[xphilter]

If there are any lawyers here, I'd love thoughts on whether these tools (used in employment/interview settings) violate 29 CFR § 801.4 - Prohibitions on lie detector use. (I know this article is about schools and in Canada). I've been thinking these tools do violate, but never filed a case alleging it (yet). Specifically, these anti-cheat "algorithms" seem to be "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." I mean, the entire purpose is to determine if the prospective employee is honest. Any thoughts?

[srtjstjsj]

They aren't invasive physiological analyzers, and they aren't assessing honesty, they are detecting behaviors, so no.

[appleflaxen]

They 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]

Exactly -- 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.

[xphilter]

Detecting 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]

A 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]

Lying is a behavior, and cheating is dishonest.

[klodolph]

We 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]

Right, 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]

> 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]

Sorry -- it's in my original question, from the statute (here 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"

[raxxorrax]

Never cheated on a test. Wouldn't accept this software, but I fear todays pupils are inoculated enough and teachers lack experience.

[vangelis]

I can't wait to get merc'd by the ACT because my cheating coefficient is over 300.