LVA Without Consent

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
604 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Sep 11, 2008

News piece examines use of layered voice analysis during investigations, including its covert use.

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (GreenwoodSO)

  • I found more.

    Search for "Eriksson & Lacerda 2007" on yahoo and click the first result. It is a journal article entitled, "Charlatanry in forensic speech science."

    The authors conclude, "To sum up by saying that there is absolutely no scientific basis for the claims made by the LVA proponents is an understatement. The ideas on which the products are based is complete nonsense." Further, "No qualified speech scientist believes in this nonsense..."

    Spread the knowledge.

  • Thanks- we'll definitely check that out for possible inclusion in the next offering of the Ethics in LE course.

  • Independent university studies have been conducted that reveal the LVA as junk.

    Search for "FINAL REPORT CIFA CONTRACT FA 4814-04-0011" on yahoo to see a study hosted on a university website.

    "The findings generated by this study led to the conclusion the neither the CVSA nor the LVA were sensitive to the presence of deception or stress." p. 44

    Dismiss this pseudoscience!

  • We posted these videos for discussion in a Lander University Ethics in Criminal Justice course, so the debatable nature of the science was a major part of the discussion. We also talked about some of the similar science (and problems) attendant to traditional polygraph testing. Thanks for your comment, especially the reference to the reports (I had not seen the jail setting research- thanks again).

see all

All Comments (5)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I too have seen the 98% number kicked around in the CJ world, at which any fair minded person would have to scoff at least a little. As a cop, I've used polys with great success dozens and dozens of times, but with a keen understanding of their very real limitations. In my estimation they are just another interview/interrogation tool, which can be effective when used properly (within the limits of their capabilities). We tell our students very plainly- the term "lie detector" just isn't viable.

  • The American Psychological Association: "There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological reactions is unique to deception."

  • By the way, good job teaching students about the scientific failings of lie detectors. I always thought it was interesting that in Psychology text books that the polygraph was slated to have about 60% accuracy. In Criminal Justice texts, the same number that polygraphers themselves parrot - 98% - is represented.

    Who are we to believe? Scientists who study human behavior under strict academic scrutiny, or people with self serving interests?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more