Check this out my fellas.....I took a poly recently....Did not lie told truth, but I have not experimented with drugs in my life.  I guess my examiner did not believe me.  After the "test" was complete I was sat down in a separate room for like 5 minutes then I was asked to come back in exam room.  Then this "tester" interrogated me for about 30min. saying that the blood pressure went skyhigh when asked about using drugs like marijuana.  I was harped on for ever,,,all they wanted was for me to say, ok I have smoked pot...But I stood my ground and did not lie to them and say I did when I did not.  I have been around the stuff many times, but did not smoke it.  ANyways, I was never showed my charts and if I did lie, wouldn't I sweat and heart rate go up and breathing rate too?  I was just told that BPress went up.  We will see what happens next.  Good Luck to all and just be honest.

Steven,

You concluded your message with the following words of advice: "Good Luck to all and just be honest."

I agree that applicants for positions of public trust should be honest with regard to the relevant questions asked of them in the course of a pre-employment polygraph interrogation. But as you know if you've read Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, the most commonly-used polygraph technique is actually based on the assumption that everyone -- even applicants who will be hired -- will be less than truthful with regard to the so-called "control" questions. In fact, the more candidly an applicant attempts to answer these questions in the "pre-test" phase, and as a consequence feels less anxiety when answering them during the "in-test" phase, the more likely the applicant is to fail!

If you haven't yet appealed your polygraph results in writing, it would be a good thing to do so promptly, instead of just waiting to see what happens. See Chapter 5 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector for further suggestions in this regard.

Catwoman,
Don't let the poly get you down. If you did pass and you are trying to get a job in LE, then get use to having your feathers ruffled. In many instances it is a thankless job. You will put your life on the line for the community and then the community will turn around and sue you. What you need to learn to look at is the final outcome, the bottom line. If you can't handle that kind of pressure then maybe you should look into another line of work. I am only saying this because it can get worse. Imagine yourself on the witness stand being questioned by a defense lawyer, it is much worse than that little polygraph thing you went through.
Good luck and remember, water under the bridge.

Catwoman,

I would venture to say the reason your polygraph seemed so "demeaning and demoralizing" was simply because you were not telling the truth when initially asked how many times you used marijuana.  You went with 10 times figuring you have made the admission, but a little damage control can't hurt, when you knew that wasn't true.  You should have gone with 20 to start with and maybe the initial polygraph results would have been different.  Bottom line is, you took a gamble and lost.  No point in blaming the polygraph examiner, or the procedure.  Just take a good look in the mirror if you want the real reason why this process was so humiliating.

Batman

Anonymous,

Thanks for replying for Catwoman.  I guess you have assumed the mantel of "Everyman's Spokesman".  It must be great going through life with rose colored glasses, no body ever lies, and anyone who accuses someone of doing so is.....what?

When it comes to drawing too much conclusion with too little evidence, I can't hold a candle to you.  On what do you base your conclusion that Catwoman' drug usage was over a decade ago?  You make a generalization regarding this, however does your generalization apply to Catwoman?  Why do you asssume Catwoman's drug usage was an insignificant event?  Again you apply a generalization to her specific situation?

On the other hand, I made absolutely no assumptions.  Catwoman stated she had told her examiner she used drugs no more than 10 times.  She was administered and failed a polygraph examination pertaining to that.  She then stated she used drugs no more than 20 times, and she now believes she passed the polygraph examination, and may have since she has been scheduled for further processing.  So, was she telling the truth when she limited her drug use to 10 times?  She states she picked 20 times for the subsequent polygraph examination to "be safe".  She was offered the opportunity to be safe during the initial polygraph test, however she went with 10 (not so safe).

You want to argue the validity of polygraph testing.  Fine, hopefully you will find someone to argue with.  I simply point out the obvious regarding some of the posts on this site.  Not everyone tells the truth all the time, not even Batman.  Catwoman was simply untruthful about the number of times she used drugs.  If it makes you feel better, let's say she was "inaccurate" in her recollection of her own illegal drug use. 

