Main Article Content
We developed an auxiliary tool, named “Software Human Reliability Estimator” (SHRE), which in certain cases can replace the polygraph. The polygraph is not always effective in measuring the reliability of a witness. For instance, the polygraph is ineffective when the witness believes that the testimony is the truth even when in reality it is not. In such cases, an alternative objective test is required. Another disadvantage of the polygraph test lies in the lack of discreetness owing to the requirement that the witness must agree to undergo a polygraph test. In addition, the polygraph test cannot be performed in real time because of its cumbersome and bulky nature. These drawbacks have motivated the search for alternatives to the polygraph. Herein, we suggest a methodology accompanied by a corresponding software package that overcomes the mentioned shortcomings of the polygraph. The methodology is based on a computer-assisted cognitive behavioral therapy methodology (CBT) (Burns 1999). CBT was originally developed for psychological treatment and can be used to characterize personalities. This methodology can also be used to find the individual’s personality disturbances and to evaluate the reliability of a witness. The CBT methodology assumes that the cognitive thoughts of a human are expressed in his language. In the literature, about ten categories of thoughts are determined, and so called distorted thoughts, indicate a behavioral deviation. Based on the above assumption, it is possible to map thoughts, including distorted thoughts and analyze them methodically with the help of linguistic tools. These tools should be able to scan the mapping and discover distorted thoughts as classified by the CBT method. We will use extreme situations as examples to illustrate distorted thoughts. The mentioned situations will refer to time description (always, never), location (everywhere, nowhere), quantity (everything, nothing, nobody), possibility (must, forced, incapable) etc. These types of expressions leave no doubt as to their meanings. The linguistic analysis is performed at two levels: semantic and syntactic. The first stage is the semantic analysis. Here, the vocabulary of the sentence is analyzed. The known linguistic term, quantitative-semantics, is given a special significance since it enables a pre-ranking of the nouns, adjectives, adverbs beyond their regular usage. Quantitative semantics analysis searches especially for superlatives such as “never”, which indicate an extreme case. This analysis is supported in the first stage by using an expression named “distinguished”. In order to find distinguished expressions it is recommended to use in the second stage of the analysis a methodology borrowed from formal-languages, a field in computer sciences. This analysis is supposed to strengthen or eliminate the indications found in the first analysis stage, the semantic analysis.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
When submitting a paper the author agrees to the following publishing agreement and processing personal data.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT, COPYRIGHT LICENSE, PERSONAL DATA PROCESSING CONSENT
This is a publication agreement and copyright license (“Agreement”) regarding a written manuscript currently submitted via Pressto platform
(“Article”) to be published in Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Journal”).
The parties to this Agreement are:
the Author or Authors of the submitted article (individually, or if more than one author, collectively, “Author”) and Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Publisher”), address al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, represented by its editor in chief Aleksandra Matulewska.
§1. LICENSE OF COPYRIGHT
a) The Author and the Publisher agree that the Author grants a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by reference and is further specified at Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International — CC BY 4.0 copyright license in the Article to the general public.
b) The Author grants to the Publisher a royalty-free, worldwide nonexclusive license to publish, reproduce, display, distribute, translate and use the Article in any form, either separately or as part of a collective work, including but not limited to a nonexclusive license to publish the Article in an issue of the Journal, copy and distribute individual reprints of the Article, authorize reproduction of the entire Article in another publication, and authorize reproduction and distribution of the Article or an abstract thereof by means of computerized retrieval systems (such as Westlaw, Lexis and SSRN). The Author retains ownership of all rights under copyright in the Article, and all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author grants to the Publisher the power to assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer any and all licenses expressly granted to the Publisher under this Agreement.
d) Republication. The Author agrees to require that the Publisher be given credit as the original publisher in any republication of the Article authorized by the Author. If the Publisher authorizes any other party to republish the Article under the terms of paragraphs 1c and 1 of this Agreement, the Publisher shall require such party to ensure that the Author is credited as the Author.
