examine
somebody with an IQ of 90 who just does not understand this. Do
Ave then have no right to examine him ?
Dr. DEARMAN: Obviously, you Have the right to examine him. How
can you say a man with an IQ of 90 could not understand this?
Dr. ORNE. Let us say you have run into a patient who does not
understand it and you know he does not understand it, but he agrees.
Dr. DEARDrAN. Then I wotild talk to his lawyer.
Dr. OIlNv. Let us say the lawyer agrees but he does not have the
ability to judge that he gives consent to his lawyer to agree. You
get into a thorny question which is an impasse. I do not know the
way out of it.
I just would like to raise the point. I do not know the way out of it
and we should be aware of the questions we are raising.
Do you see the essential problem ?
Dr. i)] ArnrAN. Yes; but, you see, if he does not have consent enough
to give me this or his lawyer this, lie does not have consent enough
to go to court and know why lie is there.
Dr. ORNE. Right. You have to testify to that and he has not given
you consent for that and you do testify to that in that case.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T 'Nn MAS 27
Dr. DFARITAN. Right, but I sav in my opinion this man does not have
the ability to recognize what is going on but I don't write up the
report and tell all the things he has told me. I do not violate his con-
fidence. I say this man is a sick man. That does not violate his
confidence.
Dr. Or,NE. I think you can see the ethical problem I am pointing
to which I don't know the way out of.
Mr. MFADER. I would like to have the other two witnesses'comment
on that paragraph from Dr. Dearman's letter.
Dr. Moss. Dr. Lacey.
Dr. LAcrY. Which aspect of the paragraph, sir, do you wish me
to comment on?
Dr. DFARMAN. Shall I give him a copy of it?
Mr. MFAnER. Yes.
Dr. DFARDTAN. The third paragraph.
Dr. LACEY. You mean does it violate the fourth amendment and
he fifth amendment?
Mr. MEADFR. Right..
Dr. LACFY. I am not equipped, sir-I am aware that to develop an
i
11prec
ation of constitutional law one has to be familiar with a great
1r. M1 DER. Primarily, I was concerned with the matter of the un-
conscious thoughts and the recording of the response.
Dr. LACEY. The polygraph, Mr. Meader,'in any of 'its forms records
only physiological responses. From that, point on, one engages .in an
inference. Where Dr. Dearman might see an unconscious thought,
Cory, unless you have been doing it all the time-I have been doing
since 1942-it is hard to realize how ubiquitous physiologic responses
are. It is difficult for me to conceive of any piece of behavior in
which the organism will engage whicli will not 'be accompanied 'by -a
physiologic response.
There is a picturesque phrase used by the late Dr. Davis, which I
think depicts this. He calls it the sea of response. If you have
proper instrumentation this is what you see, a sea of response, a con-
stantly restless moving pen, whether you are looking at blood pres-
~ure, heart rate, electrodermal activity
brain waves
pupillary dila-
,
,
tion, blood flow-you name it. 'These things are always changing.
,.When we impose a stimulus on an'individual and a response occurs
we say the response occurred because of our stimulus. We cannot
be sure that that is true because a piece of spontaneous activity, some
shift in attention, some random thought could at the very moment
of time produce that response.
We have then to insure by repetition-repetition'itself brings along
its own problems-but we have to assure by repetition that that
response is indeed timelocked to our administration of the stimulus.
A variety of,things occur. I do-not think-I will put it in another
way-I will retire to my laboratory and generate a polygraph record.
I will (Ave it to Dr. Dearman, Dr. Orne,'Dr.'ICtibis, and myself, and
I will say, "WWrhat has happened ?" They can only tell me. "Look at
that interesting increase in blood pressure, look at that CTSR, look
at that vasoconstriction." All they can say is something has happened.
Then I will say, " 11"ell, at this point in time, I was talking to the
individual about his sex life."
"Oh," they will say, "yes, indeed, this is exactly what happened."
I will say, "I was kidding you. WhatI really did was to ask the
individual to multiply 7_by 11, and then add 54." The records are
i idistinguishable.
what I would have said. ' I _
Dr. LACEY. The point I am trying to make is that one cannot look
at a polygraph and say what the circumstances were that produced
;phis change. This is an inference. It is an inference drawn, as I
pointed out before, from the background of the administration.
I have done experiments on "unconscious thoughts" and you may
remember I put those words in quotes before. I will still keep them
in quotes, but I have done experiments on them and I am willing
to admit that-as a matter of fact, I am convinced it will happen-.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 28
don't publish that last statement in any scientific paper-I think it
is certainly true that I can get a response to the administration of a,
symbolic stimulus and the subject cannot verbalize to me why that
disturbance had occurred.
In lay language, he will say : "No, I am not, emotional about this."
Under certain circumstances-and as with the polygraph, I will not
give a figure, I don't know how common the occurrence is-under
certain circumstances persistent and skillful questioning might reveal
that this symbolic stimulus had some special differential significance
to the individual.
In this case, we say, it was unconscious and we were very bright
because we gradually made it conscious. To be modest about it, un-
der an equally large number of circumstances, we will not be able to
elicit the special differential significance of that wiggle on the page.
Sometimes extensive investigation may tell us, may convince us we
know why but that is no more proof than is a confession, let us say,
unsupported by other things.
Have I answered your question, Mr. Meader?
Mr. MEAnER. "Tell, I am not sure.
Dr. LACEY. It is such a difficult question. Let us say this. Uncon-
scious thoughts-and we will accent the meaning of that-can be re-
vealed on the polygraph but deciding that they have been so revealed
is as knotty a question as deciding on the validity of the polygraph.
Does that answer the question ?
Mr. MEADER. Let me reread Dr. Dearinan's statement
However, this is of little or no avail because the examinee does not realize
that not only will his conscious thoughts and his autonomic responses to them
be recorded but his unconscious thoughts will also be delved in and conse-
quently he will give autonomic responses to unconscious thoughts.
I take it you agree with that statement?
Dr. LACEY. No, sir. He may give autonomic responses to stimuli
which in one school of thought at least is labeled as an "unconscious
thought."
I am" sorry, I don't want to be unresponsive, but, you are touching
on very difficult questions of interpretation, theoretical languages of
different people.
Mr. MFADER. Are you saying there is no such thing as an uncon-
scious thought?
Dr. LACEY. No, sir; I am saying there is disagreement about this.
Let me try it again. Accepting the concept of an unconscious
thought, and incidentally I do, as Dr. Orne, at least, knows, accepting
that concept it is possible to get physiologic disturbances, when one
administers symbolic stimuli related to this complex of feelings.
But it is also possible not to, as is documented in both the experi-
mental literature and in the psychoanalytical literature.
May I give you an example?
Dr. Franz Alexander, a very eminent analyst and one who has
spent a great deal of time investigating physiologic responses in his
patients-I think I have the right paper
Dr. ORNF. Yes.
Dr. LACEY (continuing). Was studying-my memory is a little
vague, he was either studying blood pressure or gastric secretions in
a fistula patient. He was studying blood pressure generally, and
after the intensive investigations of a single case, followed by investi-
gations of others, be said that the physiologic responses have to be
interpreted in the light of a long sequence of seven or eight different
judgments that had to be made. Perhaps Dr. Alexander could make
those judgments. I certainly could not. He gave one very interest-
ing example concerning patients engaged in defensive maneuvers,
who may misperceive what you are saying, may misperceive the im-
port of their environment. This may be a definition of a psychiatric
patient.
Dr. Alexander's words were, I believe, something like this: If the
patient develops a delusion of mastery, if he feels that he has things
licked, that he understands what things are all about and lie tempo-
rarily feels comfortable, then you will not evoke a physiologic re-
sponse when you discuss this tender sensitive network of interper
sonal and intrapersonal relationships. ,
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
l.TNO MAS' 29
)Mere, then, are unconscious thoughts. Mere, then, is the mobiliza-
tion of a variety of attitudes and defensive maneuvers which el iminate,
the physiologic response.
Perhaps I can make this even clearer in something that is a lot
simpler to describe.
Dr. Dittes did a study in which lie was evaluating the GSR as an
indicator of the course and progress of psychotherapy. In discussing
sexual matters with his patient, he observed, no surprise to any of us,
that there was quite an increase in the rate of GSR as one began to
approach the sexual problem and delved into a discussion of it. Again,
no problem. The simple and obvious interpretation is: see how upset
this subject is, how involved' he is with sexual problems. Here is a
physiologic indication that this is a problem to him. He has a homo-
sexual problem, let us say. Very careful ratings by independent peo-
ple, independent observers, were made of the therapist's attitude that
day, that session, and, even more dramatically in short intervals of
time-say the last 10 minutes. As you observe a therapist and a
patient interacting, you will observe that, the therapists, themselves,
even the best, trained of them, exhibit a change of mood, exhibit dis-
approval, or at least the patient feels he sees some disapproval or
approval. The therapist can be, very gentle with his patient; lower his
voice, select the most innocuous of words to keep the patient talking,,
or the therapist's voice rises, for example, and he rephrases in a very
sharp manner what the respondent is saying.
Let us call the variable gentleness and friendliness. In the explora-
tion of sexual matters, in 10-minute segments during the interview
when the therapist was gentle and friendly, the GSR's were not
evoked. In 10-minute segments, where the therapist shifted a. little
bit-mind you these would not be tremendous shifts, a trained thera-
pist does not change from a friendly, accepting, understanding, wise
person to a hostile interrogator in the course of 10 minutes. These are
subtle changes. Such subtle changes in his behavior, which move
away from gentleness and friendliness, increase the GSR rate.
1Yhat are we observing? Conscious and unconscious thoughts?
Or are we observing the response of the organism to the total social
interpersonal situation in which lie finds himself?
Dr. Orne has documented that he is responding to the total situation,
to, his perception of the total situation.
Drs. Silverman and Cohen, two psychiatrists, were able by being
gentle and friendly to decrease the violent autonomic response to the
word "vagina." In the same interview, however, they did nothing
when the word "intercourse" came up. A week later, when they took
the patient in and administered the analog of the lie detector test,
gave him a word association test, the word "vagina" elicited no GSR.
The word "intercourse" elicited just, as strong GSR's. In other words,
an hour's manipulation of the "emotion" surrounding a single word,
diminished the response, whereas the related word had just as big a
response.
Now, both elicited many unconscious thoughts in psychoanalytical
lingo-one elicited as many as the other.
The polygraph in physiological measurement reveals physiological
changes. These physiological changes are known to be a function of
a great variety of variables, not simply unconscious effects, not simply
response uncertainty, not simply anything you want to name.
Dr. DEARMAN. But you can't rule out the unconscious part of it,
can you?
Dr. ORNr,. You can't rule it out, you can't rule it in.
Dr. DEARMAN. I agree. You can't rule it out, you can't, rule it in,
but you know the possibility is there. You know the possibility, you
don't accuse the man of something he didn't do.
Dr. ORNn?. That could be jumped at. I think if we went from the
issue of what it could be to the question of false positive, which I think
is a statistical, issue that can be researched on that basis and only on
that basis, I think that we tend to mix moral issues with empirical
data-which is available or needs to`be available.
WVhat I am trying to do is separate the empirical questions which
can be researched, and need to be researched from moral ones on which
decisions have to be made by people other than research workers.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 30
Dr. DEARMAN. Would not an emotion have two components, a
psychic component as well as the physiologic component?
Dr. ORNE. You can't pick tip the psychic component on the
polygraph.
Dr. DEARMAN. I agree. All he knows is the blood pressure, pulse,
respiration, and the GSR. That is all he knows.
-Dr. ORNE. Actually, lie also observes
- Dr. LACE:Y. He should know more than that. He should know what
stimuli are being administered, what kind of contact.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes. I am talking as far as reading the polygraph.
It tells him nothing about what type of emotion produced this. Are
any emotions really true emotions? Do you get an emotion of love,
fear, or an emotion of fear, anger? The guy that is stopped by a
policeman for running a red light, this fellow usually gets angry,
mainly because he is frightened. So you have two emotions.
Dr. ORNE. Nobody would argue that you cannot separate emotions,
that you get into very difficult scientific issues when you try to do so.
Dr. DrARMAN. 're need to do this. This is important.
Dr. LACE Y. No, many feel we need never consider this concept.
Dr. ORNE. This is exactly it because we can do this on a strictly
empirical statistical basis. If you base your judgment on one case, you
have a lot of trouble. We also-did research on psychotherapy on poly-
graphs. These were not lie detector polygraphs but sophisticated
.instruments where we had both the therapist and the patient in the
polygraph.
You may recall the work. - 'W'e can document the kind of phenomena
that Dr. Lacey talks about nicely. It was not merely the content that
was talked about, the therapist changes. His activation level had a
,lot to do with how the patient responded. This is why we emphasize
,so much. It. makes a difference-how you ask your questions. - There' is
no doubt about this. I think if you get a situation like "You drink
coffee?", which is your example, and you get a big response to it, there
.is no question that this is an idiosyncratic response which is related
to something in the man's past.. This is an inference but is one on
which I think most people will agree. It is a kind of commonsense
-inference.
Dr. LACEY. That is right. It is something you can find.
Dr. ORNE. Right. Now, let us say we have not 1 question but 50
questions which we ask, of which, let us say, 10 relate to information
that the individual should have or would have, if he is guilty of some-
thing, and 40 do not relate to it. You are going to get among these
50 questions a couple of random idiosyncratic responses because of
past associations. There is no doubt about that. But the odds are
very high they should not come only on those 10 questions. They
should come randomly distributed and wash out in this much data.
If you get significant differences between these 10 and the other 40
which should be about matched in an emotional content, which should
be asked the same way, then you have a fairly solid basis for saying
something is going on in these 10 questions which is different from
those 40 questions.
If you know enough about the individual's past that he could not
have known this information except by being involved, let us say, and
you know it. was asked in such a way that these questions should not
evoke a different response in a random individual, then you have
fairly strong bases for statistically saying, this individual is respond-
ing differently, therefore he must- know something.
Dr. LACEY. No. This guy is responding differently, therefore, some-
thing is going on.
Dr. DEARMAx. Exactly.
Dr. LACEY. It may be guilt, it- may be some distortion, such as Dr:
Dearman described in that one case.
Dr. ORNE. No. Something is going on not in terms of his individual
idiosyncratic past but, in terms of his having this knowledge. You
would have to know more about the situation before you call make the
next jump but, you can make this statement that lie has more knowledge,
than he should-have.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 43
Then perhaps in a somewhat shorter time and in a more decisive way,
we could give you some evidence of the range of validities to be
expected for different kinds of crimes under different kinds of cir-
cumstances, and indicate what kinds of decisions-may be made.
Is it true, sir, that the deci si on is al w ays bl aek and white?
I mean, guilty or innocent. Are those the terms in which they
are placed usually ?
Mr. REUSS. I wouldn't know until I had made- the test and until
I had seen what the polygraph operator says. He-must have some
end product. Some of the people who testified before us indicated
that they could pinpoint this with uncanny accuracy, to use their
adjective.
Dr. DrARDMAN. May I say in the 200-page report that I gave you
on this patient for your use, the polygraph operator's report was in
there. He specifically stated, after lengthy questioning and so forth,
this man did finally confess he was guilty. Not only that, but the
polygraph operator who came to the University of Virginia, and she
knew nothing about what was going on except she took the questions
.and she asked them. After asking them she said, "this man has been
stealing money from the bank."
So they do say either innocent or guilty in the two cases of poly-
graph operators that I haveknown.
Mr. Riiuss. One was the case of theft. What was the other case?
Dr. DFARbMAN. They were the same case. This was the man who
.was asked the question, "Have you stolen any money from the bank
or its customers?"
Then the vice president was sent to me. I worked this case up-,
made It hypothesis of what I thought would happen if you gave him
another polygraph test, and that is exactly what happened.
Mr. Reuss. Let me get this straight, because I am not familiar with
this case. The polygraph operator from the University of Virginia
asked the question: "Did you steal the money from the bank?"
Dr. DFnr.~r,:AN. Let me start back at the first. This man was given
a routine polygraph examination in the bank. In fact, he was given
three, then another one called the peak of tension test. Each time
they asked him, "Have you stolen money from the bank or its
customers?"
On any question in which the word "customer" was used, he got a
positive response. So, he finally signed a confession. -
Well, before he signed the confession, he said. "Tell me how much
money I have stolen." The operator said, "You will have to tell me:
You will have to give me some figure to start with," because some of
the things he had said about 50 cents for parking and $5-50 for taking
a trip that he didn't take for the bank. that he kent. He finally added
tip and he said, in his mind, and said it was $300. So they started
with $300. When they got to $1.100, he got a positive response. He
said "No" and the machine said "Yes." He went as high as $3,000
with no other response. Then the polygraph operator tore the nailer
off the machine, walked over to the vice president and said: "I just
wonder when you sat down in the chair did you have any other figure
in mind ?"
The man said, "Yes, I did; $800."
The polygraph operator put these two together, wrote out a con-
fession for $1,000 and the man signed it.
Mr. RFuss. Did he steal the$1,000?
Dr. DFARMAN. No. sir, he didn't steal anything.
Mr. RFUSS. Who did?
Dr. DEAR-MAN. Nobody did. No money was stolen.
Mr. RFUSS. This is the only ease I know of where the results of
a polygraph test have been subjected to ex post facto analysis and
from your testimony it would appear that the polygraph operator.
who I gather was a reputable one
Dr. DFAmre1N. Yes, sir; recommended by the bonding company
for the bank.
Mr. Ri,.uss (continuing). Found a. guilty response to the key ques-
tion as to whether the suspect had stolen money from the bank?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. REUSS. And it turns out that this was an incorrect judgment
on the part of the polygraph operator. While the line may have
wiggled, if it did wiggle, it wiggled for other
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
- LINO MAS 44
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, it wiggled the next time on other questions.
Mr. REUSS. I would say this is the kind of study we need to make
as the retrospective part of the total study. We would now start out
with the lie detector batting zero as a result of test No.1.
Then there are several thousand more cases that would have to be
looked into. When we do that, with competent people making the
study, we would then have some idea of the efficacy of lie detection
as presently practiced.
Dr. LACEY. Mr. Chairman, this very case demonstrates the reli-
ability of the polygraph.
Mr. REUSS. Of course, the polygraph accurately records blood pres-
sure, galvanic
Dr. LACEY. Two separate examiners separately said there is an
area here which exhibits disturbance. This, I think, we can all do
with much greater than chance. Then comes the inference, what does
the disturbance mean? That is why I asked the question : Do they
say guilty or innocent?
I think we would all agree that one should not say guilty or inno-
cent.
Mr. REUSS. Here, however, the operator did and thus I think we
can
Dr. LACEY. But if the operators had only said there is evidence
of real disturbance, here both would have been in agreement, we
would have had a very good case.
Mr. REUSS. You don't need an operator to say that, do you?
Can't any one make a visual observation that the wiggles after a
particular question are wider than the wiggles after other questions?
Dr. LACEY. Yes, when taught what to look for, some would be
more apparent than others.
Mr. REUSS. So I would think that this one test that Dr. Dearman
describes, so far as it went, was what needs to be done on a very wide
-scale.
So far as you know, this is the only case?
