Polygraph + EyeDetect® = 97-99% Outcome Confidence
A Great Argument for Using Lie Detection Test Results in Court.
In 1955, two scientists (Meehl & Rosen) proposed that if you could test someone with two independent lie detection tests on the same topic — and if that person could pass both tests — then you have greater confidence in the outcome of the two tests when they agree.
That concept was referred to as "successive hurdles" and referred to successive testing. This combination is truly the best lie detector test.
Successive hurdles only works if the two lie detection tests are independent, which means they measure different behaviours. Polygraph measures heart rate, blood pressure, skin conductance, and respiration activity. EyeDetect measures changes in cognitive load which have an involuntary impact on the eyes and reading behaviour.
For the first time in the history of lie detection, the successive hurdles model can be reliably used and trusted. Why? Because polygraph and EyeDetect are largely independent, and both have high rates of accuracy.
EyeDetect Station: 97-99% Outcome Confidence
If someone can pass a polygraph and an EyeDetect test on the same topic, then, as discussed by Meehl & Rosen, based on the statistical model called Bayes Theorem and the published accuracy of those technologies, there can be a 97 to 99% outcome confidence. That is a better outcome than the best lie detector test.
The successive hurdles argument has never been used with polygraph alone because it does not apply to using two successive polygraph tests.
However, with the advent of EyeDetect, and given that EyeDetect and polygraph have been shown in scientific lab studies to have greater than 85% accuracy, the statistical model based on Bayes Theorem now has applicability.
In conclusion, based on science and proven statistical models, we believe there's now a valid argument to allow lie detector test results in a court of law.