Suppr超能文献

有罪行为测试是否能够区分有罪的参与者和知情的无辜者?再检验。

Does the Guilty Actions Test allow for differentiating guilty participants from informed innocents? A re-examination.

机构信息

Department of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Psychophysiol. 2010 Apr;76(1):19-24. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.01.009. Epub 2010 Jan 29.

Abstract

The Guilty Actions Test (GAT) is a scientifically validated technique of forensic psychophysiology that allows for the detection of concealed memories. However, it is still debated whether it is better suited for differentiating guilty from informed innocent examinees than the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT). Participants of the current study either committed a mock crime or they acquired crime related knowledge by indirectly witnessing it on video. A subsequent polygraph test was carried out using the passive GKT or the active GAT question wording. Neither electrodermal, nor respiratory or heart rate responses were found to differ as a function of truth status or questioning technique. Results indicate that either questioning technique yields high validity coefficients in detecting crime related knowledge. Neither the GKT nor the GAT seems to allow for a valid differentiation of guilty participants and informed innocents when crime related knowledge is deeply encoded and participants are motivated to pass the test.

摘要

犯罪行为测试(GAT)是一种经过科学验证的法医心理生理学技术,可用于检测隐藏的记忆。然而,它是否比有罪知识测试(GKT)更适合区分有罪和知情的无辜受检者,这仍然存在争议。当前研究的参与者要么犯下模拟犯罪,要么通过间接观看视频获得与犯罪有关的知识。随后使用被动 GKT 或主动 GAT 问题措辞进行测谎测试。无论作为真实状态还是询问技术的函数,都没有发现皮肤电、呼吸或心率反应存在差异。结果表明,无论哪种询问技术在检测与犯罪相关的知识方面都能产生较高的有效性系数。当与犯罪相关的知识被深度编码并且参与者有动机通过测试时,GKT 和 GAT 似乎都不能有效地区分有罪参与者和知情的无辜者。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验