Dr. DEAR-MAN. This is the only case ever reported in the world.
Mr. REUSS. The only time anybody has ever taken any trouble to
go back and take an independent look as to whether the readers of
the polygraph have had much luck or not.
Dr. LACEY. As long as we stick only to the lie detector test, you
are cutting off from consideration a great deal of other information
that we have. For example, your very strong distinction between
the laboratory situation and "the real life" situation may not be quite
as dichotomous as it seems. This too is real life.
Mr. REUSS. I have one other question of the panel. What about
the use of drugs, particularly more modern drugs, by g rilty people
in order to depress their reaction to questions put to them by a lie
detector operator? Are there such drugs and could their use render
the lie detector less effective than it otherwise is? Does anyone have
any knowledge?
Dr. LACEY. A parasympatholytic agent could destroy cardiac re-
sponses during the conduct of the polygraph examination. This
would be immediately detectable upon recording heart rate and blood
pressure. One would know that either this individual's cardiovascular
system has been rather atypical or he has been under a drug.
Are there any drugs being used specifically as adjuncts?
Dr. ORNE. I believe the question is addressed to the issue of could
you give a drug which you wouldn't detect?
I presume you are thinking of tranquilizers of various kinds, bar-
biturates, this kind of drug. I don't know what the answer is. We
just casually looked at it a bit. There is a tremendous amount of
work which would have to be done to give a real answer. But you
have two problems essentially. You have a signal and you have got
background noise.
Now, if you take a drug which will quiet you down, as it were,
you are going to diminish not only the signal which you are looking
for but also thebackground noise.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO-MAR -45
There are some- circumstances with an anxious subject, in an ex-.
periinental situation admittedly; but with an anxious subject where.
he becomes much easier to recognize in case he takes a calming drug
because you not only have diminished the sinal itself but you have
much more diminished- the' noise, there is no- drug that we know of,,
at least that. I am familiar with, which would eliminate the signal,,
in other word's, which would act so differentially on the emotional'
response without eliminating extraneous emotion to an equal or some-
times greater extent. This would be a guess at the present state of'
knowledge.
Now, the drugs which eliminate sweating, for example, these would
not help you because they would be recognized. You would know
somebody was taking a drug:
Mr. Reuss. Mr. Kass.
Mr. Kass. Dr. Dearman, you stated earlier that no money was-
stolen from the bank.
Dr. DE RMAN. No. I would like to add one thing. When the,
examiner asked the man if there was any other amount he had thought-
of, the man said $800. The examiner then said: "WWrell, you got a
reaction at, $800." So he got a reaction at $800 and $1,100.
Mr. KAss. You stated no money had been stolen.
Dr. DrartizAN. No money had been stolen.
Mr. KASS. Are you satisfied that no money had been stolen?
Dr. DEARMAN. I had a 2-hour interview with the president of the
bank the third night. after I saw the patient the first time. He said,
as far as he was concerned, 'he was fully satisfied no money had been
stolen.
I said: Is there a possibility even that money could have been
stolen?, He said, it would-have taken a $10,000 audit to find that out.
He said, "With our audit and the place where 'he could have stolen
the money, all the books check, no money has been missing in that
account for 5 years:"
Mr. KASS. So the bank president, himself, was satisfied that no,
money had been stolen?
Dr. DEARMAN. That is right; and the man went back to the bank.
Mr. KASS. You stated there were two polygraph examiners. You
only told 'us about one. Can you go into the second polygraph ex -.
aininer situation also?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes. After Iliadgone over over this case for sev-
eral hours, including a sodium amytal interview, at. the end of my
study, T then hypothesized if I was right, if the $800 and the $1,100
had meaning in connection with mother and wife, which I found out
that they did have, then if you ask the man the same nine questions,,
he had, been asked before, he would get the same reaction that. he did
the first'time. Then if you break these questions down so that you
leave tine word "customer" out, give the question the mime meaning,
every time "customer" was "in the question, regardless of the man's
answers, he would get a positive response. And every time that you
left. th,a-word "customer" out he would get a negative response in re-
gard to stealing. ' Tliis is exactly what happened.
Mr. KASS. Did the examiner have an opportunity to conduct what
she thrnight was a complete polygraph examination or did you just
give her a list of questions?
Dr. DEARMAN. I gave her the list, of questions. I said: I want you
to. conduct this as you would conduct any polygraphic examination.
We watched the procedure through a one-way mirror-Dr. Smith
and I did. We did not listen. We didn't have anything fixed up for
tape recording. She, -I suppose, conducted it as she usually conducts
an examination.
Mr. KASS.'With'all the questions that this polygraph female op-
erator or examiner would normal ly'ask ?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes; in fact, there were some questions -I did not
have down and she asked permission to ask two control qilostions, to
see how high a response she would get. For instance: "Did you have
any intention oflying to me when you sat down to take the test?"
She said this will always give you a positive response. This is test-
ing the maximum lie-we would test the minimum on what we would
call questions that had no meaning.
Mr. KASS. Did this polygraph examiner at, any time during the
experiment or after, to this date, ever complain to you that she-had not
been given an opportunity to conduct a proper examination?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 54
Mr. PASS. In a military situation, the rank of an individual, for
example?
Dr. ORNE. Yes, the rank of an individual and the rank of the fellow
who is testing him, obviously. It is always the interaction.
You are getting a. physiologic response which is the result of very
:complex stimuli of which the questions are only a part.
However, hopefully, you are getting differential responses to ques-
tions. Since you have neutral ones, you should be able to form some
judgment about this.
Now, I do not know, because the work has not yet been done, the
accuracy of field situations. I would guess, based on laboratory
studies, where it is very much more significant than chance, this holds
true in the field also. This needs to be tested, needs to be evaluated.
But, as an article of belief, I would say I am quite sure it will turn out
to be significantly better than chance.
Given this fact,, if this turns out to be a fact, then Dr. Lacey's point
which be made, and which I tried to make also, which I think all of
its agree upon, all you need is an instrument which is significantly-
better than chance.
If you have a large enough sample, it. will be an asset to you to
use it. Sure, it would be nice if you had 100-percent accuracy,
then you would no longer need an actuarial kind of prediction. We
have no such instruments at all in any part of science. If you have
an instrument which is 80 percent effective in terms of any kind of dis-
crimination, this is fine, and then depending upon where you place
your cutoff points it can make this decision which Dr. Lacey was talk-
ing about earlier, selecting 1.0 people out of 1,000, very effectively.
However, you will have lots of wrong positives which you will toss
out. You have to be certain to protect, these individuals. This is why
I would completely agree with Dr. Lacey's point. As long as you
know that you are going to have false positives, as long as this is
clear but it is part; of the game as it were, because the stakes are high
and we can't make errors, then I would say if it is better than chance.
we have to use it.
Mr. PASS. Dr. Orne, on another matter, you worked and have done
some studies on hypnosis?
Dr. ORNE. Yes.
Mr. Pass. Can you perhaps tell-us, how hypnosis would affect the
lie detection? Is it possible to beat, the machine or the operator, which-
ever the case is,'through hypnosis?
Dr. OP-,\,E. The answer to that is by no means clear. You can, under
certain circumstances, give a very flat record under hypnosis. I don't
know whether you would call this beating the machine. -ALll you can
say then is t1lat you can make no decision whatsoever about the in-
dividual ; he is nonresponsive. He not only does not talk, his physi-
ology does not talk. Whatever that means, then, is an inference be-
yond that point.
Mr. Moss. Isn't the machine as reliable at that point as it is at any
other time? The machine itself?,..
Dr. OIiNE. The machine is telling you that the man's physiology is
not, responsive at this time because of some intervention.
Mr. Moss. If anybody is fooled, it would be the operator and not
the machine?
Dr. ORNv. Right. The read-out is the read-out. Unless there is
something wrong with the tubes or transistors, it is there.
Mr. Moss. Talking about. the tubes or transistors, this is an elec-
tronic device using such components. What effect does it have if you
have a, weak tube or a. somewhat faulty transistor?
Dr. OrNE. This should not present a real problem because there is
no reason that this transistor should selectively go on the blink every
third question which happens to be the important one. This should
be random noise.
First of all, you should be able to pick it out.
Secondly, it would not selectively affect things since in each case
you are comparing the individual response with his own response to
other things. It is either a uniform artifact or random. If it is uni=
form, it does not matter. If it is random, it should wash out.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LTNO MAS 55
Mr. Moss. Providing the response is sufficient to be visually dis-
cernible on the graph. Now, could there be a lessening of the response-
on the graph if your machine has, say, a weak tube?
Dr. Oi xr,. Certainly.
Dr. LAcEY. One should run calibrations before in the lab.
Dr. Kusis. You put in a standard stimulus and expect a certain
type of response. If one does not occur, you have trouble.
There are two problems iu our discussion about, the value that we
are to place on the lie detector's judgment. Is this in a sense final?
Does this have much weight in a final decisions, or is this advisory,
that is, merely ancillary evidence?
We talk about lie detection .and often consider it as giving a final
type of decisions. We have quite a different orientation if it is just
going to be some partial evidence to be added to the body of evidence
that we have. We have to distinguish these types of uses for the lie
detector. There are very few instances where the lie detector can be
used as the sole source of evidence.
The only one that I know of is if two people get into an altercation
where there is no observer and then one calls the other a liar. This
is about the only situation I know where the lie detector operator is
the only one that can make a decision since there are only two wit-
nesses and each one is accusing the other.
The other point is that we have to discriminate very carefully
between man-machine decisions and pure measurements taken from
the machine itself.
These are two different problems. In one case in talking about the
value of the lie detector we actually mean the lie detector as applied
and interpreted by an operator. In other instances, we may be talking
about the value of the lie detector when we refer only to machine
itself. Then we talk about its reliability and whether it is a true reflec-
tion of the physiological state of the individual.
To what do we attribute the accuracy, to the machine or to the man-
m~achine system that is involved here. This distinction will help us
with the basic issues that we have to talk about and which, I am sure,
the committee is interested in.
Mr. IC ss. Dr. Orne, getting back to hypnotism for a minute. It
it possible that wider a posthypnotic suggestion, a person would be
told to suppress emotion at the point of mention of a word, for ex-
ample, "communism"? Is this possible?
Dr. Oiixr. It is possible to tell him this and the result probably,
because we have only casual data. on this, by so doing you would
guarantee a bigger response because this would become much more
conflict, ridden and you would be picking up the conflict. Not only
this but at times-and on this we do have some data-it is possible
to pick up responses to stimuli which you do not have a conscious
awareness of, which is very much Dr. Dearman's point, we con demon-
strate this in a, laboratory situation by giving you data in hypnosis
for which you have amnesia, you do not, have a conscious awareness.
This information we can elicit. on the polygraph without the indi-
vidual being able to identify why lie is responding.
So, at least, as it looks today, if you are asking the question would
hypnosis be an effective countermeasure, the data is very unconvincing,
it probably would not be. You would probably make sure you got
bigger and better wiggles.
Mr. IC ss. I have no further questions.
Mr. Moss. Gentlemen, I want to thank you. It has been a rather
lengthy day for you. I regret that other commitments made it neces-
sary for me to be absent for part of this afternoon's hearings.
Dr. Orne, I want to praticularly thank you. I understand that you
have to return home this evening.
The committee will now stand in adjournment until 10 o'clock
tomorrow morning, at which time we will reconvene in room 1501-B,
in the Longworth Building.
The committee is now adjourned.
(Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to recon-
vene a.t 10 :00 a.m., Thursday, April 30,1965.)
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 56
USE OF POLYGRAPHS AS "LIE DETECTORS" IN THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
(Part 3-Panel With Scientists)
THURSDAY, APRIL 30, 1964
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
FOREIGN OPERATIONS AND
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SL COMMITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 304
Cannon Office Building, Hon. John E. Moss (chairman of the sub-
committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives John E. Moss, Henry S. Reuss, and Ogden
R. Reid.
Staff members present: Samuel J. Archibald, staff. administrator;
Jack Mattison, chief investigator; Benny L. Kass, subcommittee coun-
sel ; Marvin G. Weinbaum, staff investigator.
Mr. Moss. The subcommittee will be in order.
Mr. Kass.
FURTHER TESTIMONY OF DR. JOHN I. LACEY, CHAIRMAN, DEPART-
MENT OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY-NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, FELS' RE-
SEARCH INSTITUTE, AND PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY,
ANTIOCH COLLEGE, YELLOW SPRINGS, OHIO; ACCOMPANIED BY
DR. H. B. DEARMAN, PSYCHIATRIST, JOHNSON CITY, TENN.; DR.
JOSEPH F. KUBIS, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY,
FORD~HAM UNIVERSITY; DR. MARTIN T. ORNE, SENIOR RE-
SEARCH PSYCHIATRIST, MASSACHUSETTS MENTAL HEALTH
CENTER, AND ASSOCIATE IN PSYCHIATRY, HARVARD MEDICAL
SCHOOL
Mr. KASS. Dr. Lacey, could you describe the polygraph that is being
used in both the Federal Government and commercial practice today?
What are the component parts? Flow do they operate?
Dr. LAOEr. Dr. Kubis would be a better man to address that ques-
tion to. I repeat that, I don't have any personal experience with the
polygraphs as, used in lie detecting.
Mr. KAss. Dr. Kubis?
Dr. Kums. The usual polygraph has three components, one of which
measures the cardiovascular responses, another which measures the
respiratory response, and the third which measures the psychogalvanic
response.
Mr. KASS. For our record and for our own understanding, can you
explain what you mean by cardiovascular, and the other two?
Dr. Kusns. The cardiovascular response that is usually monitored
is an analog of the blood pressure response that a doctor gets when
he put a cuff around an individual. A cuff around the upper arm is
not essential. You can get a similar response from a finger.
Dr. LACEY. Are they still using a cuff pressure midway between
systolic and diastolic?
Dr. Kums. That is right. Also the plethysmnographic response can
be listed as another indicator of the cardiovascular response.
Mr. KASS. My own understanding is completely negative at this
point. Dr. Lacey, I have one question for you. You asked "Are they
still using this teclmique?"
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T,TNn. M AS 57
Dr. LACFY. It is not a sound physiologic technique, although it,
might serve a practical purpose.
Mr. KASS. Why is it not a sound physiologic technique?
Dr. LACFY. The usual indirect technique for the measurement of'
blood pressure with which we are all familiar in clinical practice,
wrapping the cuff around the arm and inflation of the cuff upward'
and letting it go back; depends briefly-how deeply do you want me,
to go into this?
Mr. KAss. As fully as you can, so that everybody understands.
Dr. LACFY. It depends briefly on the following picture, if you will.
The injection of blood into the arterial tree when the heart contracts
produces a forcible wave of pressure transmitted clown the arterial
tree. This wave of pressure, being impressed upon the elastic walls
of the artery produces audible sounds.
When the pressure is so high that the sounds disappear, this means
that one has imposed an external pressure upon the artery just strong
enough to prevent the wave of blood from being transmitted down
the arterial tree. This is what, is known as systolic pressure.
Then one drops the pressure slowly until either the sound again
disappears or until there is a, characteristic muffling change, and this
is taken as diastolic, a steady state pressure in the cardiovascular sys-
tem in the absence of the pumping action of the heart.
These, it must be emphasized, are themselves indirect measures of
blood pressure. They do not correspond very accurately, although
they are very suitable for clinical purposes. This is a point one
should make over and over and over again, that things that don't
correspond accurately to the physical phenomena we are measuring
may still be of clinical usage. This technique does correspond very
accurately with what we might get with an indwelling arterial
catheter. However, it serves its purpose.
No-%N- then, it is very difficult to continuously monitor blood pressure,
either in the case of an investigation in psychomatic medicine or in,
the case of investigation in lie detecting; first of all, because the con-
tinual application of pressure causes pain. One has to release the
pressure quite commonly. Secondly, the application of that pressure
repeatedly is itself a stimulus and will produce other autonomic re-
sponses, such as GSR, if you. will, since that seems to be a favorite
one.
The technique developed early in psychophysiological investiga-
tions was to inflate the cuff to a degree of pressure relatively comfort-
able for the patient,, or the subject., midway between these two end
points of systolic and diastolic blood pressure. 117hat one gets is a
record something like the plethysmographic record in the pages of
Dr. Kubis' report, a pulse with an arch coining up and down super-
imposed upon waves which are thought to reflect, blood pressure.
Actually, this record is an extremely complicated admixture of
changes in blood pressure and changes in arm volume which, itself,
reflects still another underlying physiologic measure.
There are now other and better techniques available. That, is why
I asked, Is this technique still being used? There are now relatively
innocuous techniques available. For example, the monitoring of dig-
ital blood pressure continuously. I won't go into the principles of
it, but it is much more comfortable for the subject, and one at least
gets something that is much more clearly interpretable in terms of
underlying physiological processes. In this case one would get rela-
tively continuous measures of systolic blood pressure. It would prob-
ably serve better.
Mr. KASS. Do you think that the current methods being used today
on this component are practical and will get the same results, or at
least will get adequate results for the purposes they are trying to
achieve?
Dr. LACFY. That is. asking me for a value judgment that I am not
prepared to make. Let one answer the question in this way. They
Icertainly are primitive techniques. 11re have much more sophis-
ticated techniques available today for acquiring and displaying the
information. The matter of display is an extremely important one,
because what one sees with the naked eye is a matter of how one has
transformed the measurements.
I could, without much trouble, itemize three or four different ways,
for example, of getting at heart rate and heart rate changes,. of. which
I would consider only one, suitable to the- problem such as lie detecting.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 58
Mr. KASS. Not as a scientist for a moment, but as a private individ-
ual with 22 or 25 years experience using these components, could you
make that value judgment?
Dr. LAcEY. You, want to force me to make a value judgment?
Mr. KASS. Yes, sir.
Dr. LACEY. I have to be what Mr. Reuss calls responsive. I would
say, Mr. Kass, in all likelihood, assuming a certain degree of validity
under certain circumstances, which would have to be defined for the
so-called, lie-detection procedure, I would say it is probably practical
but falls far short of what we could do today. That they are prac-
tical is evidenced by Dr. Kubis' investigation, to which I must refer.
I keep on going back to it. I think it is one of the best studies in the
field I have ever read.
You are welcome, Dr. Kubis. We will come to terms later. That
is meant very seriously. That they are practical you can see by
referring to the monograph by which, with one change, using a finger
plethysmograph-we can define that for you later, but it is another
form of cardiovascular measurement related to the rate that blood is
flowing in the digit-using essentially similar techniques, he was able
with his trained graduate students and himself using techniques very
similar to it, using techniques which I would still consider rather
primitive in terms of display, they were able to do a respectable job,
at least in the first of the three studies.
Mr. KASS. In other words then, you analysis would be that this
component-one of the three that is being used in the polygraph today
as a lie detector-although primitive is rather practical.
Dr. LACEY. It is the least practical of the three, but it has some
degree of practicality.
Mr. Bass. Now what about the instrument or component that
measures
Mr. Moss. First, let us find out if Dr. Kubis is in agreement or dis-
agreement with what we have just heard.
