Polygraph Testing
Lizor et al.
Bloomsburg University who are also authors of this paper. Two were from the ASL/English
Interpreting Program. One from the interpreting program was hearing and a nationally certified
interpreter through the RID, who also held the Specialty Certificate: Legal. The other was a deaf
faculty member who is natively proficient in ASL and who had prior experience working as a deaf
interpreter as well as experience in research with deaf participants in the criminal justice system.
The third research team member was a faculty member from the Criminal Justice Program, who
had no previous experience with deaf populations and did not know ASL. The study also utilized
a certified polygraph examiner as well as a nationally certified legal interpreter. This interpreter
was responsible for interpreting for the polygraph examiner during Phase II of the study only and
was not present during Phase I.
The mixed method design of this study is best described as triangulation in nature. In line
with Creswell (2005), both the qualitative and quantitative data were collected simultaneously in
this type of mixed methods research. For this article, the qualitative portion is the focus. Creswell
identified three characteristics of triangulation design as follows:
•
•
•
The mixed methods researcher gives equal priority to both quantitative and qualitative
data.
The mixed methods researcher collects both the quantitative and qualitative data
simultaneously during the study.
The mixed methods researcher compares the results from quantitative and qualitative
analyses to determine if the two databases yield similar or dissimilar results (p. 514).
A phenomenological qualitative research design was utilized, to allow for people to
describe their experiences related to a specific phenomenon (Polkinghorne, 2005; Shaw, Grbic, &
Franklin, 2004). Phenomenology examines a particular situation in which people were involved
and analyzes how the participants construct meaning from that situation and how that impacts the
world around them. All deaf participants in this study had prior experience utilizing ASL
interpreters, such as for medical appointments or staff meetings. However, the polygraph scenario
was a new experience to all the participants, and thus the phenomenon of focus.
As an addition to the qualitative phenomenological approach of the study, the research
team also examined how many participants completed the polygraph examination during Phase I
as compared to Phase II as part of the quantitative study. This quantitative information sheds light
on how the deaf participants performed in the study and is methodically tied to the qualitative
information from their polygraph test taking experiences. The research team acknowledges that
the participants undergoing the polygraph examination the second time may have a better chance
of completing it regardless of the provision of the interpreter. Yet the comments made by the deaf
participants could either confirm or deny the benefits of linguistic accessibility. If the qualitative
findings favor the provision of a certified legal interpreter, the research team will accept that the
interpreter serves as a variable that can improve the deaf participants’ chances of completing the
exam.
When scoring the polygraph charts, participants can have a No Significant Response
(NSR), a Significant Response (SR) or a No Opinion (NO). The NSR indicates that the person
passed the polygraph. A pass means that the scoring was a +3 or better in each column. A SR
means that the scoring was -3 or greater in one of the sub-columns. The NO response indicates
that there is not enough data to know if one passed or failed the polygraph examination. Examiners
score the charts themselves. All the tests are quality controlled, and depend on the type of
SASLJ, Vol. 2, No.1 – Spring/Summer 2018
9