Batman

???

I have to disagree, Anonymous.   

About 5 years ago, during a pre-employment polygraph for a le position, I went through hell.  I left the room about 4 hours later literally in tears.  I havn't cried like that since I saw titanic.  I was repeatedly accused of being deceptive in the area of drug usage.  Now, I have never used illegal drugs.  I have never even taken a drink.  However, I have used drugs illegally.  In other words, I have used other peoples pain meds on very rare occasions, or another's anti-biotics, etc. etc.  Not a lot, just once a year or so.  Oh, and I admittedly have had a swig of nyquil when I was really only a bit sick and didn't really need it.  ANYWAY.......I failed that test miserably.

Recently, I was informed that I was being considered for a government law enforcement agency.  after tests and interviews that spanned a few months, I was told that I was selected and that I would be undergoing a polygraph.  I immediately experienced flashbacks of the pain and anguish that I had experienced before...literally, one of the worst experiences of my relatively long life.  Anyway, the days went by and THE day got closer until it came.  I didn't sleep for 2 days before, for fear that the same thing would happen again, a false positive and bitter accusations.

I had decided that I would tell EVERYTHING this time....(see above).....BUT, the polygrapher was totally different.  He explained that there are a bunch of things that we all do that are questionable in life, and that if I told him all of those things, we would be here all day.  So, he said, use your common sense and I want you to think of "important" things.   

Anyway, it was fast, relatively painless (even with the "surprise" third party visitor from D.C. that just happened to be in town that day, which really bothered me) and I passed.  The clinching questions, I think, that they ask, besides the supposed "control" questions, was the "Have you been truthful in all of your responses with me today?" and, " did you plan on being deceptive at all today?"  I think that those are catch-alls that might nab someone who slipped through on drugs or foreign contacts.

I guess the point of my post is...catwoman was RATIONALIZING her answers.  I was too during my first test.  The machine doesn't know when your rationalizing or not, it just detects physiological changes as they occur during specific questions (asked about five times each in random order to weed out accidental or random physical reactions).
The "I smoked week ten times" response was an attempt to rationalize usage that she thought MIGHT have been more, but was gambling on the lower number.  the maching picked it up, as it picked up my "nyquil" usage idiscretion.

Anyway, I think a lot can be said about the quality of the polygrapher, as well.  Mine were two totally different animals, and I think that made a difference for me, as well.

Also, Catwoman's attitude seemed very defiant.  Sort of like she resented having to pinpoint exactly how many times she smoked pot.  Well, the number is important in law enforcement circumstances, for obvious reasons.   I think that attitude carries across, too, as not the most desirable.  But, she passed, so all is well.

for what its worth.

I did not lie when i admitted to using marijuana ten times..i honestly did not remember that day, and i don't remember now..Now is all water under the bridge but, that made me a non believer about the poly..It is full of trickery, control and manipulation. I am amazed that after I said that i had used marijuana 20 times he told me that the reading on the device was much better. I said 20 because he was not happy with ten. He was demanding a specific answer and i did not have one to give. I was nervous when i said ten but i was shaking when i said 20 because i was not sure and, he was presuring me to give and answer. If he would have said that i lied when i said that i had used marijuana 20 times i would not have known what to do next. I probably would have said 30.. To date i don't know if i passed or not, but i guess that i will know pretty soon. Taking a poly and being a law enforcer are two very different things.   This test was part of a transfer/reinstatement application..I have been a police officer for two years in a different department and i was looking to move to a department closer to my house. As tough as the job is, the poly was still a pretty bad experience. The amount of times that i used marijuana I think is totally irrelevant and proves nothing.

Batman wrote on Sep 10^th, 2002 at 9:10pm:


And judging  by your comments to Catwoman and others, you've appointed yourself "Everyone's Conscience".  Careful, Batman -- it can sure hurt falling off that moral high horse.

Skeptic