D.r. Kunrs. Yes. There are better and more sophisticated tech-
niques that can be used. These usually cannot be packaged for sale at
it reasonable price.. There is also a hesitancy among manufacturers
to. try to change, but I don't know what the reason for this is. It may
be an investment of money in the types of instruments that are avail-
able. It may be the natural lag of manufacturing that always follows
advances in science. There are better procedures available, but this is
historically the one which has been used; and I would gather that
many people feel comfortable with it and have been getting good re-
sults with it.
There are a number of good investigators and they continue working.
with an instrument and with devices that they are comfortable with.
Mr. Moss. Now when you used the term "There are a number of
good investigators who have been getting results with it." Are you
talking of the average, typical examiner operating in this country to-
day, not in a laboratory, but out in the field?
Dr. Kunrs. Usually the ones that I have come in contact with have
been very good investigators, both from a_ psychological viewpoint
and in terms of operation.
I have a. strong feeling that there are a number of individuals who
buy these instruments, do not take any training, set up, as it were, a
shingle, and operate with this instrument. I came in contact with one
around he New York region who, after buying an instrument and
working on his own, wanted to sell it to the University at a reduced
rate because he was not interested in it any more. He had no training.
These instruments can be bought by practically anyone. Anyone,
any uni versify can buy them, because they have been used for scientific
purposes in the early history of psychophysiological research. It is
these men, without trauung, without adequate experience, that I have,
a strong feeling against. I feel there are more of them than we can
see and can identify.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 60
thinking about what the lie-detector people call the "peak of tension"
method. Since blood pressure is a constantly changing thing if one
monitors it carefully, since the blood pressure cuff is uncomfortable
even when set midway between systolic and diastolic, since one person
.might be quite responsive to this discomfort, might be much aware of
it, might resent it, and so on, it is conceivable that, this could feed into
other channels, let us say the GSR channel which could show a steadily
dropping curve of resistance. This could reflect just the increase in
discomfort, physical discomfort attendant upon the examination.
May I say, Mr. Kass, that these are not to my mind the more serious
disadvantages of the inexpensive polygraph machine, to take acknowl-
edavent of Dr. Kubis' comments. There are many more serious ones.
The technique employed by the-I wish there were another name be-
sides calling them polygraph operators or lie detectors-the techniques
employed, whether based intuitively or empirically, or on sound sci-
entific reasoning-I am not sure how these have arisen-of repeating
questions which resulted in suspicious physiologic perturbations, o
juxtaposing critical and noncritical questions, of trying to eliminate
surprise responses, novelty responses, these techniques arrived at, as
I say, I don't know how, intuitively, empirically, or rationally, do
represent to my mind a considerable degree of protection against this
kind of artifact.
These artifacts, clue to movements, random thoughts, sudden changes
in the environment, this kind of artifact-responses evoked by things
other than those aspects of the situation in which you are interested-
these techniques do provide a considerable degree of protection against
them. So, I repeat, what could really be implemented in this field is
considerably increased physiologic sophistication, considerably in-
creased physiological instrumentation.
I don t think the matter of cost or ponderosity or pounds of equip-
ment should really enter in here. There are much more serious costs,
as we mentioned yesterday, in terms of human lives, human reputa-
tions, important decisions to be made for the security of our Nation
that, for me, far outweigh the fact that to buy a Fels cardiotachometer
costs about $2,500-which, I take it., is several times the cost of a
polygraph machine. I am sure the Yellow Springs Co. would be glad
to transistorize the equipment so that it may be made into a small
package. Now I really feel very strongly about this; that the so-called
polygraph machine could be updated markedly. Now this would re-
suit in an increase in physiologic sophistication. I would feel much
more comfortable interpreting physiologic changes I see on the record.
Whether it in fact would increase the validity of the lie-detecting pro-
cedure is an empirical matter. I don't know. .I do know, in pursuit
of my own scientific objectives, which is the understanding of auto-
nomic participation in brain processes, in behavioral processes, that
improved instrumentation and display techniques have simply moved
us further ahead.
So I think it is possible that it would move the lie detection further
ahead.
Mr. Kass. Dr. Dearman, do you agree with the statement made by
the other gentlemen ?
Dr. DEARMAN. This is more or less out of my line what they are
talking about now. I would say any refined technique for taking
blood pressure, respiration, will, give better results.
Mr. KASS. Your experience with the polygraph or lie detector has
been only in that one example you gave yesterday?
Dr. DEARMAN. That. one case, yes.
Mr. Kass. One other question about, this component, Dr. Lacey.
You say that the pressure curve is relatively comfortable on a person.
Are there any side effects which prolonged use
Dr. LACEY. You mean relatively uncomfortable?
Mr. Kass. Uncomfortable. Are there any side effects which could
happen to the person?
Dr. LAcEY. You are talking about adverse side effectsmedically
dangerous?
Mr. Kass. Yes.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 61
Dr. LACEY. You could-cut down the blood supply to the extremity-
after the cuff, to the point where some slight acute problem arises in
a predisposed individual, with a preexisting disorder, let us say an
early Reynaud's disease, which is characterized by extreme vasocon-
striction in the fingertips where the blood supply is completely cut off.
It is possible' that such discomfort might trigger an episode. such
as that. In, general, I would not consider this a major hazard. I
would be very surprised indeed if, in the run of the mill polygraph
examination, if the- operators of these machines have run into them!
very much. Nevertheless, the possibility exists, and there should be,
some degree of caution exercised.
Mr. LASS. Can anyone recognize these symptoms?
Dr. LACEY. That symptom would be readily recognized, because the,
patient would say "I'hurt. Look at my hands:"
Mr. KASS. Dr. Lacey, is it always possible to read the chart of that
.component?
Dr. LACEY. Definitely not,.
Mr. LASS. Could you-explain? We have a- blackboard here, if you
wish to use it.
Dr. LACEY. Yes. Well, you are hitting one of my hobbies.
The polygraph machine-I .knew this, but I wanted to defer to Dr.
Kubis who has had vastly more experience with the machine than I -
the polygraph machine has no direct writeout representing one of the
important components of the cardiovascular responses; namely, heart
rate. What they do' is to use the repetitive' bumping, which can be
seen in this curve-the same sort of thing, if you have Dr. Kubis' re-
port, shown in e plethysmograph-a" bumping 'due to the onslaught
of lalood into the area underlying the cuff.
They use this as a measure of heart rate. Now it is a measure of
heart rate. What is the usual paper transport speed on. a polygraph,
millimeters a second, or what?
Dr. Kunis. There is no uniform rate. It depends on what you want
t.o measure. I don't know what the rates are now.
Mr. LASS. We have been informed that it is about-6 inches per min-
ute; whatever that, means.
Dr. LACEY. Six inches, did you say ?
Mr. LASS. Yes, sir; this is it unverified statement. We will get it
for the record.
Dr. LACEY. A minute, did you say?
Mr. KASS. Yes.
Dr. LACF,Y. That is fairly slow paper speed. Standard recording
techniques would be about 25 millimeters a second, 6 inches a minute
is less than 3 millimeters a second. Good, now my argument becomes
even more applicable. The 25 millimeters a second is a fast paper
speed. This means that one produces miles and miles of swiggles ill
the course of day's investigation. Twenty-five millimeters per sec-
ond is still a slow enough paper speed so that changes in heart rate
cannot be apparent to the naked eye. I would quarrel very much,
I think, with the simple casual scanning of a record without meas',
urement techniques, and this simplifies what I mean.
Let us suppose that the heart rate were to change from 60 beats
per minute in a few cycles to 70 beats per minute. - In some individ-
uals this could be a rather-that change in rate at 10 beats per min-
ute could be-significant indication of perturbation. I am trying to
find neutral words to describe what is happening. Sixty beats per
minute is one per second. Therefore, one would get one bump saying
that the heart has contracted and expelled blood into the arterial tree.
One second later, or 25 millimeters later, which is approximately 1
inch, one'-would get another bump.
Now then, let us say that in the very next cardiac cycle-and this
could happen, frequently does-what we call the "RR" interval is
shortened. This means the interval of time between the electrical
signs of contraction of the left ventricle. Within one cardiac cycle
that RR interval could be changed to correspond to 70. bets a minute,
I think I said.
Mr. LASS. Could this be changed as a result of the stimulus of a
question ?
Dr. LACEY. Yes. It also could be changed due to respiration, also
changed by a stimulus-coming into the environment, and so on. Let
us say they were examining a young male adult, age 25, 22 years old.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 62
Individuals of this age typically are characterized by what is known
as sinus arrhythmia, a bening physiologic condition in whch there
is continuous variation of heart rates in synchrony with the respiration.
The heart will accelerate as one breathes in, decelerate as one breathes
out. With a typical display such as "EKG" or these bumps, this sinus
arrhythmia would hardly be detectable unless one sat down with a
plastic ruler and measured these intervals; translated them into
periods between heart contractions.
Mr. LASS. But is it a constant thing in the individual?
Dr. LACEY. Yes. W'I hat do you mean by "constant" ?
Mr. LASS. In other words, will he continually get the same ups and
downs, whether it is 60 beats per minute or 70 beats per minute during
the 4 minutes he is on the polygraph chart ? Or will it be erratic?
Dr. LACEY. There will be variation in the amplitude of 'this sinus
arrhythmia; respiratory synchronous variation. I am not trying to
obscure the issues; I am trying to communicate them.
Mr. PASS. The point, isthat
Dr. LACEY. There will be variations. This happens to be one of our
research objectives at the moment. In our opinion our experiments
showy that this, itself, is a very important psychophysiological variable.
The degree of cyclic variation in this sinus arrhythmia is a charac-
teristic that needs to be taken into account in interpreting the record
to discover something about nsychophysiological status.
This is very interesting. Sinus arrhythmia is supposed to be rather
low-level reflection in the sense that the brain mechanism involved
are low down in the hierarchy; and yet we find that this has pro-
nounced significance in terms of personality and behavior of the
individual.
Mr. PASS. You stated this occurs in persons 21, 22, 23 years old?
Dr. LACEY. It, is more typical of individuals in young adulthood.
Mr. PASS. Is it also possible at older ages?
Dr. LACEY. Yes, indeed.
Mr. PASS. It is not unique, therefore, in younger ages? It is a com-
mon occurrence also in older age?
Dr. LACEY: Yes, indeed.
I think I can communicate the sense of my argument. without actu-
ally going through the computation. The change in a given cardiac
cycle that corresponds to a rate of 60 beats a minute to, in a subsequent
cardiac cycle, a rate of 70 beats a minute represents, in terms of a
paper speed of 25 millimeters per second, a rather small change. One
would have to have the paper speed going very, very fast in order to
detect this change with the naked eye; and it would go so fast it
would be spread out over such a large part of the paper that one
would still miss it. We can demonstrate exactly what I mean
Mr. Ri trss. Doctor, is a document being passed around? What
about identifying it?
Dr. LACEY. I was identifying it, Mr. Reuss.
Mr. REUSS. As what?
Dr. DEARMAN. This is a. polygraph record taken by the second
polygraph operator on the case I talked about yesterday. This is the
actual record.
Mr. Reuss. This is the piece of paper from which they found this
fellow guilty?
Dr. DEARMAN. No, sir. Let us back up a little. This is the piece
of paper that showed the same reaction at the University of Virginia
as he got at the bank.
Mr. REUSS. From which the polygraph operator,'I think you testiY
fled, said "This is the guy who stole the money"?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes. In other words, the polygraph operator who
came to the University of Virginia after she had run these two records,
said "This man is guilty of stealing money from the bank."
Mr. Rn.uss. Can you show me in this historic document where we'
have the cry "Eureka" here it is?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 63
Dr. DEARMAN. There is one place here. Here is one place here.
Here is one place here, and I don't know whether there are any more
or not.
Mr. REUSS. Do you have the questions?
Dr. DEARMAN. I have everything.
Mr. REUSS. When you are through, I would like to have you tell me
what the questions were which produced all this.
Dr. LACEY. If one would care to glance at this record, this heavy
band of red color that one sees here is, I would assume, the so-called
blood pressure record.
Is that correct, Dr. Dearman?
Dr. DEARMAN. That is correct, and pulse.
Dr. LACEY. Now if one gets a close look at this, one sees very closely
spaced here, no more than a millimeter or two apart a series of spikes
in a curve. Each one of the spikes represents a contraction of the
heart. It is impossible in this display to look at it and say "Ali, hasn't
the heart rate changed," because one is making visual discriminations
of a spatial extent which is extremely small.
Mr. LASS. At this point, since you are interpreting something, would
you read the number underneath there?
Dr. DEARMAN. This is the question number. This is question No.
6, the first one. (See exhibit 20, p. -.)
Mr. LASS. Dr. Dearman, before we continue, is there any objection
on your part, as the psychiatrist who participated in this interrogation
and this analysis with the individual, to our stating the question for
the record?
Dr. DEARMAN. Not at all. The only thing I ask not be stated in the
record is anything about the personal life of this man.
Mr. LASS. Thank you. Question No. 6, for the record-and this
is the material which was supplied by Ihr. Dearman in "Federal Lie
Detector Case, H. B. Dearman, M.D.," confidential report of the en-
tire case which has been documented in an earlier record-question
No. 6, "Do you know anyone who has been stealing money from the
blank blank branch,"-and this is an identification of the bank-"or
its customers ?" (See exhibit 20, p. .: )
Mr. REUSS. What was his answ er ?
Dr. DEARMAN. His answer was, "No," verbally. The polygraph
said, Yes.
Dr. LACEY. At this point, I cannot, resist pointing out once more
that the polygraph record is neutral. I can look at this record and
I can say there is a pronounced physiologic response. This is a point
that I think needs to be made over and over again.
Mr. REUSS. What do you mean by saying it is neutral?
Dr. LACEY. It is neutral with respect to the, causes of that response.
Beyond that point, it is an inference. For example, take the example
I gave yesterday. Somebody could give this record to me and say,
"Here I administered the cold pressor test," which is a cardiovascular
test, as a presumed measure of the predisposition of this individual
to develop essential hypertension in later years. If you were to tell
me deadpan, without a polygraph being hooked up to you, that this
was a record of an individual undergoing the cold pressor test, it
would be completely acceptable to me. That is what the response to
the cold pressor test lookslike.
If you were to tell me that this was a response to a mental arith-
metic test that, too, would be completely acceptable to me. That is
what the response to the mental arithmetic test looks like.
In other words, a great variety of stimuli qualitatively and quan-
titatively different from each other produce responses which, by this
method of display, are indistinguishable one from the other.
Mr. REUSS. et me ask some questions, if I may, Mr. Chairman, at
this point.
Mr. Moss. Certainly.
Mr. REUSS. There is before me a document bearing the name, "As-
sociated Research, Inc., Chicago, Ill." Is that the name of the poly-
graph?
Dr. DFARMAN. No, sir; just the people who make the paper.
Mr. REUSS. At any rate, we are looking at the squiggles which
Dr. Dearman tells us ensued the asking of the question, "Do you know
anything about the stealing of this money from the bank?" And
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 64
the answer, "No." And those squiggles, to the naked eye of myself,
who is not, a, trained polygraph operator, looks as if there is a bulge
upwards there.
Dr. LACEY. In 5 days you would say there really was a, bulge.
Mr. REUSS. Yes. Anybody could see that.
Now, Dr. Dearman reports that based upon that bulge upward the
polygraph operator in this particular case drew the inference that
the man was lying and that he did know that money had been stolen
from the bank, and that lie himself had therefore probably stolen
it. On the basis of this, the man was presumed guilty and a confes-
sion was extracted, and it looked as if the crime had been solved. It
turned out later that there was no crime at all; that no money had
been taken.
Now, Dr. Lacey, you point out that the polygraph shows a reaction
at this point, but that the polygraph is-as you say-neutral; that
it is tip to the operator to make the diagnosis of what this means; and
that in this particular case the fact that the polygraph operator went
too far and made a mistake is neither here nor there on the validity of
this particular polygraph reading. Is that a fair recapitulation of
what you just said?
Dr. LACEY. Perhaps so. Precise communication is very important
at this point. So, may I correct that?
Mr. Reuss. I want you to be precise.
Dr. LACFY. The polygraph operator didn't make a mistake on the
validity of the record. The polygraph operator made an inference
of some kind. I would suspect this early in the record that any well-
intentioned polygraph examiner would have said, "Aha, this is some-
thing which should be followed up." I just doubt that, anybody
who has had any experience in this field, has any good intention or
understanding, would say "Here is guilt." He would say, "Here is
-something to check."
Dr. DEARMAN. There are, I believe, five positive responses, I am
not sure, and what she said that day after finishing the test is, "Doctor,
this man is guilty of stealing money from the bank and has knowledge
of it." On her report to me, she said what Dr. Lacey said. She said
that these reactions indicated that this should be gone into further.
Mr. REuSS. Dr. Dearman, I would like to pursue this with Dr.
Lacey.
Would you not expect a perfectly innocent man, that is, yourself
or myself
Dr. LACEY. I am not perfectly innocent, sir.
Mr. REUSS. On robbing money from this bank, both of us are.
Wouldn't you expect some reaction when a glowering cross examiner
says "yeas some money stolen from the bank? The reason you are
taking the lie detector testis that you are one of the suspects." Would
you not expect a bulge at that point or at least not be surprised if
you saw one?
Dr. LACEY. Yes.
Mr. REUSS. And therefore what is the use of all this? What is the
use of this particular question and of getting excited about the answer?
If somebody told him he was a suspect and that for his own good lie
had better submit to the lie detector test, and then he is asked the
$64 question involving the very wrongdoing that he is suspected of,
I would suspect that lie would get some kind of reaction, either anger
at being asked this, or, "My God, I did do it," kind of reaction.
Dr. LACEY. Yes, this is exactly
Mr. REUSS. Therefore, what does all this prove? Why bother
with this? Why not find out whether the bank sustained a robbery
by more classical methods, like inspecting the bank books and finding
out whether money really disappeared?
Dr. DEARITAN. Let me say this to clear up the record. When these
tests were made at the bank, no money had been stolen. This was
a routine check made at the bank. No money was missing. Every-
body was going to take the lie detector. When the vice president was
asked these questions, he got these responses. This record is not the
record made at the bank. This is the record made at the University
.of Virginia on February 28, 1962, which is about 3 months later.
Mr. REUSS. After he had been under suspicion?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T,TNO
AS
M'
Dr. D12ARMAN. He was not under suspicion- at the time he took the,
test, but it was after he got the positive responses. No money was
missing. This was just a routine check. The bank had had some
people steal from this bank, some of their employees. The bonding
company recommended to the bank that they hire a, he detector agency
to come in and do this work for them on a routine basis. I believe
this was to be done twice a year. This was the first routine check.
Mr. Rruss. This document you have in. front of you is a second
check of this man?
Dr. DEARMAN. That is right.
Mr. REUSS. Taken 3 months after the first check?
Dr. DEAR-MAN. That is right.
Mr. Rruss. Didn't the first, check show some suspicious bulges?
Dr. DFARMAN. The first, check showed exactly what this shows.
