Lie Detector Services Near Me

EyeDetect is the world’s first technology to accurately detect lies in 15 to 30 minutes by analysing eye behaviour. It’s also cost-effective, efficient, and secure.

First conceived in 2002, it’s the first ocular-motor deception detection test. The same scientists that invented the computerized polygraph in 1991 also developed EyeDetect. In September 2013, the technology was given the brand name “EyeDetect.”

EyeDetect is a new way for organizations to manage risk and create workplace integrity. It helps law enforcement agencies and governments find liars. Ultimately, it helps protect countries, corporations and communities from corruption, fraud, and threats.

EyeDetect+ is the convergence of standard EyeDetect equipment + polygraph sensors and testing techniques. It’s the world’s first automated polygraph. It makes lie detection testing impartial, accurate and less intrusive than a traditional polygraph. It assesses credibility by measuring, recording, and analysing involuntary eye behaviours and physiological changes.

EyeDetect+ is an automated polygraph. As such, it is:

Impartial — EyeDetect equipment performs test administration and an advanced algorithm analyses and scores the test data reliably (100% consistently). A traditional polygraph exam is scored by a human, who can potentially make mistakes.

Accurate — The testing protocol combines measuring and recording physiological changes (polygraph) and oculomotor measures (EyeDetect) with test questioning techniques into a single test. It uses the most diagnostic data to calculate a credibility score.

Less intrusive — It replaces the most intrusive polygraph sensor, the blood pressure arm cuff, with two small wrist sensors. Also, a strain gauge(s) is used instead of a pneumograph. And testing time is 40 minutes or less, causing less examinee fatigue.

These features make EyeDetect+ one of the most comprehensive, reliably accurate and effective lie detectors ever invented.

In April 2020, Dr Andrew Potts published the results of a lab study conducted at the University of Utah with a new multi-issue comparison test (MCT) protocol. In that study, EyeDetect achieved two amazing milestones: (1) 88% accuracy and (2) the capability of scoring up to 4 relevant issues in a single test.

In the European Polygraph Journal (Dec. 2016), Dr John Kircher and Dr David Raskin reported that when used for screening tests, EyeDetect is 88% accurate (based on field studies).

As an anecdotal example, Converus tested 66 polygraph examiners attending the American Polygraph Association (APA) seminar in Baltimore in 2016 with an EyeDetect number test. Of the 66 tests administered, EyeDetect determined the correct number 63 times. That is an accuracy rate of 95.5%. Tests were administered in English, Spanish and Arabic. Note: The probability of randomly guessing the correct number would be 1 of 8 or 12.5%.

All tests have error rates. For every 100 guilty or 100 innocent people tested, EyeDetect accurately classifies 88 people in screening tests and 90 in diagnostic tests. That means it inaccurately classifies 12 out of 100 people in screening tests and 10 out of 100 in diagnostic testing.

The Converus Science Team continues to look for ways to improve accuracy. Data from new lab and field studies help optimize the algorithm to increase overall accuracy.

In June 2021, Dr John Kircher published the results of two lab studies on a Hybrid Multi-Issue Comparison Test (MCT) protocol and a Hybrid Directed Lie Comparison (DLC) Test. The term “hybrid” refers to a combination of ocular-motor and polygraph physiology measures and question formats. In those studies, EyeDetect achieved two milestones: (1) 88% accuracy for the Hybrid DLC and (2) 91% accuracy for the Hybrid MCT. The DLC format is used for specific issue tests (investigations primarily) and the MCT format is used for screening tests.

No, they are different solutions. EyeDetect+ is an automated polygraph that meets the needs of customers who are required to use polygraph for deception detection. The original EyeDetect system was released in 2014 and filled the need for a fast, accurate, affordable, non-invasive, or noncontact lie detection test. It continues to fill this need. EyeDetect detects deception by tracking involuntary changes in eye and reading behaviour. More than 600 customers worldwide currently use EyeDetect for screening tests and investigative needs.

EyeDetect+ was developed for customers that require polygraph or where the law defines “lie detector” as polygraph. EyeDetect+ combines the measurement and scoring of diagnostic eye behaviours with the physiological activities of polygraph. It should meet the needs of polygraph examiners who monitor and score the same physiological activity.

Any organization that chooses to use polygraph or is required by law to screen job candidates, test current employees, or to conduct investigations. EyeDetect+ provides a way to conduct the same testing with an automated, faster process and a less intrusive test.

In 2002, John C. Kircher and his colleague, Doug Hacker, an educational psychologist with expertise in the psychology of reading, first discussed whether changes in eye movements and pupil size while reading and answering questions about a crime would reveal deception.

They wondered: “Would changes in cognitive load affect the eye in such a way that we can capture those changes and be as accurate as the polygraph in predicting whether or not someone is being deceptive?” At that time, the ocular-motor deception test (ODT) was born — later to be branded as EyeDetect.

In 2003, Kircher and Hacker, along with other cognitive scientists, Anne Cook and Dan Woltz, formed the Converus Science Team. They worked together to produce and validate this new lie detector. Dr David C. Raskin joined the science team in 2009.

Kircher and Raskin are internationally known and highly respected scientists in the polygraph community. They frequently consult and lecture on the subject, as well as provide guidance to the polygraph community, government agencies, legislatures, and the courts.

They first published research on polygraph in the 1970s and then spent 10 years developing the software/hardware for the world’s first computerized polygraph system, which they marketed in 1991. They recognized the need to find new lie detectors that could complement the polygraph because the polygraph primarily measures emotional responses, not concealed knowledge.

In April 2014, after more than 10 years fine-tuning the technology, EyeDetect was introduced to the market.

Dr Kircher embarked in 2020 to research and develop a new technology and testing protocol that combined ocular-motor testing methods and technology with existing polygraph solutions. This was partially done in response to requests from customers around the world where policy or government regulation requires the use of polygraph in deception detection testing.

The original premise was to determine the feasibility of combining the two most accurate lie detectors in the world into one solution—EyeDetect and polygraph.

After a lengthy but successful R&D process, Dr Kircher and his team developed EyeDetect+, the world’s first automated polygraph.

As the research began, Dr Kircher felt compelled find a solution with characteristics that had made EyeDetect appealing:

• Less invasive for the examinee
• Accurate
• Reliable (consistent in obtaining high levels of accuracy

One of the most uncomfortable (invasive) components of a polygraph examination is the blood pressure cuff. It is used to measure and record blood pressure changes to help render a decision on the examinee’s truthfulness. Research shows there is a correlation between blood pressure changes and deception.

The duration of a polygraph exam is affected by the blood pressure cuff used. It must be deflated about every 5 minutes to restore circulation to the examinee’s arm. Otherwise, examinees can become distracted by the pain of the pressure, or tingling of the fingers or, in some cases, broken blood vessels. For this reason, the examiner allows the examinee many rest periods during a polygraph exam to alleviate the discomfort.

Dr Kircher analysed a variety of alternative technologies to eliminate the blood pressure cuff. One such method considered was Pulse Transit Time (PTT). PTT is defined as the time it takes a pulse wave to travel from the heart to the finger. Dr Andrea Webb looked at PTT in a study for her master’s thesis in 2006. In various other studies, PTT was shown to vary inversely with changes in blood pressure (Geddes et al., 1981; Obrist et al., 1978; Obrist et al., 1979).

By eliminating the blood pressure cuff, the EyeDetect+ test includes more questions than a traditional polygraph. More questions produce more measurements of physiological reactions, and the additional measurements improve the reliability and accuracy of the test.

As mentioned, validity (accuracy) and reliability were also an important consideration in developing a new solution. EyeDetect+ and EyeDetect) rely on computer-based decision models and algorithms and, therefore, reliability is 100%. Why? The systematic and computerized application of the same decision rules to analyse testing data will yield reliable (consistent) results. The two factors were important considerations during Dr Kircher’s research and development.

EyeDetect+ (and EyeDetect) tests are almost completely automated. As a result, test validity does not depend on the examiner to properly interpret physiological recordings. Because the test presentation and scoring are computerized, the examinee and examiner cannot influence the test outcome.

The Converus Science Team, led by Dr John Kircher, has published 19 articles or reports about the technology underlying EyeDetect®. In the research, EyeDetect is referred to as an ocular-motor deception test (ODT). Currently, there are 10 peer-reviewed research articles on EyeDetect.

EyeDetect uses a statistical method called a logistic regression equation to analyse eye behaviours and reading data. The data is measured and recorded by a high-definition camera that measures changes in pupil diameter and eye movements during a question-and-answer session with an examinee.

The test is automated and administered by a computer. After analysing the examinee’s responses and the eye behaviour data, a score is calculated, which is called the Converus Credibility Score.

Variables measured and recorded during the test include pupil dilation, question response accuracy, question response time, gaze fixation, blink rates, reading behaviour, and some other variables. The purpose for analysing various independent variables is to obtain a biologically reasonable answer to describe the test result: credible or deceptive.

The score used by EyeDetect intends to “maximize the likelihood” of the categorization of deceptive or credible. A Converus Credibility Score between 1 and 49 indicates deception. A score between 50 and 99 indicates credibility.

EyeDetect uses a statistical formula and gives a range of test scores. The closer the Credibility score is to 1, the likelihood of deception is maximized. The closer the score is to 99, the likelihood of credibility is maximized. If a person gets a Converus Credibility Score of 51, 52, 53, etc., the probability of credibility is minimal.

After an EyeDetect test is taken and scored, a test report is available in a web-based Dashboard within a few minutes. Any authorized person can access test reports through a Web browser, in any location, on any device. Decision makers can quickly see each person’s name, date/time, test taken and credibility score within minutes of test completion.

In October 2009, a company called Credibility Assessment Technologies LLC was created to bring to market this new lie detector. In September 2013, the technology was given the brand name “EyeDetect.”

On December 12, 2013, the company was officially renamed Converus, Inc. The name Converus is derived from two Latin words: con (meaning “with”) and verus (meaning “truth”). The company is currently headquartered in Lehi, Utah, USA.

EyeDetect was admitted as evidence (Daubert motion) in a criminal sexual assault case in the 8th District Judicial Court, County of Taos, New Mexico. The trial was held May 2018. Mark Handler of Converus was the expert witness. The case was State of New Mexico (plaintiff) vs. John Rael (defendant) with Judge – Jeff F. McElroy.