title: Unicorns or Tiger Woods: are lie detection experts myths or rarities? A response to on lie detection "wizards" by Bond and Uysal.
abstract: Bond and Uysal (this issue) complain that expert lie detectors identified by O'Sullivan and Ekman (2004) are statistical flukes. They ignore one class of experts we have identified and misrepresent the procedures we use to identify the others. They also question the psychometric validity of the measures and protocol used. Many of their points are addressed in the chapter they criticize. The fruitfulness of the O'Sullivan-Ekman protocol is illustrated with respect to improved identification of expert lie detectors, as well as a replicated pattern of errors made by experts from different professional groups. The statistical arguments offered confuse the theoretical use of the binomial with the empirical use of the normal distribution. Data are provided that may clarify this distinction.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of San Francisco, 2130 Fulton Street, San Francisco, CA 94117, USA. osullivan@usfca.edu
authors.forename: Maureen
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: O'Sullivan
mesh_terms: D008192:Deception; D004594:Electrophysiology / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D044707:Forensic Sciences / Q000295:instrumentation*; D006801:Humans; D011361:Professional Competence