Mr. Moss. Let us clarify this. In this particular case, Mr. Reuss,
following the first polygraph examination, this particular officer of'
the bank-because of the readings of the polygraph and the interpre-
tation placed on those by the examiner-confessed to having taken
money. He subsequently was placed under the care of Dr. Dearman'
for psychiatric treatment. This second test, at, the University of Vir-
ginia was given following approximately 3 months of treatment, where,
he had, through careful analysis, become aware of personal problems,
going back many years. These problems had apparently caused the,
autonomic reactions which led to a conviction on the part of the oiler
ator in the first instance and the subject in 'the second that he had in,
fact taken something.
Dr. DTARMAN. Yes.
Mr. Moss. At this point, the second test was part of your treatment
of the individual?'
Dr: DEARMAN. Not my treatment.
Mr. Moss. Further analysis?
Dr. DFARMAN. That is right.. I made a hypothesis of what would
happen if he took another polygraph test, and I was checking on my-
hypothesis.
Mr. Moss. This test was one prepared by you?
Dr: DFARMAN. I took the nine questions that were asked the man the
first time and asked them again. The reactions we got here are the
reactions to the first, nine questions.
Mr. Mos.. In the second instance this test was not prepared by the
second polygraph operator'?
Dr. DEARi1fAN. No, sir; prepared by me.
Mr. Moss. And it was administered yin accordance with your
instructions?
Dr. DFARMAN. No, sir. I told the polygraph operator that I wanted
her to carry out this examination as she would any other examination.
Mr. Moss. But to the extent that, she carried out this examination
prepared by you, she was not exercising her own judgment as she
might have in a, case not prepared by you.
Dr. DrARMaN. That, is'right, except she did ask permission to ask
two or three other questions which I told her she could.
Mr. Rruss. At the time of the second polygraph examination which
we are discussing, did the subject of this polygraph examination have
some idea that he was in trouble?
Dr. DEARMAN. No, sir. He felt like he was not in trouble. He felt
like we had found the answer to why he got the reactions on the first
test. But even though he felt this, the autonomic nervous system
still responded like it did 3 months before.
Mr. R.Euss. I note from the polygraph operator's notes which are
.coordinated with the chart which we have just been using that question
6, which I believe is the question that adduced the
Dr. DEAR-MAN. That is one of them.
Mr. Rruss. That is one of the questions that adduced the reaction
that Dr. Lacey has just been describing. I note the following entry.
Here's a question, "Do you know anyone who has been stealing money
from the blank blank branch or its customers?"
Then there is a notation by the polygraph operator, "Blood pres-
sure, pulse positive, strong. Breathing pattern positive. Sweat
gland activity positive. Conclusion," and this is checked, "specific
reaction indicative of deception without verification through inter-
rogation." (See exhibit 20, p. -. )
65
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 66
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes.
Mr. Reuss. Well, this, it seems to me, is a very plain straight
forward case of a polygraph operator who came to a wrong conclusion.
Dr. DRARMAN. That was my conclusion.
Mn Reuss. That is to say, the operator concluded that the subject
was guilty of deception at this point when, in fact, later evidence
shows that he was not guilty of deception. Is that not so?
Dr. DEARIZAN.. Yes.
Mr. Reuss. This seems to be the case, is it not, Dr. Lacey? Assum-
ing the man was innocent, as is strongly hinted by the fact that there
wasn't any wrongdoing for him to have been guilty of, this conclusion
that he was guilty of deception was wrong, was it not?
Dr. LACEY. Will you permit me to answer that question at some
length and in my own terms, sir?'
Mr. Reuss. Yes.
Dr. LACRY. This is an extremely interesting example of two things
first, the fact that the so-called polygraph examination in proper hands
turns out to be an extremely reliable thing; secondly, it illustrates one
,of the reasons for the impassioned speech I made yesterday that the
inference to be made from the polygraph records is just that, an in-
ference, that it must be checked by other investigative means, that a
decision of-I hate to use the words "guilt" and "innocence," I will
explain why-a decision of guilt and innocence remains, as it properly
should be, in my view, a legal matter.
Now then, the fact is that on two separate occasions 3 months apart,
if I understand this case correctly, on two separate occasions 3 months
apart, excessive physiological reactions were obtained through a cer-
tain set of symbolic stimuli, a certain set of questions. In semilay, semi-
scientific language this would mean that these questions had some
.specific differential value to that person.
Now let us see what inferences canibe made from this.
It raises the presumption of what the lawyers would call guilt; that
as, a presumption that this mau did in fact steal money, but only a
presumption. It raises the possibility of a second inference, one that
Mr. Reuss was trying to elicit before, that this individual is so sensi-
tive to all kinds of accusations that any question given to him by a
glowering examiner, I think was Mr. Reuss's phrase, that any ques-
tion which the subject, perceived as questioning his integrity, as lead-
ing to a bad attribute, would produce these physiological responses and,
as any psychophysiologist, would know, and as Dr. Dearman ap-
parently has demonstrated in this case, it raises a third presumption
that possibly there is some neurotic interconnection of affect and idea-
tion concerned with this question.
A properly trained and supervised polygraph operator, in my mind,
should have said nothing more, just as my technician will report to
me nothing more than the numbers that result from gin, test or as the
nurse in the clinic will report only the result of how much sugar is in
the urine, and so on. They must never make the diagnosis. I don't
like the word "diagnosis," but the analog.
The polygraph operator should have said simply: "There is an ex-
cessive physiological reaction to these things."
Now, in my view, a properly utilized polygraph examination, shown
in this case to be reliable, you see, in the sense that the results are re-
producible-that is what should be meant by reliability-a properly
conducted investigative network, if I may use that, phrase, would have
said, "Aha, let us go check. There is too much affect about this case,
may I say." Indeed, that is what happened. People did check.
You, yourself, went to the president of the bank, I think you said.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes.
Dr. LACE.Y. A check of the books now revealed this man could
not, have stolen the money in the way he so stated, because the books
showed no such tampering. The money was not missing. Wonder-
ful. Now, then, it seems that by more classical means-by other
means, I would prefer to say-one of the presumptions of the three
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 68
Mr. REUSS. If that is all the test can elicit, namely, a bump in the
squiggles, which could lead to the inference that a man has stolen
something or is guilty, or that he is innocent but angry about the ques-
tions being asked or, thirdly, that, there is some neurotic interconnec-
tion there, the three hypotheses you suggested, it really does not seem
worthwhile for a bank to give this kind of test, quite apart from the
human rights and indignities involved, does it?
Dr. LACEY. That is a kind of loaded question.
Mr. REUSS. The information you get is so vague that
Dr. LACEY. Sir, that is not vague information. Those are all spe-
cifically testable hypotheses. Were they not, Dr. Dearman would not
have been able to publish his paper.
What you mean is that there are several possibilities which must be
ruled out. An X-ray examination, a gastrointestinal examiaation, all
of these raise several possibilities.
It is the job of a good clinician-in this case it would be the job of
a good legal staff-to arrive at the conclusive significance of this
indication.
Mr. REUSS. You know beforehand that the sample, let us say, of 20
people that you are going to give this lie detector test to at the bank
contains some potential criminals. You could have said without any
lie detector test that of a thousand employees, let us say, one or two or
three will have criminal tendencies and larceny in their heart. It
seems to me that giving them lie detector tests which show that some
of them may either have (a) larceny in their heart; (b) a feeling of
anger about having their integrity questioned; or, (c) some neurotic
intervention, really does not accomplish very much.
Mr. Moss. Could we permit Dr. Dearman to make a response?
Dr. DEARMAN. I want to point out that this shows something more
sensitive than Dr. Lacey has recognized in the fact that he said, I be-
lieve, the glowering examiner brought up in regard to stealing.
This man only got positive responses to the questions which had the
word "customers" in them and both mother and wife were customers
of the bank. He felt that he had symbolically stolen money in the
amounts they said from mother and wife.
If you asked him about stealing from the bank, he gets a negative
response. If you put "customers" in there, lie gets a positive.
Rr. REUSS. That is the neurotic interconnection that Dr. Lacey
mentioned.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes. But he would not respond to all things about
guilt, is what. I am trying to say.
Mr. REUSS. Let me ask Dr. Kubis a question. You said, I think,
Dr. Kubis, that quite apart from these laboratory tests-the make-
believe situations which have produced good results in a number of
cases-that in the field in actual practice there have been some inves-
tigators who have been getting good results.
Did I understand you right? Were talking about the field, in actual
lie detection?
Dr. KuBrs. That is right.
Mr. REuss. Would you give me the names and addresses of all in-
vestigators and polygraph operators whom you feel have been getting
good results, and tell me on what you base your opinion that they
have been getting good results? Just list them. Let us get their
names and addresses first. Then we will go back over and ask you for
the basis on which you form your conclusions.
Dr. KuBis. Right. There is a former director of the State police
lab-oratories, Mr. Kirwan, Ii i-r w a n, William.
Mr. REuss. New York.?
Dr. Kunrs. New York. And there is Dr. Fabian Rouke, R-o-a-k-e.
Mr. REUSS. Where is he?
Dr. Kums. He is in New York.
I will stick to those for the moment.
Mr. REUSS. If we can, I would like to have you name all of those,
if there are any others. Then I would like to take you back through.
them.
Dr. KUBIS. I would prefer to stick to those first.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 69_
Mr. REUSS. Stick to those two?
Dr. KUBIS. Yes, sir.
Mr. REUSS. What is your observation of William Kirwan and tlie~
results he has obtained?
Dr. Kunis. He had been doing work in the State police, examining
individuals who had been suspected of various types of crimes. In
discussing the cases with him, in studying the records that he had
produced, and in evaluating the postexamination by the police de-
partment of the additional facts that had been adduced, it is my opin-
ion that he was getting results that have been well above chance. He
had been getting not, only confessions but verifications of some of his
results by additional evidence obtained after the examination.
-Mr. Rruss. Have you examined into these specific cases, so as to
.make a, judgment both ways? That is, was there an absence of infer-
ence from the polygraph test which imputed guilt to people who, in
fact, turned out not to be guilty, and was there a presence of the re--
verse; namely, the polygraph inference of guilt when the person in fact
.later was found to be guilty ?
.Dr. KUBiS. In the records that I have looked into, I have examined
those which had been verified and I have not been too much interested'
.in those which still were awaiting the gathering of additional evidence.
In those which have been verified and which I have examined, he,
had not made any mistakes.
Mr. Russ. How many did you examine?
Dr. Kuiis..I examined about 30 records.
Mr. REUSS. Did you select them or did he select them?
Dr. KUBis. I asked for a set of records that had data on them, pre
and post.
Mr. REUSS. However, as far as you know, he could have just handed
you 30 that worked and not handed you an equal number that had not
worked?
Dr. KUBIS. I don't know the complete basis of his selection, although
I do know that on other cases he has submitted material on which he
could not make a judgment and both of us evaluated the records and
found that both of us could not make a judgment.
Mr. R.i uss. But in those cases, he did not make a judgment that
turned out to be the right, judgment ?
Dr. Kunis. That is, he should not have made it. In the work of
lie detection, there should be a nondecision region for those cases where
the records are indeterminate. It would be expecting too much of a
machine of this sort to always obtain exceedingly good records, un-
contaminated by the excitement of such examinations, uncontaminated
by the suspect's present state and emotional condition, uncontaminated
by other influences over which lie may not have had control. Con-
sequently there will always be a number of records on which the
examiner will be in doubt as to the judgment he is supposed to make.
Mr. Rruss. As to Dr. Fabian Rouke, did you examine any of his
cases?
Dr. Kunis. Yes.
Mr. REUSS. How many?
Dr. KUBIS. I should say about the same number of cases.
Mr. RE?.USS. As in the case of William Kirwan, did you simply accept
from him a sample of cases which lie handed you for examination?
Dr. KUBis. Yes; and I went to his laboratory and looked at them,
myself. There I looked into the files and selected those that I wanted
to look at. In effect, it was an examination of those records that he
showed me, himself, and those that. I selected from his files.
I should like to bring a. point very strongly to the attention of the
committee and those who are interested in this work. There will never
be a. perfect instrument. We will have to live with the fact of error
and' the fact that we are limited, human individuals. Not only are
we working with machines that have an instrumental error, but with
human individuals who are susceptible to human error. We have to
accept these facts.
What we have to look for is whether these types of procedures, as
adjuncts to any investigation, will give us significant information over
and above the amount of information that we already have. To expect
perfection of an instrument when we do not expect perfection of our-
selves or to expect perfection of an operator when we ourselves are
fallible in our decisions, I think 'is an unfair expectation.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
I,TNO MAS 72
Has Mr. Kass the question ?
Mr. KASS (reading).
Do you know anyone who has been stealing money from the (blank) bank
or its customers?
Dr. Kurds. Yes. This could involve many things. Do you know
whether anyone has been stealing from the bank? Do you know
whether anyone has been steal ing from its customers?
I presume there are lots of customers of the bank. It is a twofold
question, therefore, first, with respect, to the bank and with respect to
the customers. Further, a question of this type is poor from another
point of view. It could be used as in introductory question, because if
money is ever missing people have suspicions. titre have to distinguish
between a suspicion and definite knowledge. Consequently a question
of this sort, should have been preceded by-does he suspect, and there-
by-does he know ? If the examiner equates the two words "know" and
"suspect," he is going to get the same type of answer. Suspicion is
not knowledge. In this particular case, the second alternative, namely
"customer," as Dr. Dearman pointed out, was the essential point in his
question. If an interpretation were to be made of this issue, it should
have been partialed out into at least four components and studied
singly thereafter. It, is a very bad type of question, and I think every-
body would agree that it encompasses too many things. As for the
bank situation, 'I have been given to understand that there are small
loans-I would say they are not pilferings for I have been told that
they are loans that some tellers make from a bank over a, short period
of time, say a day or two. They usually return this loan to the bank.
I understand that this practice is more prevalent than the banks are
willing to admit. These people, when examined, will give high reac-
tions to such questions as: "Did you ever take or do you know if any-
one has taken any money or stolen any money ?"
Dr. DEAR-MAN. Let me say this : this question No. 6 is one of five ques-
tions in which a positive response was obtained. This is not the only
question. I would like to answer Dr. Lacey on one thing. Let me see
if I heard you right.
Did you say last night you were talking with members of labor?
How did you phrase that?
Dr. LACEY. This man referred to the fact that he was talking to
labor representatives.
Dr. DEnr,MAN. They said they had no objection to its use?
Dr. LACEY. That is as I understood the reply.
Dr. DEARMAN. In 1961, an employer here in Washington, D.C., was
giving polygraph examinations to prospective employees. In this they
asked questions which, in their mind, would determine whether or
not this person was prolabor or antilabor. Every time they found that
the answer would seem to indicate the fellow was prolabor, they would
not hire him. Somebody caught on to this and went before the Na-
tiona-1 Labor Relations Board and they outlawed the use of the machine
in this type of work.
Maybe they don't object to it, but they did in this case.
Mr. KAss. Did they outlaw the use of the machine or did they outlaw
the use of that specific question?
Dr. DEARMAN. They outlawed the use of the machine in preemploy-
ment in this manner.
Mr. KASS. Do you have that citation?
Dr. DEARMAN. I don't have the citation, as such.
Mr. KASS. Do you have the brief ?
Dr. DEARMAN. I can get it, for you. I don't have it with me.
Mr. KASS. Can you supply it for the record?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes.
Mr. Moss. Is it a, National Labor Relations case?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, 1961.
Mr. Moss. You have the reference to the case? I think it would be
more convenient for the staff to secure that for the record than it would
be to place the burden on Dr. Dearman.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 73
Mr. Kass. For the record, Mr. Moss, may I supply it?
Mr. Moss. I am pleased to see that the staff has anticipated-the re-_
quirement of the committee..
Dr. DEARIZAN. No, sir; I don't have it. I can get it.
Mr. KASS. Was that a 1961 case?'
Dr..DrARnz AN. 1961.
Mr., Moss. We will hold the record` at this point to receive- the cita-
tion and the summary of the facts of the case.
(The information referred to follows:)
Mr. Moss. I think now if we can get back to Dr. Lacey, to the dis-
cussion we had-over- the. interpretation of the graph you have now,
before you, some of the problems of visual interpretation.
Dr.. LACEY. Yes. If you were to examine this closely, Mr. Moss,
you would-see a series of spikes on this record. Each of the spikes
represents a moment in time, somewhat later due to the technique, in
which the left ventricle of the heart contracted. You will see they
are extremely closely spaced, that at that time when the blood pres-
sure went up quite markedly, there was also a diminution, a decrease'
in pulse volume, I am certain that there are cardiac rate changes in
here. That is to say, a proper display would have shown increases in,
heart rate. They are extremely difficult, even impossible for me to see,
here by the naked eye. simply because my eye would have to resolve'
extremely small spatial distances and would have to contrast extremely,
small spatial distances.
If one also looks at this record, I notice above it a tracing which
must be the skin resistance tracing.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes.
Dr. LACEY. This skin resistance tracing does not show any such pro-
nounced perturbation.' This raises several issues. Somewhat later I
am certain I can go through here and find skin resistance changes
and not find blood pressure changes.
This raises many, many issues in an area that I have called response
specificity, namely, the possibility of the existence of favored chan-
nels of expression between individuals.
One individual may be primarily a blood pressure reactor; another
individual, a skin resistance reactor, and another individual blood
flow reactor. In another kind of specificity, we also speak of the spe-
cificity of the pattern of response to the actual stimulus situation.
Some stimulus situations can be shown to evoke a characteristic
pattern of activity. Nobody has been able to demonstrate to date-
perhaps because nobody has really studied it yet-that, there is a pat-
tern of activity characteristic of that complex of states we call lying.
It might be possible, Mr. Moss-I emphasize the "might"-that the.'
lack of a, skin resistance response here to this same question-even at
very close inspection I am not sure that there is a very marked heart
rate change here-that. the lack of two additional indicators of re-
sponse, right then and there should have raised the suspicion that there,
was something funny here, that this was not, let us say, the typical
'kind of response to be expected of an individual who had stolen from
the bank. One would have to have extensive norms in the proper
utilization of this technique through all kinds of questions. One chan-
nel failed to respond, the skin resistance channel.
There are changes in respiration which don't look very much differ-
ent, by a quick scan, from the changes in respiration that occurred
to other questions.
Mr. KASS. Excuse me. Are you reading from question No 6?
Dr. LACEY. I was looking at question No. 6 and contrasting it,
Mr. Kass, with the respiratory changes-I was looking at that moment
,.it questions 8 and 10.
I notice question 8 did give a skin resistance change.
Mr. KASS. Could you analyze question No. 6?
Dr. LACEY. Yes. This is the question where I am saying we have
a marked blood' pressure response. A heart rate response' is either
absent or is difficult to discriminate. There is a lack of skin resistance
response. A response in respiratory volume, at least, which is no
different from the response in respiratory volume in other questions
as I glance down here. In other- words, the big change is this one
blood pressure change.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 74
Mr. PASS. What you normally call GSR, or what is called sweat
gland activity, is negative at that point.
Dr. LACEY. It is negative. Let us not call it a sweat gland activity.
But it is negative.
Mr. PASS. Sweat gland activity was quoted from the polygraph
examiner.
Dr. LACEY. That is a fairly outmoded interpretation of what is
skin resistance.
