Opinion ID: 2623542
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Testability.

Text: {19} We first address whether the polygraph examination can be tested, and if so, whether it has been tested. Id.; see also Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593, 113 S.Ct. 2786. Scientific methodology today is based on generating hypotheses and testing them to see if they can be falsified; indeed, this methodology is what distinguishes science from other fields of human inquiry. Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593, 113 S.Ct. 2786 (quoting authority omitted). Applying this factor to polygraph examinations, the district court concluded: Polygraph test results and the conclusions derived from them are not based upon an overarching theory. To the extent it is merely argued that there is a hypothesis that the test reliably detects deception, that hypothesis has not been subjected to field research. The existing laboratory research, given the problems described [in the Findings of Fact], is woefully inadequate to support admissibility in court in real life contexts. In reviewing the district court's conclusion, we must determine whether a testable hypothesis has been generated for the control question polygraph, and if so, whether that hypothesis has in fact been tested. {20} The hypothesis of the polygraph examination was discussed thoroughly in the NAS Report, which notes that a well-supported theory can provide confidence the polygraph can be accurate when used in novel situations and with different examinees. NAS Report, supra, at 66. Also, a theory is essential to providing confidence the polygraph will work well despite efforts by examinees to beat the polygraph through the use of various countermeasures. Id. Finally, [a] solid theoretical and scientific base is also valuable for improving [the polygraph] test because it can identify the most serious threats to the test's validity and the kinds of experiments that need to be conducted to assess such threats. Id. at 69. {21} The NAS Report notes that [a]ccording to contemporary theories of polygraph questioning, individuals who are being deceptive or truthful in responding to relevant questions show different patterns of physiological response when their reactions to relevant and comparison questions are compared. Id. at 70. The specific theory of the control question technique is that an innocent person will show a greater physiological response to the control questions; but, a guilty person will react more strongly to the relevant questions. Id. The NAS Report states that in order to have a well-supported theory, it is ... necessary to identify the relevant psychological states and to understand how those states are linked to characteristics of the test questions intended to create the states and to the physiological responses the states are said to produce. Id. at 71-72. The current polygraph research, though, has focused almost exclusively on the applicability of the polygraph at the expense of developing the underlying science. Id. at 92. Specifically, [t]here has been no systematic effort to identify the best potential physiological indicators on theoretical grounds or to update theory on the basis of emerging knowledge in psychology or physiology. Id. {22} Petitioners agree there is no scientifically testable hypothesis explaining all the psychophysiological variables occurring in the control question polygraph. However, Petitioners argue such an overarching theory is not necessary for polygraph results to be deemed admissible under Rule 11-702. We agree. The State's primary witness admitted at the evidentiary hearing held below that people experience emotional turmoil when they are telling a lie, and these emotions can be detected by the polygraph machine. Also, despite its criticism of the current research on the polygraph, the NAS Report nonetheless concludes that [b]asic scientific knowledge of psychophysiology offers support for expecting polygraph testing to have some diagnostic value, at least among naïve examinees. Id. at 101. The NAS Report further concludes that [a]lthough the basic science indicates that polygraph testing has inherent limits regarding its potential accuracy, it is possible for a test with such limits to attain sufficient accuracy to be useful in practical situations. Id. at 102. {23} As we noted in Anderson, refutability is the key criterion when analyzing the scientific theory or hypothesis underlying expert testimony. 118 N.M. at 297, 881 P.2d at 42. Under the facts of that case, in which we examined the admissibility of certain DNA evidence under Rule 11-702, we stated: Defendants vociferously dispute the accuracy of the match results and the adequacy of the testing done, and in refutation have presented evidence about deficiencies in both the results and the testing of the results. Thus, it appears that by attempting to refute the FBI's theory and methods with evidence about deficiencies in both the results and the testing of the results, the defendants have conceded that the theory and methods can be tested. Id. (quoting United States v. Bonds, 12 F.3d 540, 559 (6th Cir.1993)). The State's primary witness on the reliability of polygraphs testified there are numerous studies on polygraphs and their accuracy. By claiming that a number of those studies establish that polygraph examinations do not work, the State has implicitly conceded that the hypothesis underlying the control question polygraph can be tested. The State's concession is supported by the NAS Report, which states it is possible to do better field research than we have found in the literature and, over time, to use admittedly imperfect research designs, both experimental and observational, to advance knowledge and build methodological understanding, leading to better research design in the future. NAS Report, supra, at 116. {24} Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the control question polygraph examination can be tested. We believe the district court's apparent finding to the contrary is erroneous. As was stated in United States v. Galbreth, 908 F.Supp. 877, 891 (D.N.M.1995), [u]nlike an endeavor such as astrology, the scientific validity of which can never be empirically verified, it is possible to test [the control question] polygraph technique[ ]. We now turn to the published academic literature on the polygraph examination.