Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Card, R. D.
Right arrow Articles by Farrall, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Card, R. D.
Right arrow Articles by Farrall, W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Detecting Faked Penile Responses To Erotic Stimuli

A Comparison of Stimulus Conditions and Response Measures

Robert D. Card, PhD

Clinic for Counseling & Psychotherapy, Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah

William Farrall, B.S.

Farrall Instruments, Inc. Grand Island, Nebraska

Eighteen men were instructed to fake penile responses to discrete sexual stimuli presented auditorily or visually. The same stimuli were presented a second time following instruction on faking. Sexual responses were monitored using a penile plethysmograph (PPG). Further physiological response measures to detect faking attempts included the Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) and respiration (RESP). Faking attempts were found to be more successful to audio than visual stimuli, especially if the stimuli were relatively weaker. Arousal was much more difficult to fake than suppression. The more intense the efforts to fake, and especially following faking instructions, the more transparent the faking efforts. GSR and RESP added measurably to the detection of faked PPG responses which would have appeared otherwise to be genuine responses.

Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol. 3, No. 4, 381-396 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/107906329000300401
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?