ASTM E2324-04(2011)

Standard Guide for PDD Paired Testing

SCOPE
1.1 Standard guide for the derivation of quantitative assessments of the credibility of proposed witness testimony through the application of established statistical principles to combinations of PDD examination results, and for the utilization of such assessments in the interests of justice (The Marin Protocol)
1.2 This standard describes circumstances in which proven statistical principles, applied to PDD results, can reliably quantify the trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of witness testimony, and
1.2.1 Delineates requirements necessary to effect the generation and practical use of such results, including:
1.2.1.1 Criteria regarding witnesses to be examined,
1.2.1.2 Criteria for determining facts upon which witnesses are to be examined,
1.2.1.3 Certification of examiners eligible to conduct examinations,
1.2.1.4 Combinations of results which support strong inferences, and
1.2.1.5 Appropriate uses to which strong inferences can be put.
1.3 Courts and others responsible for adjudicating questions of fact may choose whether and when to invoke paired PDD testing.
1.3.1 This guide expresses the rights and obligations of all participants in order to best serve the interests of justice when it is invoked.
1.3.2 Paired PDD testing must not be invoked in any case in any jurisdiction where to do so would violate the laws of that jurisdiction.
1.3.3 Adherence to these guidelines ensures that the conclusions reached will be valid.
1.4 This standard is directed to the proposed testimony of witnesses in criminal, civil, administrative and family court litigation, regarding factual claims, where
1.4.1 It is unlikely that the witnesses could be honestly mistaken, and
1.4.2 The facts in dispute are such that the case may hinge on whom the trier of fact believes; whenever,
1.4.3 Witnesses on opposite sides of a case offer contradictory testimony.
1.4.4 Two or more witnesses testifying for one side offer mutually corroborating testimony.

General Information

• Status: Historical
• Publication Date: 30-Sep-2011
• ICS: 03.160 - Law. Administration
• Technical Committee: E52 - Forensic Psychophysiology
• Drafting Committee: E52.05 - Psychophysiological Detection of Deception (PDD)

Relations

• Replaces: ASTM E2324-04 - Standard Guide for PDD Paired Testing
• Effective Date: 01-Oct-2011
• Replaced By: ASTM E2324-04(2017) - Standard Guide for PDD Paired Testing
• Effective Date: 01-Oct-2017

Standards Content (Sample)

NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: E2324 − 04 (Reapproved 2011)
Standard Guide for
1
PDD Paired Testing
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2324; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 1.4.1 It is unlikely that the witnesses could be honestly
mistaken, and
1.1 This is a guide for the derivation of quantitative assess-
1.4.2 The facts in dispute are such that the case may hinge
ments of the credibility of proposed witness testimony through
on whom the trier of fact believes; whenever,
the application of established statistical principles to combina-
1.4.3 Witnesses on opposite sides of a case offer contradic-
tions of PDD examination results, and for the utilization of
tory testimony.
such assessments in the interests of justice (The Marin Proto-
1.4.4 Two or more witnesses testifying for one side offer
col).
mutually corroborating testimony.
1.2 This guide describes circumstances in which proven
statistical principles, applied to PDD results, can reliably 2. Referenced Documents
quantify the trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of witness 2
2.1 ASTM Standards:
testimony, and
E2031 Practice for Quality Control of Psychophysiological
1.2.1 Delineates requirements necessary to effect the gen-
Detection of Deception (Polygraph) Examinations
eration and practical use of such results, including:
1.2.1.1 Criteria regarding witnesses to be examined, 3. Significance and Use
1.2.1.2 Criteria for determining facts upon which witnesses
3.1 The goal of this guide is to reduce the incidence and
are to be examined,
impactofperjuredtestimonyinadministrativeproceedingsand
1.2.1.3 Certification of examiners eligible to conduct
in the criminal, civil and family court systems.
examinations,
3.2 It is a mathematically established statistical principle
1.2.1.4 Combinations of results which support strong
thattheprobabilityoftwoindependenteventsbothoccurringis
inferences, and
the algebraic product of the probabilities of either event
1.2.1.5 Appropriate uses to which strong inferences can be
3
occurring alone.
put.
3.3 In litigation, the situation frequently arises:
1.3 Courts and others responsible for adjudicating questions
3.3.1 That witnesses from opposite sides offer diametrically
of fact may choose whether and when to invoke paired PDD
contradictory testimony regarding a fact or facts, such that one
testing.
must almost certainly be lying, and
1.3.1 This guide expresses the rights and obligations of all
3.3.2 That witnesses from one side corroborate each other’s
participants in order to best serve the interests of justice when
testimony, such that either both must be telling the truth, or
it is invoked.
both must be lying.
1.3.2 Paired PDD testing must not be invoked in any case in
any jurisdiction where to do so would violate the laws of that 3.4 Where both witnesses are examined regarding a fact:
jurisdiction.
3.4.1 By PDD examiners who have personally established
1.3.3 Adherence to these guidelines ensures that the conclu- that the level of accuracy they are able to achieve meets or
sions reached will be valid.
exceeds requirements established by the courts of the jurisdic-
tion.
1.4 This guide is directed to the proposed testimony of
3.4.2 The results when taken together support a strong
witnesses in criminal, civil, administrative and family court
common inference about the respective deceptiveness of the
litigation, regarding factual claims, where
subjects.
1 2
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E52 on Forensic For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
Psychophysiology and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E52.05 on contact ASTM Customer Service at [e-mail]. For Annual Book of ASTM
Psychophysiological Detection of Deception (PDD). Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
Current edition approved Oct. 1, 2011. Published November 2011. Originally the ASTM website.
3
approved in 2004. Last previous edition approved in 2004 as E2324 – 04 (2011). Press, S.J., Bayesian Statistics: Principles, Models, and Applications, John
DOI: 10.1520/E2324-04R11. Wiley & Sons: New York, 1989.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
1

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
E2324 − 04 (2011)
3.4.3 Iftheminimumaccuracyissetat86 %,theprobability excluding, impeaching or rebutting testimony by prosecution
that the inference will be wrong is less than 2.00 %. If the witnesses regarding those facts, without compromising their
m
...