Polygraph tests are scientifically unreliable. Here's why the Trump administration is using them anyway.
The executive order precipitated immense pushback, both from members of Reagen's Cabinet and from members of Congress. Then-Secretary of State George Shultz
I led
Advertisement
Polygraph tests measure autonomic nervous system reactions and how anxious a person is in response to a set of structured questions. Undermining the entire purpose of the tests is that a person's anxiety is not directly associated with their truthfulness. There is no unique psychophysical reaction associated with deception. Our OTA conclusions have stood the test of time and have been corroborated by subsequent comprehensive analyses, including
Although the administration scaled back its ambitions regarding use of the tests in the wake of the 1983 controversy, government agencies have continued to use the tests. One example of the danger of relying on polygraph testing appears in the case of Aldrich Ames. A CIA agent, Ames was arrested in 1994 for selling information to the Soviets that comprised the entire US intelligence operation in the Soviet Union. He passed several polygraph tests.
But if polygraph tests are not accurate, why are they still used? Perhaps the key reason for their continued use is to make a powerful statement about the government's concern with how information is handled by those with access to classified information or, in some cases, information that would be politically inconvenient to be made public.
Even if polygraph tests are not accurate, the threat of a test can serve as a deterrent or as an interrogation tool to elicit admissions. The danger, however, is that the government fails to detect lies that damage national security and it opens the door to misidentifying truthful individuals whose anxiety is provoked by the test.
Advertisement
All of us, inside and outside of government, know far more about the flaws of polygraph testing today than we did in 1983, but no one in government seems to care. That the Trump administration, which has expressed hostility to the scientific community, should embrace a technology that is regarded by reputable researchers as pseudo-scientific at best is not surprising. Congress has diminished capacity to understand and evaluate technology. As well, we do not have a figure such as Shultz, ready to put his job on the line to defend the integrity and professionalism of his federal employees and their critical work. The loss is not just for government workers, but for all of us who care about the work of government.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge Orders Trump to 'Stop Violating the Law!' Already
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan on Monday issued an opinion for our times, ordering the Trump administration 'to stop violating the law!' Specifically, the Clinton-appointed judge ruled that Trump's Office of Management and Budget broke the law by taking down the public apportionment website where, under a 2022 law that Congress made permanent in 2023, it's mandated to report executive decisions on federal spending within two business days. The administration removed the website in March, and, soon after, OMB Director Russell Vought sent a letter to lawmakers saying the office decided to flout Congress and scrap the database due to the purportedly 'sensitive,' 'pre-decisional,' and 'deliberative' nature of the information it is required to reveal. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and Protect Democracy—watchdog organizations that rely on the OMB database—challenged the move, and Sullivan on Monday issued a partial summary judgment ordering that the administration comply with the law and bring back the website. According to Sullivan, Trump and Vought relied on 'an extravagant and unsupported theory of presidential power' to 'claim that their apportionment decisions—which are legally binding and result in the actual spending of public funds—cannot be publicly disclosed because they are not final decisions about how to administer the spending of public funds.' While the Trump administration argued that the 2022 law encroaches on the executive branch's authority, its objections amount to 'a policy disagreement' with no 'constitutional foundation,' Sullivan wrote. 'Defendants are complaining about the extra work the 2022 and 2023 Acts require. This is a management issue; not a constitutional one,' he wrote. And the fact that the office had previously maintained the database for nearly three years 'further diminish[es] any argument that complying with the disclosure requirement is overly cumbersome or places an impossible burden.' 'The law is clear,' said Sullivan: 'Congress has sweeping authority to require public disclosure of how the Executive Branch is apportioning the funds appropriated by Congress,' and 'there is nothing unconstitutional about Congress requiring the Executive Branch to inform the public of how it is apportioning the public's money. Defendants are therefore required to stop violating the law!'
Chicago Tribune
35 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Gov. JB Pritzker joins letter demanding release of federal education funding, with billions still in limbo
Gov. JB Pritzker signed a letter with 17 other Democratic governors Thursday, calling on the Trump administration to release nearly $7 billion in withheld federal education grants. The grants, already appropriated by Congress, were abruptly frozen the day before they were set to be disbursed July 1. The paused funding included $241.8 million for Illinois schools and community colleges, supporting a wide range of programs including English-language instruction and migrant education. The White House initially said the funds were under review because they were being used to advance 'a radical left-wing agenda.' 'The U.S. Department of Education's failure to distribute these funds is unacceptable,' the letter said. 'It disrupts school operations, undermines student services, and violates the Department's obligation to administer funding in a timely and responsible manner.' On Friday, the White House's Office of Management and Budget said it had completed its review of one of the grants, releasing $1.3 billion for after-school programs. That still leaves billions of funding in limbo as schools scramble to set their budgets for the upcoming school year. A coalition of 24 states including Illinois and the District of Columbia had sued the Trump administration July 14, accusing officials of illegally withholding the already-approved funds. 'The Trump administration is not only openly flouting the law, they are abandoning their responsibility to our students,' Pritzker said in a statement Thursday. 'This unprecedented and irresponsible withholding of lawful, bipartisan funding will force cuts to critical programs and hold back the next generation from reaching their full potential.' In Illinois, the impacted grants include $75.6 million for teacher training and professional development, $30.4 million for English learners, $56.6 million for student support and school upgrades, $1.9 million for migrant education, $20 million for adult education and $3 million for adult English learners and civics education. The absence of funding has 'caused unnecessary chaos for schools,' who rely on the allocations to support students and low-income families, according to the letter. 'This delay is arbitrary, unprecedented, and indefensible,' the letter said. The letter was addressed to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought. Along with Pritzker, it was signed by the governors from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Maine, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin.
Buzz Feed
35 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
Brazil's Message To The American People Is Going Super Viral
Brazil's former president Jair Bolsonaro is on trial for allegedly attempting to overturn his 2022 election loss with a coup plot. He faces up to 40 years in prison if convicted. After Bolsonaro lost the election, his supporters stormed Brazil's Congress, Supreme Court, and presidential palace. Sound familiar? It's kind of like Brazil's version of January 6. Sooo, Brazil's Supreme Court has raided Bolsinaro's home, put him on an ankle monitor, and banned him from social media and foreign contacts. Meeeeeanwhile, Trump has been defending Bolsonaro on TruthSocial, posting a letter saying, "I'll be watching the WITCH HUNT of Jair Bolsonaro, his family, and thousands of his supporters, very closely. The only Trial that should be happening is a Trial by the Voters of Brazil — It's called an Election. LEAVE BOLSONARO ALONE!" Trump also posted a letter to current Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, threatening to impose a 50% tariff on Brazilian goods and calling the trial of Bolsonaro a "Witch Hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!" "I want to say something to the American people: If Trump was Brazilian and if he did what happened at Capitol Hill, he'd also be on trial in Brazil. And possibly he would have violated the Constitution. According to justice, he would also be arrested if he had done that here in Brazil." People in the replies are saying some sort of version of this: "America is not a serious country anymore." This person commented, "We're a joke to the rest of the planet. We're like the parent in the grocery store who will never discipline their child who is screaming and throwing literal shit at other customers." Another person shared this picture: And this person asked, "Can we deport trump to Brazil and put him in trial there instead?"
