In a paragraph of not more than 100 words, say what are the various ways in which this machine can be used, and what are the objections to its use.
Lie detector
A new form of lie detector that works by voice analysis and which can be
used without a subject’s knowledge has been introduced in Britain. The
unit is already widely employed by the police and private industry in the US,
and some of its applications there raise serious worries about its potential
here. The Dektor psychological stress analyser (PSE) is used by private
industry for pre-employment screening, investigating thefts, and even periodic
staff checks. Although at least 600 of the devices are used in the US, there
are apparently only three in Britain. Burns International Security Services
showed its PSE at the International Fire and Security Exhibition in London last
week. Philip Hicks, assistant manager of Burns’ Electron Division and the
Burns official trained to use the PSE, said that one of the other two units was
being employed by a private firm for pre-employment checks.
In addition to
the normally understood voice generation mechanisms - vibrations of the vocal
chords and resonance of cavities inside the head - there is a third component
caused by vibration of the muscles inside the mouth and throat. Normally, but
not under stress, these voluntary muscles vibrate at 8-12 Hz, and this adds a
clearly noticeable frequency-modulated component to the voice. The PSE works by
analysing this infrasonic FM component. Dektor claims that the muscle
tightening occurs very quickly, and can change from one word to the next, so
that it is possible to pick out a word or phrase that caused stress.
Dektor
emphasises that the device shows only stress, not dishonesty. Three steps are
suggested to overcome this difficulty. First, the subject is supposed to see a
full list of the questions in advance. Second, there are ‘neutral’
questions and one to which the subject is specifically asked to lie. Third, if
an individual shows stress on a vital question (such as Have you stolen more
than £100 in the last six months?), then additional questions must be
asked to ensure that this does not reflect an earlier theft or the
subject’s knowledge of someone else responsible.
The standard report
recommended by Dektor is simply the statement ‘After careful analysis, it
is the opinion of this Examiner that the Subject’s chart did contain
specific reaction, indicative of deception, to the relevant questions listed
below.’ And Hicks admitted that if a person showed stress and Hicks was
unable to ascertain just what caused the stress, he would assume that the
stress was ‘indicative of deception’.
In the US, the device is
used for pre-employment interviews, with questions such as ‘Have you used
marihuana?’ and for monthly checks with branch managers, asking questions
like ‘Do you suspect any present employees of cheating the company?’-
which at least prevents a manager from setting his own pace to investigate
possibly suspicious behaviour. Finally, US insurance investigators are now
using the PSE. They need not carry it with them - only tape record the
interview, usually with the permission of the unsuspecting claimant. Not only
does an assessor go through the claim form to look for false claims (a
questionable practice, because a person is just as likely to stress over being
reminded of a lost or damaged object as to lying), but he also offers less
money than requested. The claimant’s response can, apparently, be analysed
to show if he is, in fact, likely to eventually accept.
The potential
application of the PSE in Britain is extremely disquieting, especially as there
seems no law to prevent its use. The most serious problem is that its primary
application will be in situations where people may not object - such as
pre-employment interviews. But it can also be used to probe a whole range of
personal issues totally unrelated to job - union and political affiliations,
for example. And, of course, the PSE can be used without the subject even
knowing; its inventors analysed the televised Watergate hearings and told the
press who they thought was lying. Finally, the device is not foolproof but
depends on the skill of the investigator, who receives only a one-week course
from Dektor.
In the US, where lie detectors of all sorts are much more
widely used, Senator Sam J. Ervin has introduced a bill to virtually prohibit
their use by private companies. There may be a privacy bill from the UK
government this summer, and hopefully it will include the use of lie detectors.
In the interim, trade unions and consumer groups should prevent their use
before they become widespread.
(Article by Joseph Hanlon in New Scientist)
Then press this button to check your answer: