|
Abstract: This article responds to a paper by Joseph Gastwirth and how his article concerns an increasingly important issue affecting public policy – the estimation of error rates in tests for such things as diseases, deception and drugs. While not addressing the technical aspects of Gastwirth’s analysis, the author is drawn to his discussion of the admissibility of polygraph evidence. He elaborates on Giastwirth’s description of the standards for admissibility of such evidence. Then considers the extent to which his analysis might be brought to bear on the legal question of the admissibility of polygraph evidence. The author concludes that Gastwirth’s paper should not do much to affect the accretion of legal doctrine on polygraph evidence.
|