Essentials of the Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength: A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Comparison Question Test (CQT)

American Polygraph Association (2011), ‘Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on validated techniques’. Polygraph, 40(4), 196–305.Search in Google Scholar

Ginton, A. (2009), ‘Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength – a New Concept in PDD that Reframes the notion of Psychological Set and the Role of Attention in CQT Poly-graph Examinations’. Polygraph, 38, 204–217.Search in Google Scholar

Ginton, A. (2015), ‘Good intentions that fail to cope with the main point in CQT: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner’. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 95, 25–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.005.10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.00525264350Search in Google Scholar

Ginton, A. (2017), ‘Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique. Theoretical and practical implications’. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 14, pp. 1–13. DOI: 10.1002/jip.147.10.1002/jip.147Search in Google Scholar

Honts, C.R. (2004), The psychophysiological detection of deception, [in:] Granhag, P. and Stromwall, L. (eds.), Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts, Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–123.10.1017/CBO9780511490071.005Search in Google Scholar

Horvath, F.S. (1977), ‘The effect of selected variables on interpretation of polygraph records’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 127–136.10.1037/0021-9010.62.2.127Search in Google Scholar

Iacono, W. G., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2019), ‘Current status of forensic lie detection with the comparison question technique: An update of the 2003 National Academy of Sciences report on polygraph testing’. Law and H uman Behavior, 43, 86–98.10.1037/lhb000030730284848Search in Google Scholar

Kircher, J.C., Horowitz, S.W., and Raskin, D.C. (1988), ‘Meta-analysis of mock crime studies of the control question polygraph technique’. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 79–90.10.1007/BF01064275Search in Google Scholar

Krapohl, D.J., and Shaw, P.K. (2015), Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice, Elesvier Inc., Academic Press, San-Diego, Ca, USA.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.00005-0Search in Google Scholar

National Research Council, (2003), The Polygraph and Lie Detection, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.Search in Google Scholar

Nelson, R. (2011), ‘Monte Carlo Study of Criterion Validity for Two-Question Zone Comparison Tests with the Empirical Scoring System, Seven Position, and Th ree-Position Scoring Models’. Polygraph, 40, 146–156.Search in Google Scholar

Nelson, R., and Handler, M. (2008), ‘Brute-Force Comparison: A Monte Carlo Study of the Objective Scoring System version 3 (OSS-3) and Human Polygraph Scorers’. Polygraph, 37, 185–205.Search in Google Scholar

Raskin, D.C., Honts, C.R., Nelson, R., and Handler, M. (2015), ‘Monte Carlo Estimates of the Validity of Four Relevant Question Polygraph Examinations’. Polygraph, 44, 1–27.Search in Google Scholar

Raskin, D.C., and Kircher, J.C. (2014), Validity of Polygraph Techniques and Decision Methods, [in:] Raskin, D.C., Honts, C.R., and Kircher, J.C. (eds.), Credibility Assessment; Scientific Research and Applications, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego.10.1016/B978-0-12-394433-7.00003-8Search in Google Scholar

Shterzer G. & Elaad E. (1985), Validity of the control question test in two levels of the severity of crimes. Proceedings of IDENTA-’85, [in:] Anti-Terrorism; Forensic Science; Psychology in Police Investigations (pp. 155–166). Jerusalem, Israel.10.4324/9780429036590-17Search in Google Scholar

Vrij, A. (2008), Detecting Lies and Deceit, Pitfalls, and Opportunities, Wiley and Sons, 2^nd ed., Chichester, England.Search in Google Scholar