American Journal of Applied Psychology
Volume 4, Issue 4, July 2015, Pages: 90-94
Received: Jun. 3, 2015;
Accepted: Jun. 9, 2015;
Published: Jul. 2, 2015
Views 3563 Downloads 86
Todd D. Pizitz, Veracity Security Systems, LLC, San Diego, California, USA
Timothy A. Scheuber, Alliant International University, Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
Court Wallner, Veracity Security Systems, LLC, San Diego, California, USA
Kathleen Fernandez, Martse Training Centers, Chemical Dependency, San Diego, California, USA
The present study measured the accuracy and utility of the Veracity TouchScreener™ technology as a viable alternative to urine drug testing. 101 participants enrolled in court-ordered drug and alcohol treatment participated in the current study. All participants were administered 18 questions on a the Veracity TouchScreener™ and then participated in a visually monitored drug and alcohol urine test. The results revealed 92% accuracy at classifying alcohol and drug user’s self-report of sobriety by using this new technology. Clinical implications for the treatment of alcohol and drug users are examined through the implementation this technology.
Todd D. Pizitz,
Timothy A. Scheuber,
Detecting Alcohol and Drug Use with the Touch of a Finger, American Journal of Applied Psychology.
Vol. 4, No. 4,
2015, pp. 90-94.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders – text revision (DSM-IV-TR). (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions In Psychological Science, 1(3), 98-101
Kelly, K., Murray, E., Barrios, V., Gorman, J., Ganis, G., & Keenan, P. (2009). The effect of deception on motor cortex excitability. Social Neuroscience, 4 (6), 570- 574
Lum, G., & Mushlin, B. (2004). Urine drug testing: Approaches to screening and confirmation testing. Laboratory Medicine, 35(6), 368-373.
MacDonald, I. (April 22, 2013). The GOP’s drug-testing dragnet. How republicans and industry profiteers are targeting high school students, welfare applicants and the unemployed. The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/173654/gops-drug-testing-dragnet
Melanson, S. E., Baskin, L., Magnani, B., Kwong, T. C., Dizon, A., & Wu, A. H. (2010). Interpretation and utility of drug abuse immunoassays: lessons from laboratory drug testing surveys. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 134(5), 735-739. doi: 10.1043/1543-2165-134.5.735.
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (1986). Research Monograph Series 73. Urine Testing for Drugs of Abuse. R. L. Hawks, & C. N. Chiang (Eds.). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Office of the Federal Register. (2011). Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy, Pt. 1-50, Revised as of January 1, 2011. Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register.
Pizitz, T. D., McCullaugh, J. M., Sprague, P., Vaccaro, A., Blue, J., Mealing, D., & Fernandez, K. (2014). Measuring the veracity of alcohol and drug users’ self-report of sobriety. International Journal of Clinical Psychiatry and Mental Health, 2, 70-76.
United States Department of Justice. (2011). Federal justice statistics, 2011 – statistical tables. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fjs11st.pdf
Venkatratnam, A., & Lents, N. (2011). Zinc Reduces the Detection of Cocaine, Methamphetamine and THC by ELISA Urine Drug Testing. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 35, July/August 2011.
Verstraete, A. G. (2004). Detection Times of Drugs of Abuse in Blood, Urine, and Oral Fluid. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, 26, 200-205.