Mr. BASS. Dr. Dearman, you included in the material that you
supplied the subcommittee a list of questions. The question is stated
on one side of the page. Blood pressure, pulse, breathing pattern,
;sweat gland activity is listed in three separate columns. In. the
second column over is positive, positive, positive. The third column
over is "Strong" and that is in parenthesis opposite "blood pressure,
pulse." Is this the record submitted by the polygraph examiner in
your experimental case? (See exhibit 20, p. -.)
Dr. DEARMAN. This is a copy of it.
Mr. PASS. This is a copy of it?
Dr. DEAR34AN. Yes.
Mr. PASS. Let the record show at this point that all three responses-
blood pressure, pulse, breathing pattern, sweat gland activity-are
noted here as positive.
Will you continue, Dr. Lacey?
Dr. LACEY. Yes; I got sidetracked. We were talking, I believe-
Mr. Moss and Mr. Kass-about the display problem. I cannot dis-
tinguish the heart rate response here. It may be in here.
Now, if I understand the intent of your question, Mr. Kass, that
skin resistance was rated as positive, it may well be positive in other
questions.
Mr. PASS. No; it is listed specifically at question No. 6 in the second
test which, I believe it was stated for the record, is that chart you
have now.
Dr. LACEY. I would not view the skin resistance change I see here
as a positive response. It is a perfectly normal spontaneous reaction
of skin resistance, as I see it.
We are talking about the display problem. The mere fact that this
inexperienced witness looking at the record did not detect skin re-
sistance response, did detect a respiratory response which, on casual
visual investigation of the record, is not diagnostic of anything, and,
did detect only the differential blood pressure response. All this raises.
the presumption that increased coverage and more precise display of
these physiological responses might result in some increase in precision
of the technique.
I would be almost certain, seeing this large blood pressure response,
which looks to me as a large blood pressure response-I halve no calibra-,
tion here to tell me how big a response in numbers of millimeters of
mercury, but this is a big response-I would asume that a simultane-
ous record of heart rate would have added corroborative or noncor-
roborative evidence.
Now, the display of heart rate that must be chosen is one that is not
dependent upon paper speed, you see. It is one which must be as in-
terpretable as the skin resistance response is.
Typically, this is a very clean-looking thing at this degree of sensi-
tivity so that one sees big responses in skin resistance.
Mr. PASS. To clarify one additional point, could the skin resistance
activity or GSP and the positive reaction from it have been visually
noted from the interrogation room? In other words, can you see skin
resistance other than through your components?
Dr. LACEY. You have to have a meter. Properly, it is measured
in an electrical unit, either ohms or in the preferred way, the recipro-
cal of ohms, conductance. It is an electrical measure. It reflects cer-
tain electrical properties of the skin which are of great interest to the
psychophysiologist.
Dr. DEARMAN. Dr. Lacey was talking as to his knowledge. He
didn't know about the fact that the examinee was told that the machine
was perfect, that he couldn't beat the machine.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 78
It is fairly obvious this should be repeated later and determined
whether it is a consistent reaction.
Mr. KAss. Dr. Kubis, could we continue on those questions, then,
with the next number. What is the next question number on there?
(See exhibit,20,p.-.)
Dr. Kunrs. Seven.
Mr. KAss. Is there a positive response on GSR?
Dr. Kunis. I would have to know the calibration on this and see
what the natural perturbation of the system is. There seems to be a
small response here. That might be before 7.
Mr. Kass. The next, question is question No. 40?
Dr. Kunis. That is question No. 7.
Mr. KAss. But, the next question after that, is that No. 40? The
next question circled?
Dr. LAOP:Y. Fourteen. There are other things circled. But 14 is
totally circled.
Mr. KAss. What would you read the GSR to be there?
Dr. Kums. I would read this negative or nonsignificant.
Mr. Kass. What other questions are there that you think would
have a nonsignificant GSR?
Dr. Kusrs. It may be easier to pick out those that are significant.
Mr. Kass. OK, sir.
Dr. Kunrs. I don't, know what this question is, it is 7, 8, in com-
parison to the rest of the tracing. We are in difficulty here because
there are lots of numbers, 12, 7, and 4.
Mr. Kass. You say before 11 ?
Dr. Kuhns, let me ask one other question, though. Is it not also
possible that these responses were created not because of the ques-
tions asked but because the individual examiner was a female and the
individual subject was a male? Is this also possible?
Dr. Kuunrs. I could be facetious and say that it, depends on the
question that is asked of a male by a female.
Mr. Kass. I am talking about the GSR response.
Dr. Kunrs. Yes.
Mr. Kass. Based on the studies that Dr. Lacey has done and you
have clone, isn't, it, possible that the mere presence
Dr. Kunrs. We would have to be careful about that. If this was
a female examiner, we should expect this influence throughout the
record. It should not occur at specific points unless we can identify
those points and the questions at those points. Therefore, we have
to assume the influence of femininity throughout the examination,
since a female person is present throughout the examination. We
cannot say and pick out one spot, and say this is due to a female
examiner and this other spot which is not large is not due to the
female examiner.
Mr. Kass. Couldn't certain questions that were asked, however,
stimulate greater responses?
Dr. Kums. Yes. It, depends on the meaning that, the individual
attributed to those -questions and the implications of, those quetions.
Mr. Kass. Would not. the examiner also have to know what'mean-
ing?was derived by the individual ?
Dr. Kumrs. Yes, and the examiner would have to phrase her ques-
tions so as to be objectively and directly relevant to the issues under
investigation. These should be spoken in a voice that is relatively,
indifferent, to the femininity that that examiner exerts on any of
these questions.
Mr. Kass. If the question asked by the examiner was "Have you
ever stolen from the bank's customers?" would that have been a
better question to ask?
Dr. Kunrs. Have you ever stolen any money from the bank's
customers?
Mr. KASS. From the bank's customers. Strike the "money."
Dr. Kraus. Have yon ever stolen from the bank's customers?
Yes, it could have been a better question because it would have im-
plied stealing. It would have implied stealing from a specific sub-
class.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 79
Mr. Kiss. What, about, the word "customers"?
Dr. rums. I would presume that those would be the people who'
would be coming to the bank.
Mr. Less. You would presume this?
Dr. Kuhns. That is right.
Mr. Kiss. So perhaps would the examiner, but can we presume
that?
Dr. K mis. I think this is the ordinary interpretation that is given
to this term.
Mr. KASS. But is it also possible that, the subject had another inter-
pretation of the word "customers"?
Dr. Kusrs. Yes, and we should always be on the alert for such
individuals. This individual apparently was very disturbed because
I cannot see how an innocent individual, an executive of a bank,
presumably intelligent, presumably having many dealings with
ordinary people, and seeming to have been functioning well up to
that point, going to the extreme of admitting that he had done some-
thing which he had never clone.
This is a, difficult thing for me to accept, for any normal individual
to accept, that a man who has not, taken money would admit taking it.
In the admission, and I cannot interpret it in any other way, he would
have said it was money from the bank's customers, I think he would
have meant that if they were the customers who were coming to the
bank.
Mr. KASS. Dr. Pubis, what, would happen at that particular point if
the bank vice president really was not concerned because lie had had
some assurances from his president that he believes him. At that par-,
titular point he looks at the examiner who is asking the question and
says she is a, very attractive young woman, I would like to take her
out for a drink tonight?
Dr. Kunis. I don't think he would do that under these circum-
stances. The question about stealing is a threatening question. And
the fact that lie later admitted this type of action would not indicate
that this would gain for him the access to the young lady in question.
It is very difficult psychologically to interpret his reactions and to`
understand him from the point of view of the normality that we would
expect in respectable, efficient individuals who are operating at an
executive level.
Mr. KASS. Now we are assuming executive level. The vice presi-
dent of the bank, I believe, was 27 years old. I don't know what sig-
nificance you can attach to that. I know I am 27 years old and I have
had some thoughts in this hearing room today that would probably
evoke great GSR's despite the fact that I am sitting here trying to get
certain information about the use of polygraphs in the Federal Gov-
ernment. Is it not also possible that this bank vice president, whether
27, 47, 67, had extraneous thoughts?
Dr. Kunrs. Yes.
Mr. KASS. Or exciting imagery, as I think you called them:: in your
study?
Dr. Kuuis. Yes. We have to postulate highly improbable situa-
tions, then. If I understand the meaning or the implication of your
question, then these highly exciting thoughts would have come up
only in one class of questions and not in the other class of questions..
I would presume that if these were highly exciting thoughts and if
they were not specifically related to the question, that they should
also occur in questions that have nothing to do with taking of the money
from the bank. They should occur under these circumstances, in these
other questions.
Mr. PASS. If the subject in this particular case in his own mind,
twisted as it may be-I don't know-assumed or brought the examiner,
who happened to be a female, into his mind as his mother or his wife,
and every time he used the word "customer," he associated it.-and I
assrune these associations can be rapid-with customer, with his wife,
could you not have a constant at, that particular question which
would evoke great GSR's only at that particular point?
Dr. Iiunrs. With regard to customers?
Mr. PASS. With regard to customers.
Dr. Kuins. Yes; he!'
e could have clone that.. That is wh.y I say th'
question originally as formulated was a. poor one.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 80
Mr. KASS. But we did agree earlier that even the question that
would have been a better question asked, "Have you ever stolen from
customers," that even this question could have caused serious problems.
Dr. Kums. Yes; in a disturbed individual, but in ordinary circum-
stances, these individuals are not so numerous.
Mr. Kass. Are you saying that most individuals are not normally
disturbed? I have been reading that all of us have a few neurotic
tendencies.
Dr. KuBrs. I say that most individuals are not disturbed in the
sense of pathology.
Mr. KASS. Is this a. pathological disorder or a neurotic disorder or
just being a red-blooded individual?
Dr. Kuars. Who would admit to having done something which he
didn't do ? A red-blooded individual ?
Dr. DRARMAN. That,, he admitted to having done something lie didn't
do, but in his own unconscious mind he had felt he had done to the
customers of the bank; namely, wife and mother.
Mr. LASS. Is this possible?
Dr. Kusrs. This is an inference which Dr. Dearman has made. I
have not studied the case and I cannot snake such an inference. In a
hypothetical case, if you gave me full details and all the relevant
information I would have to agree with certain types of conclusions
under certain circumstances.
Mr. KASS. Dr. Kubis, this is one inference that is made by Dr.
Dearman. You have made another inference or you could make an-
other inference, based on reading the case. Would you come to a con-
clusion immediately that specific reaction indicative of deception is
present?
Dr. KUBrs. Not when I know that he says that lie stole money and
he didn't. I would say this is a disturbed individual. I don't know
what is in the mind of a disturbed individual because by definition a
disturbed individual has certain types of disturbances which are hard
to interpret.
I should like to point out that this is an exceedingly unusual case
where the man admits something that he didn't. do.
Dr. DPARMAN. May I say this. He says I inferred. Let us look
at it a. little bit. What is the scientific method, and if I am wrong,
correct me. A man observes a phenomenon and he wonders about it,
why would this thing happen? He has seen the thing happen but
he still. can't figure out why. So, he says, all right, let, us do it again
under the same conditions as nearly as we can duplicate them, and
let us make us a hypothesis that if such and such things are done,
this will follow. This is the hypothesis I made.
Would you call that an inference?
Dr. Kums. Because you have access to information in your psy-
chiatric work, which we haven't and which could not be obtained
until
Dr. DPARMAN. As you know it, would you call that inference? If
you set up an experiment, you made a hypothesis, and you proved
the hypothesis, is this inference?
Dr. Luaus. Let, us say if your hypothesis is a legitimate hypothesis,
you have shown that your hypothesis has been verified by the experi-
ment, provided everything else there is legitimate and well controlled.
Dr. DEARMAN. Sure.
Mr. KASS. Dr. Kubis, without the psychiatric examination, without
the background investigation, without all the other information
needed to make a determination, could you or would you recommend
making a determination of guilt or innocence or truthfulness or
falsity?
Dr. KiBrs. In what situations?
Mr. LASS. In this particular case.
Dr. Kraus. I would have to know the situation, I would have to
? examine the case; I would have to know under what circumstances
it was done; I would have to know something about his reactions.
Mr. KASS. Would you recommend to the bank president at that
-particular moment that this man is perhaps "rotten"?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MA S' 81
Dr. Kums. Of course not,. I would dust say that he gives dirge,.
cardiovascular responses. He is apparently cardi.ovascularly dis-
turbed at certain points where certain questions have been asked:
Mr. KASS. You made one other point, that people don't normally-
confess.
Dr. Kuhns. If they have not done it.
Mr. KASS. If they have not done it. Could you document this?
Dr. Kunis. I think I could ask any one in the room, that this is a
phenomenon that all of us observe inlife.
Dr: DI:ARMAN. That people don't confess at times to things that
they don't do?'
Mr. KASS. How many people go into a police station after a crime
has been committed an for various reasons say, "I did it."
Dr. Kuais. I would like to know the figures.
Mr. KASS. So you don't know the figures?
Dr. Kums. That is right.
Mr. KASS. So you can't say as a matter of fact that people don't
-normally run and confess if they don't do something.
Dr. Kums. I think newspapers like to report these things.
The incidence of such instances is relatively small.
Mr. BASS. Based on
Dr. Kums. What I have read in the newspapers; yes. Now, if we
have access to other information, I certainly would like to know that
as anybody else would. There are such people, there is no doubt about
it.
Mr. KAss. Dr. Kubis, what, other means are there of beating the in-
strument or beating the examiner or beating the operation or tech-
nique. How do you beat the lie detector?
Dr. Kuins. There is an inveterate tendency in individuals to protect,
themselves against threat. The individual tries to avoid threat in
various ways and in the case of the threat of being found out as a
.culprit, a number of individuals that. I have examined have thought
about ways of fooling the lie detector examiner. They want to avoid
being discovered. So they utilize several types of procedures. I think
there are, in general, two types of procedures. Either they flood the
record, that is, fill up the record with irrelevant reactions so that there
are many large reactions. This makes it difficult to compare the re-
sponse to the significant question, such as : Did you kill John Jones,
with the others? Technically, a lot of "noise" is put into the system.
Another method of defending oneself is getting the examiner on the
wrong track, by trying to elicit responses that are large to questions
other than the important question. These are the two basic approaches
to the problem of evading detection. -
Mr. KASS. Are either of them possible?
Dr. Kums. Yes, they are possible. In point of fact, if the individ-
ual squirms too much, I don't think you call get valid records. So it
would be a very simple procedure for an individual to say that he wants
to cooperate but still move a lot and exasperate the operator by such
movements which would be reflected throughout the record.
Mr. KAss. Now, there is a differencc between much movement, or try-
ing to get too many things on the chart- where the examiner would say,
you are trying to beat me, you had better sit down and be quiet.
Dr. Kunis. The person would say, "I am very nervous." You have
no defense against this.
Mr. KASS. Then is it possible for the examiner to 'come up with
the wrong conclusion?
Dr. Kuinis. If he is a good examiner, he should not examine that in=
dividual.
Mr. KASS. Is it possible to beat even a good examiner through other
means ?
Dr. KuBrs. Yes, I think it is.
Mr. KASS. How?
Dr. Kuins. There are types of procedures that should be studied
by all people interested in lie detection so that individuals can be
detected if they deliberately use them. Whenever they legitimately
occur, these sources of disturbance and, therefore,:sources of error,
should be eliminated.
One procedure which is classic, and, which I am sure every one has
thought about, is to induce excitement in oneself at points other than
the significant questions. This excitement is manifested in the record
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LTNO MAS 82
and would be introduce "noise" or extra reactions in a part of the rec-
ord where the examiner does not expect it. At the least, this will
cause doubt, in the mind of a good examiner, for he would be off the
main track in trying to explain these large reactions. Therefore, the
person being interrogated would have a good chance of eluding the
examiner because he has forced him into side alleys.
It is very expensive from the point of view of time to check out
these other large reactions which seem to indiciate quite a bit of dis-
turbance. As to how often this technique is used, I would surmise
that the ordinary first offender, in the excitement of being examined,
cannot mobilize either his energy or his thinking, to very adept at
this. Consequently I would expect that most of the individuals
who are being examined do not use this procedure in a systematic
way.
Mr. Kass. But can a person who, to use your own words, is adept
and is not ordinary, can a person-not induce responses at other points
to fool the examiner but-suppress his response at, the question so that
it would appear that there is no deviation from the so-called norm?
Dr. Kums. This is very difficult because the task that the individual
gives to himself, of suppression, gets him into a heightened state of
reactivity. When the critical question is asked, he may say to him-
self, "I have to suppress," and this puts him in an alerted condition,
and probably elicits more tension than it should. He might .eq.e1Z
evoke a large reaction. This is a dangerous procedure. I would not
recommend it.
Mr. Pass. Is that Dr. Orne's research, that the more you try to
,deceive the more you are caught?
Dr. Kums. 't'his is partly verified by an experiment that-I had done.
If evolved by the use of the "Yoga" technique where the individual
tries to be as calm as possible and tries to suppress-his reactions.
What happens is that. he gets to a much lower -level of general re-
sponsivity throughout the record and when these other disturbing
questions come in, even a small response looks flagrantly large in com-
parison to the suppression he has been able to, achieve elsewhere.
Mr. Kass. What about the classic case, mentioned in Mr. Inbau's
and Mr. Reid's book, when the question was asked: "Did-You Kill
;Mabel ?" the suspect-who it was later verified did in fact kill Mabel,
was thinking of another Mabel and he said, "No, I did not kill Mabel,"
and there was in fact, no deviation from this norm.
Dr. Purrs. This, again, is a difficult procedure. If he has done it,
I have to give him credit for it.
Mr. Kara. It is possible?
Dr. Puns. If it has occurred, then I guess it is possible.
Mr. Kass. Dr. Lacey, you have done some work in suppression of-
,behavioral characteristics, if this is the scientific term to use, is it
possible to suppress your physiologic response?
Dr. LACEY. A few years back, I got.interested in what was known
as Yogi.
Mr. Kass. Yogi, or Yoga ?
Dr. LACEY. Choose your own form, Mr. Kass. I don't know. Ac-
tually, an eminent psychophysiologist, -Dr. WWTenger, of the University
of California. at Los Angeles, and Dr..Bagchi from the University of
Michigan, went on a scientific expedition to India to study Yogi on
the spot. The question of expenses and transportability did not-bother
them. I also was interested in it. They were doing field investigations
to determine whether in fact this -kind of thing did exist.
You are all familiar with the reports of suspended animation, cessa-
tion of cardiac activity and whatnot.
About the same time I started a series of investiations in the labora-
tory to see if I could just begin to reproduce in the' laboratory any sort
of control. I could not in the laboratory. That, however, is a state-
meat you will have to take with a very large grain of salt. .I did not
make a very intensive effort and there are a lot of secrets we don't
understand.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO M A S 83
Yoga or Yogi is probably the best, or most extensive evidence we
have that, even raises the presumption of rather successful dramatic
suppression of ongoing autonomic activity.
I have to be really responsible for this conclusion, I just am not sure.
Certainly, the evidence was unimpressive that it did in fact exist in
India.
I think Dr. lVenger's conclusion was that, all instances that he was
able to observe were due to control of respiration, which, of course,
we can all do. This was not a direct suppression of autonomic activity.
Let me state that they had great difficulty in locating true advanced
Yoga. In other words, if it does exist, it exists in only a few highly
trained individuals who have some physiological secrets that we in
the West certainly do not have. Even there, there are only a few in-
dividuals and they are hard to locate. I would say within all practical
limits, there are no known techniques for the widespread dramatic
suppression of autonomic activity that we are talking about there.
Whether suppression of this sort could occur in this kind of lie detec-
tion, I don't know. However, there are more subtle things involved,
more subtle than voluntary suppression.
There are some reports in the literature which raise some very inter-
esting? hypotheses capable of testing, that, the nature of the interaction,
social interaction, between the examiner and the examinee has some
effect on the channel of somatization, that is, whether one should be
looking at blood pressure, skin resistance, or blood flow perhaps which
are never included on these records. I refer to what we call in our
field, situational stereotypy, stimulus specificity. Perhaps the most
relevant study is a study by Dr. Reiser and his colleagues. Dr. Reiser
is now professor of psychiatry at Albert Einstein Medical School in
New York. These studies were done by him at the time he was a
captain in the Medical Corps. He was studying the effect of interview
techniques on cardiovascular physiology.
In one case, he, Dr. Reiser, personally took the blood pressures. The
individual also was being measured on a ballist. cardiograph, which is
a record of the ballistic recoil movements of the body as blood is
expelled forcibly into the arterial tree.
In another instance-I can't remember whether it was a sergeant or
a private-a technician of lower rank took the blood pressures while
the ballist cardiograph was also being taken. Now, then, the content
of the interview, the formal interview, I think, was about the same,
but obviously the informal interaction surrounding the interview was
very different when a private or a sergeant examined the soldiers
than when a. captain of the Medical Corps examined the soldiers. For
example, griping, very common in the Army, was quite freely done
when the private was around. A more formal, much more pleasant,
nongriping atmosphere was generated when the captain took the blood
pressures.
The interesting thing was that if one wanted to detect physiological
changes consequent upon the symbolic stimuli in the interview situa-
tion, one would have chosen different, physiologic measures to look at,
depending on whether the captain or the private was doing the
measuring.
I don't remember which way it went, which is simply another way
of stating that theory in this field is still very primitive. We are all
hard at work trying to arrive at generalizations that make sense.
When I say to you I don't remember which way it, went, I am simply
admitting I have no general principles, I would have to remember this
little detail. But it might have gone something like this, trying to
think about general principles-I will be interested to check myself
later-that in the presence of the captain, the measured blood pressure
response did reveal differential impact in the interview material on
the soldier being examined but the ballist cardiograph record did not.
In the presence of the private, the blood pressure response did not
reveal any differential impact in the interview, whereas the ballisto-
cardiogram record did.
The important principle is that. the nature of the surrounding
socialization may determine, by mechanisms we do nof yet understand,
that suppression of differential physiologic perturbation to symbolic
stimuli will automatically occur and that, one has to look elsewhere
to another somatic channel which you see may not even be repre-
sented on here.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T?TNO MAS 85
Mr. hAss. Thank you, Dr. Lacey. I have no further questions.
Mr. Moss. First, I would like to ask both Dr. Lacey and Dr. hubis
if they will comment on the article read earlier by Dr. Dearman,
written by an official of the Virginia State Police, --here he strongly.
emphasized the importance of convincing the examiner of the in-
fallibility of the polygraph. Would-either of you relate this to proper
procedure?
Dr. LACPY. I think I have already answered that. partially when I
said I think-well, it is a lie, it is a deception of the public. I feel very
strongly this should not be done. I stated that if the public were prop-
erly informed this might decrease the validity of the lie-detection
procedure.
My answer to that is, too bad, but that is what the democratic ethic
requires. I don't. want to live in a police state. It is not an infallible.
technique. When one says it is, one is using a club.
Mr. Moss. On the contrary, it is a relatively fallible technique?
Dr. LACEY. It is a fallible technique; yes, sir.
Mr. Moss. Dr. Kubis?
Dr. hums. Yes, I would agree. We would not use lies either to in-
timidate people, or to appear as if we are very truthful individuals.
Deception ultimately will destroy the individual who uses it. In time
be will become worse as an examiner, because as he comes to believe
his infallibility he gets closer and closer to the position of God; and
when one does get that close, he does not belong with us mortals. He
belongs elsewhere. This procedure is to be condemned and should not
be utilized.
Mr. Moss. Now, very briefly, what happens if we have a person of'
average or less intelligence-perhaps a very meager education-who
is convinced by one of these examiners that this machine is infallible.
It is going to find out rather quickly whether he is lying or telling the
truth; and he responds truthfully to the best of his ability, and the
operator says he is lying? What happens to the individual at that
point? Does he then start to try to defend himself, to beat it, by
whatever means might. be available? Does he become confused?
What actually happens to that individual ? How will it affect him ?
Dr. hums. I don't think many individuals believe this, if they have
to answer this question outside of the interrogation. They might in
the height of the emotional confusion that exists at that time. But I
would_suspect that such an individual, if be is innocent., will claim that
he is innocent and will not admit to the situation. But, at the same
time he may be fearful of the consequences of such a decision which
may be put into his record. I have heard at a meeting of polygraph
operators one representative who gave a speech saying that "I don't
even look at the record ; I accuse him of it, and then study his reaction."
These are techniques that some people may use to try to elicit confes-
sions, but my point on this is that if you use such tactics why use a
machine. Accuse him immediately of you
crime, and if the individual
has actually committed the crime, and if he is susceptible to such types
of pressures, he may confess.
This is a technique tha`isometimes a number of interrogators might
like to use. I don't know how frequently it is used in actual interroga-
tion.
Mr. Moss. You indicate you feel it would be rather infrequent that
a person would actually believe the machine was infallible. Yet I have
read within the past week in connection with a campaign for high
public office in one of the States of this Union where one of the prin-
ciple candidates has challenged the other to take a lie detector test
which, at best, would be nonconclusive.
Dr. hunts. Yes.
Mr. Moss. Now is he hippodroming, or does he believe it.? I grant
that he believes they are relatively infallible instruments.
Dr. Ptunis. I wonder whether he is just trying to bring up an issue
that may be completely irrelevant to the campaign.
Mr. Moss. That has been known to happen. My reday response.
to such a challenge would be very polite, but I have not read the re-
sponse in the case I have in mind.
Dr. hums. Certainly it is an inappropriate, uncivil procedure to
use.
Mr. Moss. We read frequently in much of the press and news media.
of the country where there is almost a public attitude of scorn be-
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 88
Institute for Defense Analysis in Research and Engineering Support
Division with regard to the objective measurement of autonomic
responses for use in lie detection. As part of that study I believe at
one point
Dr. LACF.Y. I don't know, isn't this classified ?
Mr. REID. This is not now classified. This has been declassified.
All I wanted to place in the record, with whatever comment you might
want to make, is that at one such meeting in July 1961 there were
eight areas of suggested study that you thought would be pertinent.
Dr. LACEY. Not individually. There was a group of psycho-
physiologists at that conference.
Mr. REID. I take it that would still be your view, that those studies
should be carried out.
Dr. LACEY. I don't remember what the eight areas were.
Mr. REID. I understand that, but in general you subscribe, I take it,
to the views of that committee with regard to additional study, and
there area list of eight.
Dr. LACEY. Perhaps with one exception, Mr. Reid, one qualification;
that I think I came away from that conference feeling that my
colleagues were a bit more optimistic about the potential success of
this technique than I was. That is the only qualification I made. As
a member of the group advising IDA, I was in agreement with the
general tenor of the report. Certainly it says there is lots of research
that needs to be done.
Mr. REID. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask unanimous consent
that this list of possible areas of study be included in the hearing
and any other sections of the report counsel feels may be relevant.
Mr. Moss. Without objection, it may be included in the record.
(See exhibit 21, p. -.)
Mr. REID. My final question is the simple one of the overall validity
of the lie detector. I think we have heard a lot of testimony from
those who are sophisticated in its use, such as psychologists and mem-
bers of the law. I think you have said that you do not favor its
use in the Federal Government. Is that a flat statement, or do you
feel that it could be used in certain instances?
Dr. DEAR-ZAN. I was in agreement with Dr. Lacey yesterday that
if you have these 1,000 men and you need 10, you know some of them
are going to show false positives and false negatives, but you want to
get as good 10 men as you can get; but of the other 990, all those rec-
ords be burned, nothing is left, expunged from the record. In other
words, there is nothing to show that these men had ever had any-
thing. I would agree with that.
Mr. REID. Could we have a concensus of you, Dr. Dearman, Dr.
Kubis, and Dr. Lacey just what you think the use of a lie detector is?
As I understand it-and I will try to paraphrase what I think you have
all said in substance-you would only use it in cases of serious na-
tional security, and not under any circumstances for trivial purposes
or trivial inquiry.
Dr. DF.ARMAN. I would only use it in connection with other psycho-
logical examination.
Mr. RFID. I would like to narrow it. Do you want to see widespread
use of the lie detector in the Federal Government throughout the
depths of the Government, or do you wish to narrow it to serious mat-
ers of national security?
Dr. DEAR-MAN. I would say serious matters of national security,
but I would want, as Dr. Lacey said yesterday, that this would be
just one part of it. I want the other psychological tests that went
along with it.
Mr. REID. I understand that, and a series of safeguards. But in
general are all three of you agreed that widespread use in untrained
hands should not be pursued and that its use should be limited to
highly trained persons, to serious cases, and finally with full protec-
tion for the rights of the individual, legal and otherwise?
Dr. DEARMAN. With other psychological testing.
Mr. REID. And with any other psychological testing;or safeguards
that might be pertinent.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes; I would agree with that.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 90
Dr. You mean my recollection of what happened? I
remember what happened.
Mr. Moss. Do you have no reason, then, to want to change your
recollection?
Dr. DEARMAN. No, sir.
Mr. Moss. Then, would you supply for the committee a photostat of
the original report signed by the operator?
Dr. DEARMAN. I will 'be glad to do so. (See exhibit 20, p. -.)
Mr. Moss. So that, as that report reflects conclusions it be accurately
stated on this record?
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, Sir. Let me say this, that what she put in the
report is not the same as what she said that day. I would go by what
the report said. This was her way of writing up the report. But l
do remember what she said. Dr. Smith was there. He remembers
what she said. On page 1018 of the article it states what she said.
Mr. Moss. For the purposes of the committee, it is relatively irrele-
vant to the committee; but just to indicate that there has been express
disagreement, I would like the record to reflect the nature of the dis-
agreement.
Dr. DEARMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. Moss. I ask also at this point, Mr. Reid, if there is no objection,
that the staff be permitted to include in the record of these hearings'
those documents pertinent to it or referred to in connection with the
hearings. (See exhibits 22 p. -. )
Mr. Moss. Gentlemen, I can assure you that I have had a most
interesting and, I think, profitable 2 days. I wish we could continue.
But the schedule of the Congress does not permit us that luxury.
I thank each of you for your appearance. I hope that we can call
upon you again should it become a desirable matter for the committee.
Mr. REm. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to thank Dr. Lacey,
Dr. Kubis, Dr. Orne who is not present, and Dr. Dearman for their`
thoughtful and pertinent testimony which I think has been extremely
helpful on a subject that I know is complex; but I think they shed
light on it, and I think we all appreciate it.
Mr. Moss. This will conclude this series of hearings. Others will
be, announced later as the committee develops firm planning. The'
subcommittee is now adjourned.
(Wliereupon; at 1:25 p.m. the subcommittee adjourned subject to
call of the chairman,.)
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
UNO MAS qY
ARPE-NDIXES
(Exhibits 1 to 18 appear in pts. 1 and 2 of these hearings.)
IVNI-iJIlI1'S' 1!la-1'.ll)-1iIG)ffRAP11Il'a7, SKETCHES SUBMITTED BY SCI,
I:A'1.STS :1P1'L7ARIN(_ BEFORE THE SI'(' UOM l'IVV "1!:
Exiiiiisrt'1)A-EI: B:-DEAIaIAN,'M.D'.
General
H. P. Dearman. M.I). (psychiatry). 205 blast'\1"atauga Avenue, Johnsom,
City, Tenn.: telephone !)2S-451 ,
Born..llay 14, 1921,.in Wingate (I'ei?ify-Comity); Miss.
E(iucatiou :
Finished high school in 'April 193!). New Augusta High School. Nev vAu-
gusto. Miss.
Received R.A.. degree May 1942. University of Southern Mississippi, Yhit-_
tiesburg. Miss.
Received medical certificate ill February 191:1, university of Mississippi,
Oxford. Miss.
Received M .D. degree December 1946. University of'Tennessee, Memphis,
Tenn.
Internship. 1 year (aaumtry 19-17-Jana ry 1915) Methodist Hospital,
Mpill ldiis.:_L'enu.
Two iutd-one-half yeitrs-preceptorship in surgery, Nijuary 1948-:iuly 1!),0.
One ye;u? preceptorship?in anesthesiology.?1!1:1 ~~2.
Professional status-:
Private practice of medicine (general practice) January 1t115-July 19:i0,
Columbia. hiss.
Private practice of medicine (general prac?tice) August 19-51 -July 19.M1,
Carthage. Miss.
Psychiatric residency. July 19:;9-July 1902. Chief resident, July 1901-
July 1902. University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville. Va.
Private practice of psychiatry, ;July 1902 until the present time, Johnson
City, Tenn.
Military service: Navy, active duty. rank lieutenant senior grade, October
7950-August 1951. honorable discharge. 195,.:1
,Assoc?ia tioiis :
At present, member of the American Medical Association and affiliated
State aipi local societies, itsssx?iated menihei? of the American 1.'sycltiatrie
Assoc?iatiou.
Formerly member of Americ;eu Academy of General Practice and the
An)ericaii Society of Al)esthesiologists.
Eximtrr 191`3-Josi:rii F. 'ttaoi's
Joseph I:'. Kubis. 37-15 55th Street, Jackson Heights 72. .Y. TNN' 9-70:x7.
Birth. March 13. 1911 (Brooklyn. N.T.: married (tvvo children) business ad.
dress. Fordh;utt University. Brous. N.T.
Education
1824-25: Bushvrick High School. Brooklyn. S.T.
1928-32: St. John. University. Brooklyn, N .Y. B.A. degree.
1932-37: Forcihani17nivetsity, New York (. ity: M.A.. I'll. D., (m ajoi: field.:
Psychology;
sIember, s(.ieutitic olga ni 7.11 ti( ins American Association for the Advancement of Science-
American Psychological Association.
American Society of Criminology.
American Statistical Association.
Aatericaii Personnel & Guidance Association.
Biometric Society .
MathematicaI Association of America.
Medical Correctional Society.
New York Academy of Sciences : Chairma). Division of Psychology.
Psychometric Society.
Sigma Ni.
;Ponsnitaut status :
Present
National Aeronn ntiesand Since Administration (Washington).
Veterans' Administration I Brooklyn).
Catholic Charities (N wv Yoork--).
Ifvruuttent : City u141 Stiilep)oliteruthoritie'.iln a111111mtl interi?*ogatioii.,
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LiNO' MAS 92
Reeent :
Institute for Defense Analyses (Washington)
,Ofliee of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (Washiug-
ton). I
Professional status
Assistant ancl'teacher, Fordhain I'niversity, 1934-3d.
Instructor. Fordham University Graduate School. 1930-39.
Assistant professor. Fordhai i University Gritdnilte School, 1939-44-.
Associate Professor. Fordhiua i'niversity Graduate School. 1944-53.
Professor, Fordhinn University Graduate School. 1953-present.
Research interests : Eiiuctional reactions, their measurement: stress and- ana-
Iety ; interrogation and interviewing:
John I. Lacey. horn April 11, 1!115 Chicago, Iil. R.A.. Cornell Unn?ersity, 1937-;.
-1'h. 1).. Cornell I'niversi-ty, 1942. Chairman. department of hsYcholihysiolO -
neurophysiology, Fels Research Institute. mid professor of psychophysiology,
1946 to date.
Susan Linn Sage scholar in psychology, Cornell University, 1937-35. Susan
Linn Sage fellow in psychology. Cornell University. 1935-9. Junior graduate
:Issistant in lr;ycholog -. Cornell University. 1939-40. Senior graduate assistant
in psycholcray, Cornell University. 1940-41. Research associate, the Psychological
(Corp.. New York, N.Y., 1939-42. Instructor in psychology. Queens College. N.Y..
1941-42. Induction station psychologist. 1942. Personnel consultant. the Adju-
tant Geiraral's Otfice, 1943-44 (second lieutenant. ASC). Aviation psychologist
(second lieutenant to captain. Air Force). 1944--46. Lecturer in psychology. Ohio
State University. 1950-59. lecturer in psychopathology, University of Louis-
1.-ille. School of Medicine. 1955 to date. Member. National Psychological Research
Council for the Blind of the American Foundation for the Blind. 1:n5-S7. Coin-
nuniwealth Fund postdoctoral fellow in neilrophysiology, 1957-59. Consulting.
editor: Jonr11a1 of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 19:53 to date: Psy-
dxdogical Review. 1958 to date: Journal of Psychomatic Medicine. 1902 to date
technical contributions, editor and consulting editor, 1962 to date. Meniher. men-
tal health study section, N] ME. 1957; behavioral sciences study section. NIUH,
1955: experimental psychology study section. AIMH. 1955-60. American 1'sycho-
Iugical Association, board of scientific affairs (chairman). 1959-61. Advisory
e-olnmittee on graduate laboratory development prorrani. National Science Foun-
dation, 1961. Behavioral sciences training committee (psychobiology). Institute
of General 'Medical Sciences, U.S'. Public Health Service. 1962-05. Midwestern
I'scchologieal Association, American I'syehohcgical Association, I'sychouomic
Society. American Academy of Neurology. Americ:uc Association for the Advniice-.
Inent of Science. Society for I'sychophysicdogical Research (president, 1961-62),
American Psychosomatic Society. Sigma XI. I'lil Kappa Phi.
General:
Address : Harvard Medical Schooi, Department of Psychiatry. 74 Fetnyood
Road. T'.oston.llass.
Telephone: Aspinwall 7-0910 (area code 017).
Date of birth : October 10. 1927.
Present position
Senior resetnrh psychiatrist. AL iissachnsetts Mental IJealth Center.
Director: Studios in hypnosis and hnmiuc ecology projects.
Associate in psychiatry. Harvard Medical School.
Education :
llnler_cadmite: Harvard University, A.13., cum halide. 1945. Major
Social relations.
Graduate:
University of Zurich. 1945-49.
Harvard T-uiversity Graduate School of Arts mud Sciences, A.M.,
clinical psychology. 1951.
Tufts University Medical School. M.D..
Internship. Michael Reese Hosuital, Chicago, 1955-:101.
Residency in isychiatry, Massachusetts Mental Health Center (Boston
Psychopathic llospita.l), 19:511=:59.
Harvard University Graduate School of Art, and Sciences. I'll. D.,
19.55.
