POLYGRAPHY AS A TOOL FOR FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION IN CASES OF WORKPLACE HARASSMENT: ADVANCES AND ETHICAL CONCERNS

Nisha Patel

doi:10.29121/digisecforensics.v2.i2.2025.66

Authors

Nisha Patel Research Scholar, Bharti Vishwavidyalaya, Durg

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/digisecforensics.v2.i2.2025.66

Keywords:

Polygraphy, Forensic Psychology, Workplace Harassment, Psychological Trauma, Truth Verification, Psychophysiological Assessment, Ethical Issues

Abstract

From a conventional technique for detecting lies, polygraphy has developed into an important psychophysiological instrument for forensic psychological analysis. The use of polygraphy in evaluating psychological trauma and confirming veracity in workplace harassment cases is examined in this review. The study looks at the main polygraph methods, their theoretical underpinnings, and how they can be combined with clinical and psychometric tests to improve the accuracy of forensic analyses. According to the literature currently in publication, polygraph tests offer important insights into emotional arousal, trauma recall, and the veracity of witness or victim statements when used ethically and in combination with other psychological tests. However, issues with legal admissibility, examiner bias, and the possibility of victim re-traumatization make careful, trauma-informed application necessary. According to the review's findings, polygraphy is most effective when used in conjunction with conventional psychological and investigative evaluations to help comprehend the intricate relationships between trauma, emotion, and the truth in cases of workplace harassment.

References

Ben-Shakhar, G., and Elaad, E. (2003). The Validity of Psychophysiological Detection of Information with the Guilty Knowledge Test: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 131–151. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.131 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.131

Ben-Shakhar, G., and Furedy, J. J. (1990). Theories and Applications in the Detection of Deception: A Psychophysiological and International Perspective. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3282-7

Handler, M., Honts, C. R., and Krapohl, D. J. (2010). Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice. Elsevier Academic Press.

Iacono, W. G. (2008). Effective Policing: Understanding how Polygraph Tests work and how they can fail. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(10), 1295–1308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808321529 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808321529

Kleinmuntz, B., and Szucko, J. J. (1984). Lie Detection and the Polygraph: A Historical Review. American Psychologist, 39(7), 766–776. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.7.766 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.39.7.766

Meijer, E. H., Verschuere, B., and Ben-Shakhar, G. (2018). Psychophysiological Detection of Concealed Information: Current Status and Future Directions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3370 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3370

Meijer, E. H., Verschuere, B., Gamer, M., Merckelbach, H., and Ben-Shakhar, G. (2016). Deception Detection with Behavioral, Autonomic, and Neural Measures: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1102. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12609

National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and Lie Detection. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/10420

Raskin, D. C., Honts, C. R., and Kircher, J. C. (2014). Credibility Assessment: Scientific Research and Applications. Academic Press.

Verschoor, J. A., and Ben-Shakhar, G. (2020). Individual Differences and the validity of the Concealed Information Test: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00134 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00134

Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities (2nd ed.). Wiley.