§2. EDITING OF THE ARTICLE
a) The Author agrees that the Publisher may edit the Article as suitable for publication in the Journal. To the extent that the Publisher’s edits amount to copyrightable works of authorship, the Publisher hereby assigns all right, title, and interest in such edits to the Author.
a) The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author’s knowledge the Article does not defame any person, does not invade the privacy of any person, and does not in any other manner infringe upon the rights of any person. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher against all such claims.
b) The Author represents and warrants that the Author has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to grant the licenses granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author represents and warrants that the Article furnished to the Publisher has not been published previously. For purposes of this paragraph, making a copy of the Article accessible over the Internet, including, but not limited to, posting the Article to a database accessible over the Internet, does not constitute prior publication so long as the as such copy indicates that the Article is not in final form, such as by designating such copy to be a “draft,” a “working paper,” or “work-in-progress”. The Author agrees to hold harmless the Publisher, its licensees and distributees, from any claim, action, or proceeding alleging facts that constitute a breach of any warranty enumerated in this paragraph.
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
a) The Author agrees and acknowledges that the Author will receive no payment from the Publisher for use of the Article or the licenses granted in this Agreement.
b) The Publisher agrees and acknowledges that the Publisher will not receive any payment from the Author for publication by the Publisher.
§6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
a) This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the Author and the Publisher with respect to the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to the Article, and each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any party except those warranties and agreements embodied in this Agreement.
b) In all cases not regulated by this Agreement, legal provisions of Polish Copyright Act and Polish Civil Code shall apply.
c) Any disputes arising from the enforcement of obligations connected with this Agreement shall be resolved by a court competent for the headquarters of the Publisher.
d) Any amendments or additions to the Agreement must be made in writing and signed by authorised representative of both parties, otherwise being ineffective.
e) This Agreement is signed electronically and the submission of the article via the PRESSto platform is considered as the conclusion of the Agreement by the Author and the Publisher.
f) Clause for consent to the processing of personal data - general
g) The Author shall give his or her consent to the processing of their personal data in accordance with the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of persons physical in connection with the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation) for the purpose and in connection with making publications available on the PRESSto scientific journals platform and DeGruyter platform, guaranteeing the security of services rendered, and improving them.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE FULLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
The Author The Publisher
- Apostolico, Alberto and Galil, Zvi (Eds.) 1997. Pattern matching algorithms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Burns, David D. 1999. Feeling Good. Avons Books, Harper-Collins Publishers.
- Charras, Christian. 2004. Handbook of exact string matching algorithms. London: College Publications.
- Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
- Colma, George. 1970. Cross-Examination, A practical handbook. CapeTown: Juta & Company, Limited.
- Cotterill, Janet. 1968. Language in the legal process. New York: Palgrave.
- Ferdinand de Saussure and Roy Harris. 1986. Course in General Linguistics. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Co.
- Gawne-Kelnar, Gabrielle. 2008. Bibliotherapy: Book Yourself In.
- Gibbons, John. 2003. Forensic linguistics: an introduction to language in the justice system. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publications.
- Glisan, James Lindsay. 1991. Cross-examination, practice and procedure; Sydney: Butherworths.
- Greenberger Dennis and Christine Padesky.1995. Clinician's guide to mind over mood. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
- Kearns, Kate. 2000. Semantics (Modern Linguistics). New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
- Knuth, Donald E. 1964. Backus normal form vs. backus naur form. Communications of the ACM 7 (12): 735-736.
- Navarr, Gonzalo, 2002. Flexible pattern matching in strings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Olson, John. 2004. Forensic linguistics: an introduction to Language, crime and the law. London, New York: Continuum.
- Ophir, Dan, 2012. Computerized Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CCBT). EABCT- European Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy, August 29th, 2012, Geneva, Switzerland.
- Salhany, Roger E. 2006. Cross-Examination, the art of the advocate. Canada: LexisNexis Butterworths, Inc.
- Shuy, Roger W., 1966. Language Crimes: the Use and Abuse of Language Evidence in the Courtroom; Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
- Stockburger, David W. 1996. Introductory statistics: Concepts, models, and applications. Atomic Dog Publishing.
- Weld, Allen Hayden. 2009. Parsing book: Containing rules of syntax and models for analyzing and transposing, together with selections of prose and poetry. Whitefish, Montana: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.