Teaching appointments:
Visiting lecturer. Department. of Psychology, University of Mainz, Ger-
many, suauner. 19.3.
Teaching fellow in psychiatry, Tufts MIedical`School. 1957-?55.
Teaching fellow in psychiatry. Harvard .Medical School. 19.57-59.
Lecturer. Department of Social Relations, Harvard University, 1955-
:59Research associate. Department of Social Relations, Hamvaid University,
19.59-60.
Instructor in psychiatry. Harvard -Medical School, 1959-62.
Visiting lecturer. Department of Psychology, University of Sydney, Aus-
tralia_ sunnoer, 1900.
Associate in Psychiatry. Harvard Medical School. 1962-
`-Visiting lecturer, Department of Psychologyy, University of Californci:i,'
Berkeley, summer, 1.962.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
T,TNn MAS 93
011-rent cuusnltamt aappcnintmeuts
-[ember, Advisory Committee on Behavioral Sc?ielic'es Research of the
Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Washington. D.C.
Consultant. psychotherapy study at the Henry Phipps Psychiatric Clinic,
Julius Hopkins Hospital.
Consultant, Institute for Defense Analysis. Washington. D.C.
(-omsultant, Commnittee oil Research in Hypnosis. Office of Naval Re-
search. Douartment of the Navy, Wasliington, D.G.
Research consultant, experimental psychiatry, Boston State Hospital.
Research grants :
Postdoctoral fellow-. National Institute of Mental Health, 1956-57.
Principal investigator of ar;nit from Society for the Investigation of
IInm;ni h:eology in Special States of Cons-ion-moss. 1t5s-i 1.
Principal investiLator of contract Nn, ,.AF49(( ;x)_725 from the air Force
Office of Scicutific Research for all investigation of the nature and uses
of Iivnnosis as, a control technique, 1959-l2.
Principal iuvestiiaton of research grant 1o. M-3389 from the Public
Health Service, National Institute of -Mental health for studies in hypnosis,
19:i9-
1'rineilial investigator of research eontrriot No. flonr-33l 2 from the Office
of Naval Research for an elmiirical investigation of basic research lirob-
lems in hypnosis maul related states, 19(i2-
Principal investig;ttnr of rese;nrh Brant No. AF-AI t Sl'f-5S-(;3 from the
Air Force Office of Scientific Research for a seicaititic investigation of per-
sonality attributes of good hypnotic snitiects. It);'?-
Principal investicrator of research contract No. il.a-49-193-A[i)-24sq front
the U.S. Arniy ifedieal Research apml Development Command for a scientific
investigation of studies in the detection of deception, 19li3--
Professional society altpointmeuts:
Editor, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis,
1911-
Secretary-treasurer, Societe of J'sychoithy~ioloLlcal Research, 19g2-
Steerin r committee. New- 10,nghuud 1'sycholog-ical Asset-iation, 19t2-
Professional society ntentbershlis:
americans Association for the Advanceiiient of Science.
American (;rop) 'Clienalty Asociattion.
American Aledie;tl association.
American I'su'hiatric Association.
-Americana I'swholndeal association (fellow-).
Massachusetts Medical Society.
New Eniri;uul 1'svcholwrical Association.
New York.-Acadenn' of Sciences.
Society for Clinical and Exiieriutental Hypnosis.
Society for
I'sycholihysiological Reseatftlt.
F.xiirmirr 2O--LETTEat FxoM \Luxinl: 1'o.Y(aa_1i'Ii ExtMrxlo , TO
Dr. H. B. Da?AmrmIx, Ai'rir. 1, 1902
Dr. 1-I. B. T)EAaM. N,
l)cparturcvct of P.e/lchiati'y,
7%iiivcrsit, of Fii'fivi.ia. 11o.pifa7,
'Ch(u-iottc.S(;i7/c, l%a.
DEAR Mtn. DEARMAN : Regau'cling your letter of -[arch 20, 1 have rewritten
the report in all effort to simplify it for printing-I fea m' this is easier said than
clone. I retyped your format because I only give positive or negative results:
a good polygraph examiner does not know- the meaning of the word "inccim-
ehisiye." I also reworded the eonchisi(ins-the polygraph (ioc. not tell whether
the subject is Being or telling the truth-it only shows physiological reactions
to verbal stimulus. This psysiologica1 reaction may be indicative of de-
ception, reflective thought, emotional feeling for the question, etc.. and it is
foolhardy of any examiner to pass judgment on an individual without inter-
rogating hint to determine just what these physiological reactions indicated of
the polygraun utean.
In nay first report I listed all the questions on which f would interrogate
because even though question 12 was negative oil the second polyLr;arms
I do not feel the perfunctory remark he made after the first test was sufticien);
to completely remnove it from the chart. As yofi notice in this report-he reacted
of question 10 in the second test and I believe that No. 12 became \o..10 to
him in the second test. I know this sounds real stupid, but that, is the feeling
I have about this question.
In the nevonipanyiug report this is the way I see the questions lined ill) in
brief :
FIRST 'PEST
G. Do you know anyone who has been stealing money from the branch
oi' its customers?
49. Are you 27 years old? (This reaction probably implies he feels urine
emotional connotation to his being 27 years of age-either he is approaching
30 too fast, may he feeling impotent. or any number of things.)
7. Have you ever stolen any money from the bank or its custonieish
.12. I-laye you ever stolen any money from the customers of the bank tither
thaui yonr wife or mother?
14. Have yogi in fact stoleu any money from the customers of the bank?
3. Do you drink coffee? (This reaction probably implies he had it cup of
raoflee recently lie didn't like file taste of.,)
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 94
SECOifln 'PEST ' .'
He reacted to 16 and O0 which are eotttrot (fueStious and wh ic?h I expected him
ta).react struugly-everyone does.
4, I)o you suudce eiga rets'? (This reaction "MY lt11ply that lie feels he smokes"
too lunch. or has received Soule criticismit recently in that area. or he may have
smoked a (igaret that day that he didn't exactly enjoy the taste of.)
a-(i. With the exception of,what you just told ate. do you know anyone who
has been stealing money from the branch or its customers?
7. Have you ever stolen any money- from the bank or its customers?
10. Have you ever stolen any money from the back? (We have a delayed'
reaction which is indicative usually of reflective thought which might he as I-
suggested earlier a revangaing in his mind of question 12-since we had cleared
up in onr discussion any theft of money fruit his mother in childhood, he might
have recalled the imagined theft in his own mind of his wife's money to repay
his father-ill-law. Lord knows what it could be-without discussing it with,
hint it is impossible to hoary for sure.)
11. Have you ever stolen any money from the customers of the bawl:?
14. Have you. in fact. stolen timiy money from the customers of the bank?
I still believe because of the strong reactions which 1. indicated as such on the,,
arrontpanying report, that your hypothesis still holds firm despite question 10
rearing its ugly head.
I hope I have not wade my report too long. but the polygraph technique is not
simple and all the additional information I included has to be there for one
ttupardonable sill for a polygraph-examiner is to assume anything. from all
examination. The polygraph is used only as :ill aid to interrogation enabling
the examiner to latow which areas need to be exploited further through interro-
gation-Would that it Were as simple as the hip ill thinks it is.
Please don't think 1 tai lecturing you over your ideas of the polygraph-I
tglpreciate your inexperience with the nutchiue and your exposure to some pretty
lousy polygraph technique with the past examiner you worked with-i alit only
attempting to clarify the aecontpanyittg report and enable you to get sonic sense
out of it because it is sometimes difficult to do-even for the polygraph-examiner.
I AN-ould like tut opportunity to come to Charlottesville and speak with the
doctors in the department of psychiatry to enlighten them on just what the
polygraph does ttccuutplish so they may know just how it may he nstal ill any
future research regarding human personality. etc.
Please excuse the typographical errors in this letter, but it is 10 1.m. iiud I att
Hooped. I do hope I have made toy report a little clearer, but if not please duu'I-
hesitate to send it back and 1 will he glad to do what I cart to clarify it for you.
If you wish you ratty call me at my home phone--i'L :i-2i(-I for any quick irr
fornmtion you might desire. I :1111 leaving for North Carolina tontorrom- for a
week's testing but should be back home by Friday.
The hest of luck to you on the publication of your article. and I shall be looking
forward to receiving a copy of it. Let ace say a.gtliu what a pleasure it was
working with you on this, it marks one of the highlights of my polygraph work
this year.
Sincerely,
MAxIx B: RIF.OER.
AttmAxoEMey'1'S
At the request of 1)r. H. P. I)eartnau. of the University of Virginia IIusltital.
Charlottesville, I'll., was examined oil the polygraph, a detection of decep-
tion technique. He was examined for the purpose of determining his physiologi-
cal reactions on the polygraph to certain questions prepared and numbered ill
advance by 1)r. Dearman and tud:uowu to the polygraph examiner prior to the
test.
After surveying the list of questions the polygraph examiner requested per-
inissiou of Dr. 1)ear11mu to obtain some additional irrelevant ciuestivnts directly
from so as to follow' routine polygraph procedure in the questioning
technique. Permission was granted and the following irrelevant questions were
asked, with the accompanying information that rvats obtained
\\'httt is your age'?-27 years.
Wlmt is the date of your birth'?-March 11. 1934.
What is the place of your birth?-
What education do you have'?-B.A. degree ill English.
Where do you live,ot present
After the first test, the polygraph examiner cousillted briefly with Ih'. Dear-
man outside the polygraph room and asked permission to ttdd two ('uutrul
questions :
l0. 1h1 you have airy intentions of trying to lie to mile during this test?
:10. Have you deliberately lied to any of these questions?
Permission was also granted to discuss a couple of the questions from the
first test briefly with . The cltteSticnts amid his answers are stated below:
0. 1)11 you lalaq' anyone who has been stealing stoney from. the --- branch
or its customers?
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
L-1- MAS :95
Answer, He klleq' who vvorked ill the branch of the bank, who
li of placed 25 cents left by a cnstou:er in all envelope and when the customer
returned inter neither or he could locate the money-it was missing from
the envelope. This incident vvas the only thing that come to his mind when
asked this iluestion-and he vvoudered who could have taken the 25 cents.
12. Have You ever stolen any ncuney from the customers of the bank other than
yotp' wife or mother?
Answer : The thought occurred to him he might have stolen something from
his norther as a child and conldu't recall it at this moment.
The ex;uuiuer inforuct;d - that in the second test she would rephrase
questions 0 and 12 with the expression "\Citlc the exception of what you just
4olkl ateW` so as to be sure they had made allowances for the information already
obtained in the discussion fullowinc the first test.
remarked at this time that every time a question had been asked by
the examiner during the first test. lie had felt as though he couldn't breathe.
The examiner rechecked, his puetlnograpih chest, tulle. and he remarked it had
ijptl f(pltr too tight during the test.
It is the opinion of-the examiner. i\laxiue Bell Itieger. that,had.itlterrogatiou
been lerniitted, it would have been conducted on the following rele..nct (Ines-
tions which showed such specific reactions indicative of,deception:
FrHST TEST
6. Do you know anyone q-ho has been steatiug morey,froal the . br:l,uch
or its customers? 7. Have you ever stolen ally utouey from the bard: or, its customers''
12. Have you ever stuleli :illy' money from the customers of the bank other'
than your wife or mother?
14. Have you in fait stolen any money frouc the' customers of the bauk?
a-6. With the exception of what you just told ace, do you. know anyone Who
has beet, stealing nudtey frou: the branch or its customers'?
7. Have you ever'stoleu :my nuniey from the_ bank or its ch toncers''
1.1. Have you ever stolen any 3noney from the customers of the baud:?
14. Have you in fact .stolen till ihnttec from the-c udtoiners _of the.biutl:?
10. Have yon ever stolen any money from the bind:? .IA dehcyed reactiola
to this question shows some reflective thought that should be investigated
-through interrogation.)
\I_\xaxE BELL 1:151,5x,
Poly(/raplc-7?J'camictcr.
Fnr5'r , TEST
T. Is your first name
Blood pressure, pulse: negative.
Breathing pattern : negative.
Sweat. gland activity: negative.
Conclusion
r' ( )~ Specification reaction indicative of deception without verifica-
tion through interrogation.
( X ) No?sletitic reaction iilclicative of deception.
2. Do you live in the State of ?
Blood pressure. (nrlse:''uegntlve.
Breathing Pattern : positive.
Sweat gland activity : negative,
Conclusion :
( ) Specific reaction iodic;l,tia;e of deception without verifi(-atiola
through interrogation,
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
(i. 1 )o You know anyone who has been stealing money from the , branc:ll
of its customer's?
Blood pressure. pulse: positive; (strong).
Breathing Pattern: positive.
Sweat ghaud activity : positiv'e.,
Conclusion
X')' Specific reaction indicative of deception, without verificatiop.
through interrogation.
) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
49. Are you 27 years old?
Blood pressure, pulse : ne atlye.
'Breathing pattern : positive.
Sweat gland activity: positive.
Conclusion ( X ) ~ Specific reaction indicative of deception without veritleatiol)
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
7. Have you ever stolen any money from the bank or it customers?
Blood pressure. pulse : Positive.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : -Negative.
Conclusion
(X) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verilicatio>;t
through ?.iicte rrogatiofi.
( ) No.sptecific reactigai;iudicativ'e of deeel:tioaa:
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 96
S. Have you ever kept anca,1 be,.
Mood pressure. pulse : Negative.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion :
. ( ) Specific reaction indicative of d?ce1( i'w1 withonntt tiny ficatio.i
through interrogation.
cje tout
X ) Ao specific reaction indicative of
1 iglisla'?
41. Do yon have a B. z\,. degree ill
Blood pressure, pulse: Negative,
Breathing pattern : Negative. .
Sweatglaud activity : Negative.
Coiicltisiotl: ihcatiuri
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception withp**t kit;
through iuterrogatiou:
( X ) No spelific reaction indicative of deception,
-10. Have you ever stolen any money from the hank:
Blood pressure, pulse : negative.
Breathing pattern : negative.
Sweat gland activity : negative.
Conclusion :
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verificfitia Z
through interrogation.
X No specific reaction indicative of deception.
11. Have You ever stolen any money from the customers of the bau1?,
Blood pressure, pulse : negative.
Breathing pattern : negative.
Sweat gland activity : negative.
Couclnsitn :
Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X No specific reaction indicative of deception.
42. Were you horn in 1c.13-t?
Blood pressure. pulse: negative,
Breathing pattern : negative.
Sweat gland activity : negative.
Conclusion :
Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X No specific reaction indicative cit deception.
12. Have you ever stolen ally money from the customers of, the bank other
than your wife or mother?
Blood pressure. Pulse: Positive (strong).
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat ghuid activity: Positive.
Conclusion :
(X) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
13. Have yon in fact stolen allay money from your wife or mother?
Blood pressure. pulse : Negative.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
C'onclusioll :
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
43. Is your birthday March 11?
Blood pressure. pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion
( } Specific reaction indicative of deception without verificatio
through interrogation.
(X) No specific reactitm indicative. of decept ion:
14. Have you in fact stolen any money from the customers of the bank?
Blood pressure. pulse: Positive (strong).
Breathing pattern : Positive.
-Sweat gland activity : Positive.
Conclusion
X ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through iuterrogaatiou.
No specific reaction indicative cif deception:
3. Do you drink coffee?
Blood pressure. pulse: Positive.
Breathing pattern: Positive.
Sweat. gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion :
( X ) Specific reaction indicative of decejitioti without verification
through interrogation:
No specific reaction indicative of de,~vlition.
9. Are you withholding allay information necessary to the prevention of tltef{;
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 97
from the hank?
Blood pressure. pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion
( ) Specific reac?tiott indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction iu(lic?ative of de ceptioa.
4. Do you smoke cigarettes?
Blood pressure, pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern: Positive.
Sweat gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion
1 ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interroget.i)n.
(X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
4:i. Is today Wednesday?
Mood pressure, pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion
( I Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
1. Is your first muse '?
Blood pressure. pulse: Positi've'.
Breathing pattern : Negative ?
Sweat gland activity : _A`egatik?e'
Conclusion
( ) Specific reatc?tlou III'( i(;itice of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
2. Do you live in the State of ?
Blood pressure. pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern: Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion
( ) t;pec?ific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X I No specific reaction indicative of deception.
16. Do you have any intentions of tryiltg to lie to Inc during this test?
Blood pressure. pulse : Positive.
Breathing pattern: Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion :
( X ) specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
4. Do you smoke cigarettes'
Blood pressure, pulse : N(-gative.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Positive.
Conclusion :
I, X ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reac?tiou indicative of deception.
With the exception of what you just told inc. do you know anyone who has
been stealing money from the branch or its cu.stinners?
Blood pressure. pulse : Positive (strong).
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Positive.
Conclusion
( X ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without vertifica'tioit
through interrogation.
(' ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
7. Did you ever steal any money from the hank or its custonters?
Blood pressure. pulse: Positive (strong).
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity: Positive.
Conclusion
(X) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
40. Is your birthday 'March 11?
Blood pressure, pulse: Positive.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion : 0
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception witl;q)tlt Verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 :, CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 98
i., Hav-,eyon ever kept any-cash overages?
Blood- rtressre, ptIse: -Negative.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion:
( ); Specit{ii reut?tiou indicative of deceptiow without- verification
through interrogation.
( X ): specific reaction indicative of deception.
10. Have yon ever stolen ally looney from the haul:?
Blood priessure, pulse: Delityed.positive.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat. gland activity: Negative.
('onchtsiou
(X ) Specific reii?tiort indici tine (+f (llec('JIllon? without. verifications
through interrogation.
t ) No spe(ific reaction indI(Ilfi've o# decep'itter.
a. Do you itnoty how to drive au antoutolaile?
Blood pressure. pulse: Negrt.ive.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity: Negative..
Cotu?lnsiou
( ) Specific rea('lion indicative of deceptlorr without verification
through in terrogaat iotl.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
11. Have you ever stolen any numec from the customers of the hank?
Blood pressre. pulse: Positive (strong).;
Breathing paittern: Positive.
Sweat gland activity:. Negative.
Conclusion
( X ) Specific reaction indicative of (leceptiou without verificatior4
throii h interr(unition.
(' ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
4.5. 1)o you have as B.A. degree iii English?
Blood pressure, pulse : Positive.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland Tatctivity: Negative.
Conclusion :
Specific reaction indicative of deception without veriticaatiott?
through interrogation.
X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
a-12. With the exception of what You jest told sae, have you ever stolen ant
money from the customers of the hank other than your wife or mother?
Bland pressure. pulse : Negative.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
1-. Have you in fact stolen any nioney from your wife or mother?
Blood pressure. pure: Negative.
sheathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No speeific reaction indicative of deception.
48. Are you 27 yea rs old?
Blood pressure, pulse : Positive.
Breathing pattern : Negative.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Cottclnsiou.:
( ) Specitc reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
(X) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
14. Have you in fact stolen any money from the customers of the blink?
Blood pressure, pulse: Positive (strong).
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion :
( X ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without certification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
40. Were you horn in - ?
Blood pressure. pulse: Negative.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity : Negative.
Conclusion :
( ) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( X ) No specific reaction indicative of (leceptiou.
