This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Polygraph article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Crime and Criminal Biography Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of crime and criminal biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Enforcement Top‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Skepticism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Physiology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article has not yet been associated with a particular area.

Johndoe2230 I don't know what you mean by "are 98% effective". Effectiveness is neither reliability nor validity, so I don't know what you mean. I cannot make heads or tails of it. How do you define effectiveness? How do you measure it? What are WP:RS for it? What you wrote is grammatically correct, but it does not have meaning. In plaintext: tell us where did you read that polygraph examinations are 98% effective. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Data and sources are so important! I also noticed that there are about 5 sources or so that were published within the last 5 years. There are great articles related to polygraphs and deception that are a little bit more updated. Everything else is from decades ago.. AmarillaAerre (talk) 14:32, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article says: "Marston's machine indicated a strong positive correlation between systolic blood pressure and lying." This sounds like a fact, while it only describes Marston's claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acdcx (talk • contribs) 12:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the lede it says "often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test"; why is this term incorrect? I'm not necessarily against it, but it's not very clear why it's incorrect. xRozuRozu (t • c) 00:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a pretty good explanation at the end of that paragraph. (The machine is detecting physiologic responses that may or may not be associated with a lie.) Larry Hockett (Talk) 00:42, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to the United States Supreme Court opinion in United States v. Scheffer, the article currently states that "The Supreme Court summarized their findings by stating that the use of polygraph was 'little better than could be obtained by the toss of a coin.'" This is incorrect: the quotation in the SCOTUS opinion is only used to illustrate the fact that there is no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable, with some studies finding that "polygraph tests assess truthfulness significantly less accurately".

The full quotation, in context, from the SCOTUS opinion is as follows:

Some studies have concluded that polygraph tests overall are accurate and reliable. ... Others have found that polygraph tests assess truthfulness significantly less accurately–that scientific field studies suggest the accuracy rate of the “control question technique” polygraph is “little better than could be obtained by the toss of a coin,” that is, 50 percent.

I therefore recommend that the sentence stating that "The Supreme Court summarized their findings by stating that the use of polygraph was 'little better than could be obtained by the toss of a coin'" is deleted from the article. ~2026-21475-55 (talk) 09:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more context may be better than removing context. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:14, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with thoughts of adding more context over outright deletion. Armeym ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]