[
American Polygraph Association (2011), Meta-Analytic Survey of Criterion Accuracy of validated Polygraph Techniques. Polygraph, 40 (4), 194–305.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Amsel T., (2020), The Centennial Introspection Project 100 Years of Polygraph Practice. European Polygraph, 14 (1), 23–26.10.2478/ep-2020-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Baker M., (2016), 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533 (7604), 452–454.10.1038/533452a
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ben-Shakhar G., Lieblich I., & Kugelmass S., (1970), Guilty knowledge technique: Application of signal detection measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54 (5), 409–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/h002978110.1037/h00297815474268
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bornmann L., Mutz R., (2015), Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66 (11), 2215–2222.10.1002/asi.23329
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, (2015), Board on Health Care Services; Institute of Medicine; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Balogh, E.P., Miller B.T., Ball J.R., (eds.) 2015.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Diagnostic Errors: Technical Series on Safer Primary Care, (2016), Geneva: World Health Organization. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Elaad E., (1985), Decision Rules in Polygraph Examination in: IDENTA 85 – An International Conference held in Jerusalem Israel in 1985: Anti-terrorism, Forensic Science, Psychology in Police Investigations, 167–179, A Book of proceeding. First Published, 1985 Imprint Routledge. 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429036590.10.4324/9780429036590
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Elaad E., and Kleiner, M., (1986), The stimulation test in polygraph field examinations: a case study. Journal Police Science & Administration, 14 (4), 328–333.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Elaad E., and Schachar, E., (1985), Polygraph field validity. Polygraph, 14 (3), 217–223.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fanelli D. (2009), How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLOS ONE 4(5) e5738. Bibcode:2009PLo-SO...4.5738F. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738. PMC 2685008. PMID 19478950.10.1371/journal.pone.0005738268500819478950
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ginton A., (1985), A Built-In Validity in Polygraph Field Examinations. in: IDENTA 85 – An International Conference held in Jerusalem Israel in 1985: Anti-terrorism, Forensic Science, Psychology in Police Investigations, 167–179, A Book of proceeding. First Published, 1985 Imprint Routledge. 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429036590.10.4324/9780429036590
]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 (3), 204–217
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ginton A., (2013, Sept), Adaptive Polygraph. [Paper Presentation]. The annual meeting of the American Polygraph Association, Orlando, FL. USA.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ginton A., (2019), Essentials of the Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength; A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Comparison Question Test (CQT) A detailed outline version. European Polygraph, 13 (4), 181–201. DOI: 10.2478/ep-2019-0013.10.2478/ep-2019-0013
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ginton A., Daie N., Elaad E., and Ben-Shakhar G., (1982), A method for evaluating the use of the polygraph in a real-life situation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67 (2), 131.10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.131
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gustafson L.A., & Orne M.T., (1963), Effects of heightened motivation on the detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47 (6), 408–411, https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041899.10.1037/h0041899
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gustafson L.A., & Orne M.T., (1964), The effects of task and method of stimulus presentation on the detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48, 383–387.10.1037/h0044000
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Guyatt G., Cairns J., Churchill D., et al. (1992), Evidence-Based Medicine: A New Approach to Teaching the Practice of Medicine, JAMA, 268 (17): 2420–2425.10.1001/jama.268.17.2420
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Horton R., (2015), Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma? The Lancet, 385 (9976).10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ioannidis J.P.A., (2005), Why Most Published Research Findings Are False? PLOS Med, 2 (8): e124.10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124118232716060722
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kleiner M., (2002), Physiological detection of deception in psychological perspectives: A theoretical proposal. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 127–182). Academic Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Krapohl D.J. & Goodson W., (2015), Decision accuracy for the Relevant-Irrelevant screening test: Influence of an algorithm in human decision-making. European Poly-graph 9 (4), 189–208.10.1515/ep-2015-0007
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Krapohl D.J. & Rosales T., (2014), Decision accuracy for the Relevant-Irrelevant screening test: A partial replication. Polygraph, 43 (1), 20–29.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Krapohl D.J., and Shaw P.K., (2015), Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice, Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.00005-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kugelmass S., Lieblich I., Ben-Ishai A., Opatowski A., & Kaplan M., (1968), Experimental evaluation of galvanic skin response and blood pressure change indices during criminal interrogation. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology & Police Science, 59 (4), 632–635. https://doi.org/10.2307/1141863.10.2307/1141863
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Larsen P.O., & von Ins M., (2010), The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics (2010) 84, 575–603, DOI 10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z.10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z290942620700371
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Langlois J.P., (2002), “Making a Diagnosis”. In: Mengel M.B., Holleman W. L., Fields S.A., (eds.) Fundamentals of Clinical Practice (2nd ed.). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publisher.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leach M.J., (2006), Evidence-based practice: A framework for clinical practice and research design. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 12 (5): 248–251.10.1111/j.1440-172X.2006.00587.x16942511
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lykken D.T., (1959), The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 285–388.10.1037/h0046060
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lykken D.T., (1960), The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44 (4), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044413.10.1037/h0044413
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mullen E.J., (2002, July), Evidence-Based Knowledge: Designs for Enhancing Practitioner Use of Research Findings (a bottom-up approach). [Paper Presentation]. The 4th International Conference on Evaluation for Practice, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/sospol/eval2002/EvidenceF2002.PDF.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019), Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.10.17226/2530331596559
]Search in Google Scholar
[
National Research Council (2003), The Polygraph and Lie Detection. Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10420.10.17226/10420
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nelson R. (2015), Appendix B: 2015 Update to the American Polygraph Association 2011 meta-analytic survey of validated polygraph techniques. In D. Krapohl and P. Shaw Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice. Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.09986-2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nelson R., Handler M. & Krapohl D. (2007, Sept), Development and validation of the Objective Scoring System, version 3. [Poster presentation]. The annual meeting of the American Polygraph Association, New Orleans, LA. USA.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nelson R., Handler M., Shaw P., Gougler M., Blalock B., Russell C., Cushman B. & Oelrich M., (2011), Using the Empirical Scoring System. Polygraph, 40, 67–78.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nelson R., Krapohl D. & 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, 185–215.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Olechno J., (2016), Individualized medicine vs. precision medicine. DDNews, 12,5.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Open Science Collaboration, (2015), Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349 (6251).10.1126/science.aac471626315443
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Orne M.T., Thackray R.I. & Paskewitz D.A., (1972), On the detection of deception, A model for the study of the physiological effects of psychological stimuli. In: N.S. Greenfield & R.A. Sternbach (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972, 743–785.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pashler H., Wagenmakers E.J., (2012), Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science. 7 (6). 528–530.10.1177/1745691612465253
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peng R., (2015), The reproducibility crisis in science: A statistical counterattack, Signifi cance, 12 (3), 30–32.10.1111/j.1740-9713.2015.00827.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sackett D.L., Rosenberg W.C., Muir Gray J.A., Haynes R.B., Richardson W.S., (1996), Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312, 71–72.10.1136/bmj.312.7023.7123497788555924
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Straus S.E., Glasziou P., Richardson W.S. & Haynes R.B. (2011), Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (4th ed.), Churchill Livingstone.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
The Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress –OTA- (1983), Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation.,
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Webb S., (2001), Some consideration on the validity of evidence-based practice in social work. British Journal of Social Work 31 (1), 57–79.10.1093/bjsw/31.1.57
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Youngstrom E.A., Choukas-Bradley S., Calhoun C.D., Jensen-Doss A., (2015), Clinical Guide to the Evidence-Based Assessment Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 2 (1).10.1016/j.cbpra.2013.12.005
]Search in Google Scholar