O. Have you deliberately lied to ;my of these (questions?
Blood pressure, pulse: Positive (strong).
Breathing paattern : Positive.
Sweat Maud activity : Negative.
Conclusion:
(X) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
( ) No specific reaction indicative of deception.
Approved, For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 99
9. Are you withholding any information necessary to the prevention of theft
from the hank?
Bawd pressure, pulse : Positive.
Breathing pattern : Positive.
Sweat gland activity: Negative.
Conclusion :
(X) Specific reaction indicative of deception without verification
through interrogation.
)No specifie-reaction indicative of decetltiou.
Ex iiiIII'r 21 a-M EM ORA:N OU1I FOtt'IF!E RECORII-PLANNING CONFERENCE ON TRUTH
I)E]to:NsTR_vrioN TECHNIQUES \11NUTt?s of .vhsE rl NU HtsLn ON JUNE 0, 1901, BY
HEtnsERT POLLACK ANO JESSE ORLANSKY, Jut.v' 3, 1001
PLANNING CONFERENCE ON'rRU'I'R !ENIONS'rRA'FIOA TECHNIQUES
1/i IIItcs of inecthly, .1N)IC 9. 19(11
The uteetiug was called to order at 9:30 a.nl. by the cladruinn, l)r. Ralph
Gera.I'd. with the following p:1 I?t1cipalits ill:itteiida)t'ce
Stephen Aldrich
Joseph Kuhis
Kent K. Parrott
_ F. Ax
John I. Lacey
Herbert Pollack
Lewis C. Bohn
"
1)av-id T. LylckeIl
Ol?r Reynolds
(']mrles W. lira}-
Donald Michael
1):6'id Rhodes
Leoua_rd T. 1)11111
.1. Moouev
Johil A. Talbot
Iohn Ford
Lihwood i\1urray
_Marion A. Wenger
Hallih 1-Iardill
Jay O rear
?AIarsh:tll Heyman
Jesse Orlausky
The chairtmill said that the pttt?pi:se of tile'lileetiHg was to discuss the I)Ossihle
application of lie detection techniques as one menus of inspection to enforce
itrtus confrol'itgreemeuts and also :is n meiuls of delboI I strating the truthful in-
tent of p:irticcipants in negotiations. The uteetiug would,be'unclassified :1ud only
ptihhi'I- available iufornliitioh vv'ould lie discussed.
The following agenda was presented to the group:
1. Technical aspects:
Instrumentatioin.
Procedures.
Interpretation.
2. Political aspects
Feasibility.
Appropriate c?ii:nurels.
Procedures.
3. Further steps.
Thefirst tome to he discussed was instrunteatntioll. of which the main purpoo
is the "objective" measurement of emotions, Up to some point. the iuterpreta-
'tion of emotions iutpa'oves as utore variables are recorded and uteasured. The
most useful variables are those which (,;ill be measured most accurately. such all
'the galv-iinic? skill response. heart rate, pulse and blood pressure. etc.. and which.
of course, correlate highly with the emotional State of the subject. The-inter-
pretatiou of, recordings with many variables requires sophisticated -statistical
lirocedures and the use of a coluputer. Attempts have been made to identify the
most discriminating variables. There was some disagreement about the. eon-
elusion that one could identify specific emotions, such as :Niger or fear, by the
pattern of autonuttic responses, It was felt that this type of identification is
still n preliminary phase.
A distinction was amide between "lie detection" and the "detection of guilty
knowledge." The first assuutes that lying involves n specific emotional arousa)_
utd that it call be detected by measuring atltOlllmic responses. The second
assmire's that knowledge of guilty information is available only to the partici-
'pau.ts of a crime :utd therefore that a unique pattern of antouomic? responses c?:ui
exist only for those who possess guilty information. The use of the galv'aiiic
skin response alone has been suflcieut to detect 100 percent of those who had
guilty knowledge ill an experiment involving students.
Much discussion was (,oucerned with the relation between :tt>tonontii' response
Itlid specific elm tonal states. The autonomic responses upon which lie..detec'-
tiou depends would be influenced markedly by the context of particular words
and the word habits of the individual. Ill one study, words with low response
uncertainties gave low GSR responses, whereas words with high response uncer-
tainties gave high HSIf responses. An individual with urnitiple responses avail-
able to it given word tended to give HSR reactions of a highly emotional type.
The discussion continued all the techniques of how different liars lied, and on
the patterning of the antouomic? variables. Although there may not be a typical
pattern of inltouolllii responses indicative of lying in general. nevertheless each
individual nmy exhibit a consistent Pattern of responses whenever lie lies. Front
this conic the concept thnt it aright be possible to establish a utan's Hernm1 re=
slwnses as a basis for judging whenever he lies; this was called "titrating the
All indiv'idual's social role. 1101 as chief of state, may create :1 situation ili
'which it. is his duty to lie and, as such, lead hint not to exhibit ally emotional
response connected with lying. III dealing with a chief of state, the general
c?ouchisioll was that siri)jec?tive inference of intent would probably override any
"'objective" evidence eollerted by polygrlpll methods. The evaluation of false
klegative and falsepositiv'e,,reslxatses .1']'p ikbl,have tube taken into :account..
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO MAS 100
MMG LINO -1
Couiitermeasiires to the use of lie cletea?tion techniques were also (liscnssefi.
The existence of imany false positive re:ic?tiolls would mldernliue the Tie detection
`leehuique. Sever:ll possible c?ouutermensures were considered :
(a) The 'Hindu'' systems of going into a tin me niny make the person oblivious
to stimnili.
(b) The deliberate use of muscular tension can introduce irrelevant respoll"es
into the recording techniques.
(c) The development of all exciting image with iii the subject's owii imagiua-
tioii could confuse the recording to a very hirge extent.
Thus. there :u?e uuiuy ways of cuntanlinating the responses and of iucreasiug
'the diflionlty of interpretation. However, the use of such counterineasm es could
be detected and thus the operator would be alerted to take corrective measures.
The validity of the polygraph recordings depends upon the operator's ability to
identify such sources of error and oil the suspect's ability to induce spurious
reactions which would not be ucitiled. The role of drugs in stripping an indi-
.. Vidlal of his resistance and of altering his responsiveness was discussed very
briefly. It was concluded that the use of drugs is merely am adjunct to the
interrogation and uieasurellleut process. Though it may have some value, great
care must be used in interpreting the results-
'I'll(, discussion then lluived over to political aspects in the use of lie detection
techniques. Final proof of an nttenlpt to c?irciumvent :111 arms control agree-
nieut. would require physical evidence. Heuc?e, even lie detection techniques of
low reliability may be acceptable if they are used to indicate a reason to search
There was a short discussion oil the influence of iuixiety on the individual's
selected at random to represent a typical avimiple of scientists or political fignres
by methods similar to those used ill questiouu:lire or luiblie opiuinm stu?veys. It
was considered possible that the ('ouumimists alight. 'limit the knowledge of
nucle:u' tests to platoons or c?e115, ns the ('omnmunist countries call thew, as a
means of evading 11(1llidp?si(al detection techniques. Clearly, am individual
would not react to a he detection technique if lie did not have ally guilty
klim-dedge.
Three questions were asked but not answered ill the discussion: Is the tech-
uique scientifically valid? Is it socially acceptable? Is it politically acceptable?
There was a short discussion oil the influence of :ulxiety nil the indivdual's
iiuto111lliie responsiveness, oil the stabilization of the cardiovascular and vaso-
motor response with different age groups, and of their effects on this type of
recording.
The guilty killu ledge technique rests on the assumption that :i guilty person
will show- some involuntary physiological responses to stimuli related to remeul-
bered details of his crime. If the crime is such that the investigator call dis-
cover a number cif factual details with which only the guilty person should be
familial., then the guilty lcn((WIedge method can lie used. The guilty knowledge
items are interspersed with other similar but irrelev: lit items ill a stimulus
list. Ill a teat ban agreement, the examiner could use a prelilliiuary interview
method to establish the details for which he would be hooking in a guilty knowl-
edge test and thereby help hint search for' knowledge of new weapons, wit 11
unknown characteristics. not included ill :t test ball agreelllent.
The fiiml oast of the session was concerned with future planning. The group
developed the following research concepts, listed without regard to order of
iulportauce .
1. Lie detection illstrnntentation mud techniques should be reevaluated sutler
real field conditions.
2. Multiple variables moist be chosen very carefully and only the most critical
ones should be used. These were considered to be c'hnuges ill respiration. nmscle
tension. skill re'si stilllce? card i ova soul ill' and vasomotor re:ic?tions, and eye 111otiM11.
3. Research should be undertaken to examine the influence of a person's
soc i i l and political role upon his iUitououlic responses.
4. Attention should lie paid to the use of corneal retlec?ticnls to measure the
direction ill which the eye is looking. ms pointed out by R. C. Davis in 1958.
tI:lectroem?eph:ilogi;imis nuly possibly be used if snffic?ielit research is done
to miderstaud the meaning of the phase c?hn ages.
0. Improved techniques for antocuatic data recording and processing are imi-
licm?tnmt in the evaluation of multiple recordings. - -
7. Equipllleut should he niinatnrized ill order to slake it? more portable and
reliable.
8. Work should lie conducted ou "hugs" ill a lie detection systems, such as false
positives and false negatives.
9. The cost-effectiveness of nonphysical n11i1 physical inspection concepts should
be compared with the knowledge that they 1my lie complementary rather than
:redluidant.
10. Evaluation of the social acceptability of lie detection teclllliules is most
desirable, both ill (1111? own, as well as ill foreNii cultures. When dealing with
people front other cultures, other variables are introduced beside the subject and
interrogator. These are the interpreter. the semantic differential :isociated
with words used ill the interview and the lulaulw-n social sensitivity of the
individual to the test procediu?e. All of this tmust lie studied if we wish to use
lie detection in other cultures.
11. While it would be desirable to develop a technique which anMmaticaiily
gives evidence of a lie, it is conceivable that pattern reading would also be
acceptable.
12. It w-:is considered desirable to study collective or group lying.
13. Reliability checks :ire desirable for c?on111aring the perforumuee ()f sev'er'al
interrogators Oil the same subject or test nwiteriui. .
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO - MMG -2
14. Further work must be done to determine the actual existence of pathological
liars, and to evaluate the extent to which test records can be cont:uuinated by
such people.
1:5. What ute: tis, such as drugs, hypnosis. special equipment or Special psycho-
logical procedures can be used deliberately to introduce spurious effects into test
records.
1(1. A study should be made. perhaps using public opinion techniques to examine
hots' people iu the street would react to questions concerning their possible knowl-
edge of secret work on arms development or ou weapons testing. This is in
recognition of the fact that the technical questions involved are only one phase
of a uutjor sociological and political problems.
17. Further work is required to study by physiological or other menus whether
it is possible to detect an intention to act ill the future.
There was some discussion about the possibility of creating an International
research group, including the United States. ['S.R.R.. and other countries to ex-
plore and improve these techniques for mutual interest.
The meeting ended with the affirmation that lie detection techniques had
sufficient Merit to warrant their consideration as part of an inspection scheme
for an arms control agreenxelit and. possibly, for applieatiou as it truth demon-
stration device in political negotiations.
hlxitnirr 2111-JI>rttoeaxoonr To rilE FILE ON LIE l.h.rrorwx-M1xurr,S OF A
NIEETisc, AUGUST 1), 1901
'I'opic
Research to improve the objective measurement of auto1aulic responses,
for use ill lie detection. July 20 and 21. 1961.
institute for Defense Analyses, Research and Engineering Support Nil-
Simi. Washington, D.C.
Attendees :
Albert F. Ax.
Lewis 1101111 (July 20).
Chester Do crow.
Ralph Gerard, Chairman (July 20).
John I. Lacey.
David C. Lykkeu.
Martin T. Orne.
Jesse tlrlausky (Chairman 101 July 21).
Herbert Pollack.
Since the last meeting it was planned to have four small meetings dealing
respectively with the problem of inspection. the instrumentation of lie detection.
Hie interview aspects of lie detection, and the diplomatic :wd politica1 uses of
lie detection. Further. the use of this technique ill Various agencies will be ('.x-
amined. The meeting oil inspection took place on July 11). 1961, and led to the
conviction tltat,'behavioral inspection (nonphysical inspection) offers it number
of major :u1VOUttages and does not till ye the serious deficiencies of the physical
testing methods and that therefore it is definitely worthtehile to explore further
()It the state and improvability of the art.
Various autonoulie responses may be used as measures of emotional state
for the purpose of he detection. There is some basis for dividing :ultonnuic
responses into those associated with attention whicli wo111d be primarily cortical
and might involve such responses as the (1R, and into those associated with
guilty knowledge, which are primarily subcortical and might involve such re-
spouses as blood pressure. '[`his dichotomy is by uo means sharp and there is
evidence that it fallen heart rate might be the most seusitiye indicator of atten-
tion changes. Further. defense in the sense of social guilt is not entirely the
same as defense at the physiological level of injury. Another dichotomy is sug=gested in terms of the ilistrunteuta1 situation : those which are analog or Voltagd
Ine:tsnreutents, and those which :ire time measurements. Since time measure'
meats are easy and I(leeise, and since it is possible to convert Voltage measure,
utents into time ones. this nuty be au iutportattt methodological consideration.
In general, responses Which are close to the basic physiological eh: ilges, whic11
are relatively rapid, and which do not adapt out rapidly in repeated testitif.
would be relatively preferred: blood flow is it good indicator for these reasons.
A final dichotomy is in terms of responses which could be used on large scale
field testing with great numbers of subjects, and those which would be prac-
ticable only under tuore limited use with very special subjects and better working
conditions.
The following atttouontic responses were considered especially useful:
Blood pressure : This may be feasible only under limited conditions.
Breathing rate and pattern.
GSII. especially palumr sweating.
Pulse Volume, pulse rate, or pressure. depending npo11 the itistriiateutal choice
(photoelectric, inipedauce. and pressure transducers).
Velocity of Pulse vVau'e.
Systolic and dyastolic blood pressure (may be available u'lily tinder limited
conditions).
Froutalis muscle tension and nnlscle potential peaks (prolnibly only tinder lim-
ited conditions. unless couyertelI from voltage into time measures).
Finger tremor (limited (-onditions).
.Gastrointestinal reactions. using it telemeter capsule (thin;, would need investi=
gation). 1,
Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
 Approved For Release 2005/12/23 : CIA-RDP79B00314A000700050002-8
LINO-MMO-3
Orman. ineiveuieuts (especiatll for observing whether atteutiotn is directed to tone
position or a iii)ther on a lint Ii. but also ill utanty other general situations),
EEG (especially phase differences, using a utiiiitmtl five lead cap).
flea(titin tiute ('S'pecially latency of verbal and autonomic responses to kt given
verbal stinntlus).
Rallistoca rdiograplt (or the tinkle accelerometer).
;Glpod oxygell couceutratiou (ear oxiuteter).
In all these there is. besides the inuuediate response value, the l)ossibilifv of
long-tinge shifts in baselines associated with it prottreesive shift in eniotiottifl
state, such its the anxiety level. Soule of the measures might lie especially useful
in this latter case.
Research should lie undertaken in two directions. The first would involve
laboratory testing of intltisensor. multichannel systems to discover what Valu-
able information cculd be obtained from patterns and coutbinatioils of autououtic
respouses. This hivolyes data digitalization nod the use of congmters for data
processing. The second involves field trials with a limited, well-established
group of nteasureateuts. such as GSIt. pulse, respiration pattern and rate, and
relative blood pressure. This should also be done to test automatic data proces-
sing as fill' as possible. The field tests might involve actual work with police
groups auud all established criminal population, iVith student populations tinder
the stress of ex antinatious. with any group willing to accept severe punishment
for being caught and it considerable utonetau'y reiwau?d for participating. at
"genuine" test such is hiding all 1('RJI and interrogating the groups that might
have done it, and the like.
The kinds of tests should include straight lie detection. guilty knowledge
detection, and zeroing in oil it location or some other attribute beyond the
knowledge of the interrogator. There is disagreetneut as to whether these
methods involve different psychological processes or whether different physiologi-
cal responses occur, or whether the difference is it matter of degree of attention
and emotional involvement; but there is no disagreement that there would lie it
ntethodoltigicad difference both in the uteasurea iettts and the interrogation pro-
cedure, depending till it'ili t one ti'as after.
Teleatetering with sensors ou the body is now tptite practicable. Saute areas-
urenieuts emlld lie made without any body attachments, such as skin temperature.
respiration patterns aid rate, eye movements. and possibly pulse rate by measur-
ing the ballistic action of the body.
All additional measure suggested after the first list is the Luria technique,
which involves squeezing it bulb with one hand while maintaining the other.
steady. 'l'lns seems to measure general level of emotionality or anxiety.
Further. for field work. the data should lie recorded ox magnetic or paper tape
and the question arose as to whether the interrogator should or should not have
the responses of the subject before hint. For mtuty purposes. it preloped inter-
rogattiou cot11t1 be used, for others not.
The guestious of hinds of situations to use in examining the polygraph tech-_
uique was discussed at length. especially the -transfer from the artificial lie.
sitnatiun of the laboratory to real life. While it teas agreed] that the differences
which seemed to he of kind might actually be only of degree (involving response,
ciii'Ves of different slope) nonetheless various mensm'es are better indicators in
one case that in another. The questions of exlteriateutal design, of field testing
anon] of laboratory testing. therefore, need special scrutiny.
On the question of titrating ar calibrating the iudividuail. despite considerable
detailed disagreement, there wars it general consensus that certain initial test
exautiuat.ious would lie Valuable. For one thing, one could measure general
reactivity and perhaps exclude certain individuals as tutsatisfactory for the
detailed exantiuatitn. For another, one can get ant idea of the general re-
activity of different indicators for a particular individual. This may help the
judgment as to the validity of the subsequent exautiuatiou without necessarily
indicating what the results of the exanriuatiou would he. 'There. was also some
disagreement ou the use of different stressors, different modes of stressing. the
use of different methods of interrogation for lying, the validity of transferring
from artificial to real life responses and the like. Some of the specific stressors
that have been considered ire various drugs. cold. pain sensory isolation. auil
different sorts of interview situations. I)rug_s, pain, or sensory deprivation
might also lie used as sensitizers to potentiate or magnify autonomic responses
to the test situations. Here is clearly one area of research.
The utttltiphasic personality inventory or other paper and pencil tests aright
also be used to calibrate the individual_ Although these could easily be "faked,"
the utere relation of responses on these to the polygraph findings would give
evidence of the use of coil uternteositre;s, The point was reemphasized dint some
of these preliminary tests might be highly important ill indicating the degree
Of validity of the actual tests from individual to individual.
There was general agreenieut that test stiutttli and judgments should lie
as objective as possible. Photographs or movies could lie used as it stimulus
situation while uun-iug pictures of the subject could lie used as at indicator of
the response. It is a matter for research as to whether the polygraph response to
the possession of guilty knowledge twill be alike or different to that of lying, de-
pending upon the mood and other conditions tinder which the subject is tested.
For example, will a unit who is telling it lie to benefit himself react the same way
when he is telling it lie as it patriotic duty to his cotuttry?
The u