Superseded term, now call the comparison question. Class of questions used in deception examinations that serves to elicit larger physiologic responses from innocent examinees when compared to the relevant questions. There are several types, such as the exclusionary, non-exclusionary, probable-lie, directed-lie, the positive, and minor variations. The term “control” in PDD traces its roots to the 1930s and to what are now called stimulation tests. These tests were used as “controls” for the production of deception response patterns that would later be compared with responses to relevant questions in the Relevant/Irrelevant technique. In 1947 John Reid published a paper in which he referred to two types of questions as controls— one he called a “guilt complex” and the other a “comparative response” question, the latter being a probable-lie question. The “comparative response” question was called a “control question” in a paper published by Fred Inbau in 1948, and the name became the standard terminology in PDD for nearly 50 years. This was not the first use of this class of question, however. Walter Summers used similar questions with his Pathometer technique which he labeled emotional standards as early as 1939, and they were used by New York State Troopers from 1939 until at least 1952. Elizabeth Marston, widow of William Marston, and Olive Richard, Marston’s former secretary, reported that they had participated in deception examinations with Marston some years before in which “hot” questions were used for comparison. A typical hot question would be, “Did you ever think of stealing money from that safe?” Elizabeth stated during an interview that they did not believe it wise to publish these types of questions, and consequently they have not been generally credited with this contribution to the science. Beginning in the 1970s, critics of PDD noted that the word “control” as used in PDD tests did not meet the criteria of the term as used in science. The term has since been replaced by comparison question in publications of the American Polygraph Association, American Society for Testing and Materials, federal polygraph programs, and scientific papers. See: Waller, 2001.
