Featured Video: Of Colanders and Lie Detectors

Educate yourself. Before playing Russian roulette with your reputation, learn how to protect yourself against this invalid test. Download AntiPolygraph.org's free book (1 mb PDF):

The Lie Behind the Lie Detector

The dirty little secret behind the polygraph is that the "test" depends on trickery, not science. The person being "tested" is not supposed to know that while the polygraph operator declares that all questions must be answered truthfully, warning that the slightest hint of deception will be detected, he secretly assumes that denials in response to certain questions -- called "control" questions -- will be less than truthful. An example of a commonly used control question is, "Did you ever lie to get out of trouble?" The polygrapher steers the examinee into a denial by warning, for example, that anyone who would do so is the same kind of person who would commit the kind of behavior that is under investigation and then lie about it. But secretly, it is assumed that everyone has lied to get out of trouble.

The polygraph pens don't do a special dance when a person lies. The polygrapher scores the test by comparing physiological responses (breathing, blood pressure, heart, and perspiration rates) to these probable-lie control questions with reactions to relevant questions such as, "Did you ever commit an act of espionage against the United States?" (commonly asked in security screening). If the former reactions are greater, the examinee passes; if the latter are greater, he fails. If responses to both "control" and relevant questions are about the same, the result is deemed inconclusive.

The test also includes irrelevant questions such as, "Are the lights on in this room?" The polygrapher falsely explains that such questions provide a "baseline for truth," because the true answer is obvious. But in reality, they are not scored at all! They merely serve as buffers between pairs of relevant and "control" questions.

The simplistic methodology used in polygraph testing has no grounding in the scientific method: it is no more scientific than astrology or tarot cards. Government agencies value it because people who don't realize it's a fraud sometimes make damaging admissions. But as a result of reliance on this voodoo science, the truthful are often falsely branded as liars while the deceptive pass through.

Perversely, the "test" is inherently biased against the truthful, because the more honestly one answers the "control" questions, and as a consequence feels less stress when answering them, the more likely one is to fail. Conversely, liars can beat the test by covertly augmenting their physiological reactions to the "control" questions. This can be done, for example, by doing mental arithmetic, thinking exciting thoughts, altering one's breathing pattern, or simply biting the side of the tongue. Truthful persons can also use these techniques to protect themselves against the risk of a false positive outcome. Although polygraphers frequently claim they can detect such countermeasures, no polygrapher has ever demonstrated any ability to do so, and peer-reviewed research suggests that they can't.

Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge Clock On 28 January 2002, retired FBI polygraph expert Dr. Drew C. Richardson reiterated his challenge to the polygraph community to prove their claimed ability to detect countermeasures (techniques for passing -- or beating -- the polygraph). This clock figure shows the number of weeks Dr. Richardson's challenge has gone without takers. What are the polygraph operators afraid of? (Listen to a personal message from Dr. Richardson.)

417 weeks

It ended everything
It's been a long time since I spoke of this.Maybe I figured that now since everything's in the past that one of these days I'd be out of its shadow. This sadly, is not the case....

Polygraph Operator Ronald P. Bae Indicted for Felony Sexual Abuse
Polygraph operator and criminal justice professor Ronald Phillip Bae of Cottonwood, Alabama has been indicted by a grand jury on a felony charge of sexual abuse.

BBC Interview
AntiPolygraph.org co-founder George Maschke was interviewed by Michael Rosen for a BBC radio program that aired on 12 January 2010. An MP3 file of the broadcast is now available for download.

CIA Polygraph Division Seal Unveiled
Did you know that the CIA's Polygraph Division has its own seal?

I'm still in shock over my first polygraph!
"I had a job with a L.E. agency this week. I just had to pass my polygraph and physical and I was ready to go. This was the first polygraph test that I've ever taken and I was not nervous at all about passing it. I have nothing to hide so I knew that I would ace it. Was I wrong...."

Former Aide to Colin Powell Accused of Espionage, Fired Based on Polygraph Results
A recently filed federal lawsuit documents how a veteran intelligence officer with the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) was accused of espionage and summarily fired after failing a series of polygraph "tests" (a procedure roundly rejected by scientists as being without scientific basis).

Scott Horton Interviews AntiPolygraph.org Co-founder George Maschke
Scott Horton of Antiwar Radio interviewed AntiPolygraph.org co-founder George Maschke on Wednesday, 30 December 2009.

CIA Bomber Likely Passed Polygraph
ABC News reports that the suicide bomber who killed at least six CIA employees at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost, Afghanistan "was a regular CIA informant who had visited the same base multiple times in the past." If this is true, then it is very likely that the bomber passed a CIA polygraph test.

District Attorney Finds No Evidence Against North Carolina's Top Polygraph Operator
Jon Ostendorff reports for the Asheville Citizen-Times that North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Chris Smith, who supervises the Bureau's polygraph unit, will not be criminally prosecuted for allegedly assaulting a suspect he had polygraphed.

North Carolina's Senior Polygrapher Charged with Assault
Jon Ostendorff reports for the Asheville Citizen-Times that the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation's senior polygraph examiner, Special Agent Chris Smith, who supervises all the Bureau's polygraphers, was arrested and charged with assault in August 2009. Smith is currently free on $200,000 bond.

NASCAR Driver Tony "Smoke" Stewart Takes Lie Detector Test to Prove He Loves Burger King's Whopper Sandwich!
Burger King has webcasted a publicity stunt that involved NASCAR driver Tony "Smoke" Stewart taking a lie detector test wherein he answered some 30 questions putatively submitted by members of the public in addition to five questions about his history of eating hamburgers in general and his affinity for Burger King hamburgers in particular. Burger King is among Stewart's paying sponsors.

Polygrapher Patrick T. Coffey Threatens Lawsuit, Demands Retraction
Polygraph operator Patrick T. Coffey of San Francisco has threatened AntiPolygraph.org co-founder George Maschke with a defamation lawsuit. In a letter (877 kb PDF) dated 4 September 2009 sent by U.S. mail and fax, Coffey's attorney, Carleton L. Briggs, demands "a full and complete retraction" of the 20 August 2009 blog post, "Is Patrick T. Coffey Fit to Be Screening Police Applicants?"

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, R.I.P.
One of the great heroes of polygraph reform has died. Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), who succumbed to brain cancer at the age of 77 years, was a co-sponsor of the 1988 Employee Polygraph Protection Act, which severely restricted the ability of private employers in the United States to compel applicants and workers to submit to lie detector "testing."

Is Patrick T. Coffey Fit to Be Screening Police Applicants?
Following up on his previous article on the San Francisco Police Department's reliance on polygraph screening--despite broad scientific consensus that it is invalid--S.F. Weekly reporter Matt Smith takes an in-depth look at the man the SFPD has hired to polygraph applicants: Patrick T. Coffey, who received "$81,463 during the last fiscal year" for his services.

 

 

---