7 ms·
They aren't invasive physiological analyzers, and they aren't assessing honesty, they are detecting behaviors, so no.
by srtjstjsj 6y ago
They aren't invasive physiological analyzers, and they aren't assessing honesty, they are detecting behaviors, so no.
- xphilter 6y agoDetecting behaviors to assess what though? Isn't that exactly what a lie detector does? It claims to detect electrical signals of behaviors (stress) and then that goes to determine if the person is honest.
- gowld 6y agoA lie detector does (claim to) not detect facts. It (claims to) detect psychological states via its physiological measurements, which is obviously what the law is talking about. No one would claim that fact-checking statements is a "lie detector" under this law.
- vageli 6y agoLying is a behavior, and cheating is dishonest.
- klodolph 6y agoWe can go down the rabbit hole all we want, but a "lie detector" is a specific type of device. Not everything that can detect lies is a lie detector. (And not everything called a "lie detector" can detect lies, either. A polygraph test doesn't detect lies at all... and yet it is exactly the type of test banned. In fact, that's one of the main reasons why it is banned: because it doesn't work for its stated purpose.)
- xphilter 6y agoRight, but the "specific type of device" is defined more broadly than that -- so if I code a "lie detector" that tracks mouse movements during an online interview (my hypothesis would be that liars and cheats move their mouse more sporadically), could I use that code as a part of an interview process?
- klodolph 6y ago> Right, but the "specific type of device" is defined more broadly than that... More broadly than what? I can't recall giving a specific definition for lie detector. It sounds like what you are describing is basically a way to use mouse movements to detect psychological stress, which is more or less the same way a polygraph is designed to work. So it would be banned, because it's the same type of thing that a polygraph is.
- xphilter 6y agoSorry -- it's in my original question, from the statute (here https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/801.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/801.2) "The term lie detector means a polygraph, deceptograph, voice stress analyzer, psychological stress evaluator, or any other similar device (whether mechanical or electrical) that is used, or the results of which are used, for the purpose of rendering a diagnostic opinion regarding the honesty or dishonesty of an individual. Voice stress analyzers, or psychological stress evaluators, include any systems that utilize voice stress analysis, whether or not an opinion on honesty or dishonesty is specifically rendered"
- klodolph 6y agoYes, sorry... I'm not responding to your original question, I'm responding to the oversimplification, > Lying is a behavior, and cheating is dishonest. I'm aware of the definition. The problem is that it depends on whether mouse movements are being used to detect psychological stress or whether they are used to detect that someone is cheating by flipping to another browser window or talking with someone in a chat window.
- vageli 6y agoYou raise a good point that my oversimplification obscured.
- vangelis 6y agoI can't wait to get merc'd by the ACT because my cheating coefficient is over 300.
- raxxorrax 6y agoNever cheated on a test. Wouldn't accept this software, but I fear todays pupils are inoculated enough and teachers lack experience.
- appleflaxen 6y agoThey are not invasive to your body, but they are invasive into your home/environment. And does the law require it to be "invasive"? I don't see this in the section that was quoted in GP.
- xphilter 6y agoExactly -- and who knows how invasive these programs are. We have no idea how they work because the companies keep the code private. They could be using the microphone, video camera, keystrokes, mouse movements etc, to feed some dubious pseudoscientific code to predict "cheating" and we're entirely reliant on their claims of robustness of it all--that troubles me.