Abstract
Joseph Gastwirth's paper concerns an increasingly important issue affecting public policy-the estimation of error rates in tests for such things as diseases, deception, and drugs. Gastwirth explores the estimator C of the predictive value of a positive test (PVP or P(D I S)) and the variance of C. He explains how C depends on the sensitivity q, the specificity 0, the base rate ir, and the sample proportion p of those whom the diagnostic test classifies as having the disease. Furthermore, for large samples, he demonstrates how the variance of C depends on q, 0, ir and the sample sizes used in estimating these quantities. Not being a statistician, I shall not attempt to address the technical aspects of Gastwirth's analysis. As an attorney, I am drawn to his discussion of the admissibility of polygraph evidence. First, I shall elaborate on his description of the standards for admissibility of such evidence. Then I shall consider the extent to which his analysis of C and Var(C) might be brought to bear on the legal question of the admissibility of polygraph evidence.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
