Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback

, Volume 34, Issue 3, pp 197–208 | Cite as

Countering Countermeasures in the Concealed Information Test Using Covert Respiration Measures



The effects of physical and mental countermeasures on the accuracy of the concealed information test (CIT) were examined in a mock crime experiment with 64 participants. To combat countermeasures, two covert respiration measures, hidden in the seat and back of the examination chair, were used in addition to the standard physiological measures (SCR, FPWL, RLL). Some guilty participants were trained to use either physical or mental countermeasures and apply them to distort the outcomes of the CIT. In the second phase of the experiment participants were detached from the standard polygraph devices and examined solely with the two covert measures. Results indicated that physical countermeasures lowered SCR accuracy but had a relatively small effect on the other standard measures. On the other hand, SCR was relatively resistant to mental countermeasures. Both covert measures were resistant to physical countermeasures in the polygraph phase. When the standard devices were removed, the covert seat measure was effective in the no countermeasure and in the mental countermeasure conditions but not when physical countermeasures were applied. The back measure was entirely ineffective.


Guilty knowledge test Concealed information test Polygraph Psychophysiological detection of information Unobtrusive respiration measures Respiration Skin conductance Finger pulse volume 



We would like to thank Eitan Cohen and Shira Mizrachi for their help in the data collection.


  1. Ambach, W., Stark, R., Peper, M., & Vaitl, D. (2008). An interfering Go/No-go task does not affect accuracy in a concealed information test. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 68, 6–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamber, D. (1975). The area under the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating characteristic graph. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12, 378–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1977). A further study of the dichotomization theory in detection of information. Psychophysiology, 14, 408–413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Shakhar, G. (2002). A critical review of the control question test (CQT). In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 103–126). San Diego: Academic press.Google Scholar
  5. Ben-Shakhar, G., Bar-Hillel, M., & Kremnitzer, M. (2002). Trial by the polygraph: Reconsidering the use of the guilty knowledge technique in court. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 527–541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Dolev, K. (1996). Psychophysiological detection through the guilty knowledge technique: Effects of mental countermeasures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 273–281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Elaad, E. (2002). Effects of questions’ repetition and variation on the efficiency of the Guilty Knowledge Test: A reexamination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 972–977.Google Scholar
  8. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Elaad, E. (2003). The validity of psychophysiological detection of information with the Guilty Knowledge Test: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 131–151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Furedy, J. J. (1990). Theories and applications in the detection of deception. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Bradley, M. M. (2009). Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion. Psychophysiology, 46, 1–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ekman, P. (2001). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  12. Elaad, E. (2009). Effects of context and state of guilt on the detection of concealed crime information. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 71, 225–234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1989). Effects of motivation and verbal response type on psychophysiological detection of information. Psychophysiology, 26, 442–451.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). Effects of mental countermeasures on psychophysiological detection in the Guilty Knowledge Test. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 11(2), 99–108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1997). Effects of item repetitions and variations on the efficiency of the Guilty Knowledge Test. Psychophysiology, 34, 587–596.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2006). Finger pulse waveform length in the detection of concealed information. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 61, 226–234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Elaad, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2008). Covert respiration measures for the detection of concealed information. Biological Psychology, 77, 284–291.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elaad, E., Ginton, A., & Jungman, N. (1992). Detection measures in real-life criminal Guilty Knowledge Tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 757–767.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gamer, M., Godert, H. W., Keth, A., Rill, H. G., & Vossel, G. (2008). Electrodermal and phasic heart rate responses in the Guilty Action Test: Comparing guilty examinees to informed and uninformed innocents. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 69, 61–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gronau, N., Ben-Shakhar, G., & Cohen, A. (2005). Behavioral and physiological measures in the detection of concealed information. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 147–158.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hira, S., & Furumitsu, I. (2002). Polygraphic examinations in Japan: Application of the Guilty Knowledge Test in forensic investigations. International journal of Police Science & Management, 4, 16–27.Google Scholar
  23. Honts, C. R., Devitt, M. K., Winbush, M., & Kircher, J. C. (1996). Mental and physical countermeasures reduce the accuracy of the concealed knowledge test. Psychophysiology, 33, 84–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iani, C., Gopher, D., & Lavie, P. (2004). Effects of task difficulty and invested mental effort on peripheral vasoconstriction. Psychophysiology, 41, 789–798.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lacey, J. I. (1967). Somatic response patterning and stress: Some revisions of activation theory. In M. H. Appley & R. Trumbull (Eds.), Psychological stress: Issues in research (pp. 14–44). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  26. Larson, J. A. (1932). Lying and its detection: A study of deception and deception tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lykken, D. T. (1959). The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 385–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lykken, D. T. (1960). The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 258–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lykken, D. T. (1974). Psychology and the lie detection industry. American Psychologist, 29, 225–239.Google Scholar
  30. Lykken, D. T. (1998). A Tremor in the blood. Uses and abuses of the lie detector (Second edition ed.). New York: Plenum Trade.Google Scholar
  31. Marston, W. M. (1938). The lie detector test. New York: Smith.Google Scholar
  32. Nakayama, M. (2002). Practical use of the concealed information test for criminal investigation in Japan. In M. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 49–86). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  33. 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.Google Scholar
  34. Raskin, D. C. (1989). Polygraph techniques for the detection of deception. In D. C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence (pp. 247–296). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Reid, J. E., & Inbau, F. E. (1977). Truth and deception: The polygraph (“lie detector”) technique (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
  36. Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Winograd, M., Lui, M. A., Vandenboom, C., & Chedid, E. (2008). The complex trial protocol (CTP): A new, countermeasure-resistant, accurate P300-based method for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 45, 906–919.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vandenbosch, K., Verschuere, B., Crombez, G., & De Clercq, A. (2009). The validity of finger pulse line length for the detection of concealed information. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 71, 118–123.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Verschuere, B., Crombez, G., De Clercq, A., & Koster, E. (2004). Autonomic and behavioral responding to concealed information: Differentiating defensive and orienting responses. Psychophysiology, 41, 461–466.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vossel, G., Gamer, M., Godert, H. W., & Rill, H. G. (2003). The efficiency of detecting concealed information with the Guilty Knowledge Test: A comparison of different physiological variables and non-physiological methods of credibility assessment using signal detection theory. Journal of Psychophysiology, 17, 184. Abstract.Google Scholar
  40. Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ariel University CenterArielIsrael
  2. 2.The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations