Sharif,

There is no meaningful polygaph appeal process for U.S. citizens who are wrongly branded as liars by their government's polygraph operators. I think the situation can only be worse for non-citizens such as yourself.

I think it would be best to forget about ever working for the U.S. government again. You will have been blacklisted.

Our book The Lie Behind the Lie Detector may be of interest to you to the extent that it will help you understand how you could fail the polygraph despite telling the truth:

https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

You may wish to share this information with any friends, family, or colleagues who might consider seeking employment with the U.S. government.

Hello everyone and thanks for helpfull comments and sulotions

I am an Afghan national, and have been working for.DOS about 3 years, i have passed my first poly test, but fail second after 2 years due to the shift duty and not being ready, 
Actually being fail with poly-test is a big loss out here, cant find job in any U.S agancy where i have good working experience and a written proof of valuable services which i offered during my duty, 
To be honest, i am not alier nor a criminal, have a very clear background in Afghanistan Gov and the long while i was working for DOS here in Afghanistan.
Can i apeal for my 2nd poly-test? and How? 

your kind answers are highly appreciated in advance

Bill Crider wrote on May 31^st, 2004 at 9:39pm:

I don't think it is complete bunk so much as marginal science. What most bugs me is that polygraphers largely use the CQT, which they seem quite wedded to, which requires polygraphers to successfully mislead examinees AND make questionable assumptions that the examinee can be persuaded to lie/worry about the control questions. This will not be the case when the examinee is informed and actually understands the true nature of the polygraph.

Another serious problem is that screening polys, except where actual confessions ensue, are not able to be measured for accuracy. Absent that, it is very natural and human for examiners to assume that virtually every examinee that fails is in fact deceptive on the relevant Qs. Everyone rationalizes what they do and thinks of themselves as "good" - something polygraphers with any training in interrogation will recognize. It is hard to look inward though.

An alternative, the DLCQT (Directed Lie Control Question Test), appears to be used in the DoE in spite of widely believed high false negative rates. Still, it can be given to examinees that are informed and I suspect the large majority in the DoE that are subject to these are informed. One problem is that, in it's formulation, it pretty much invites countermeasures - at least mental countermeasures.

-Marty

Hi,

I am in the same position, requesting a re-test after a "not within acceptable parameters" performance on the test. I am not sure what to write other than I was honest on the test and I would like a second chance to prove my innocence.  Does anyone have any suggestions on what I should add to raise my chances of getting a re-test? I really appreciate it.

Question: after the test, the examiner said that he did not have enough results to make a decision either way so the examiner wrote up another test in front of me. the test included the "problem" questions and other questions that were asked previously. This new test was repeated three times, each time in different order. The whole procedure made me extremely nervous and "sensitive" to the questions. Is this a post-test interrogation technique or just part of the test?

One note: after my test I was told that my results could be judged inconclusive and I might be asked to re-take the test (obviously not).

Thanks.

well, i can understand that I suppose. The idea of answering yes on a polygraph when you are "supposed" to answer no would definitely cause a reaction in a normal person. But thats a far different issue than asking a control question of someone when they know its bunk no matter what the answer. here are some of the ones they asked me.

Quote:


Annie and PP,

You are both on target. Matte (one of the best known polygraph authors) even goes so far in Forensic Psychophysiology Using The Polygraph as to say he found that when an examinee couldn't be manipulated into a control question denial he would still score the exam the same.

Matte:
Quote:


Presumably, the examinee's non-lie doesn't negate the threat value of the control question.

-Marty

Pillpopper,

What you are describing makes perfect sense.  I have read through some polygraph literature (can't direct to exactly which publications, don't remember) that describe the machine as recording reactions to questions not based on truth vs deception but rather the level of THREAT the question poses to you.

Assuming you don't know the difference between relevant and control questions and you are not lying on the relevant questions, the examiner expects you to be more threatened by the controls.

Once you know the difference, however, the relevant questions will always be more of a threat to you simply because you know these are the questions you should not respond to.  This is really true by default - whether you are lying or not doesn't seem to matter too much at this point.  Worrying about not responding only causes you to respond... and fail.

This is my theory - this is also why the polygraph is lame.  Sorry to hear about everyone's trouble - I've experienced the same things for the same reasons.  Good luck.

well my theory is this. since I knew all this stuff, or at least belileved it to be true, I was utterly paranoid of the revelant questions because I knew the other questions didnt matter. 

so, why was I paranoid if i was innocent of the issue? Im not sure. some of it was perhaps guilt about witholding the detail of my research from the polygrapher. some if it may have been a classic sort of failure anxiety. The same sort of phenoemon that explains why I can shoot a free throw better than Shaquille O Neal. 

I dont know. I'm looking for answers from the polygraph community. Ive posted on polygraphplace.org and emailed 5 or 6 retired FBI polygraphers Ive found on the internet. I either get no response or some derivative of "Liar Liar, pants on fire"

Its cool if they want to call me a liar. I mean I did fail the test. BUt at least they could say....and here is some scientific proof of why I know you are full of shit. But they never offer any proof, just accuse me of having an agenda.

Im not totally anti-polygraph. Its a great interrogation tool I imagine for the person guilty of a specific crime. But I think its full of shit for mass general employment screening.

Bill Crider wrote on May 27^th, 2004 at 10:34pm:


So why exactly do you believe this site made you more likely to fail?  Do you believe this site lies about how polygraphs are conducted? Or, if accurate, that knowing the details made you more likely to fail without using CMs?

I tend to believe that information about polys, absent use of CM's, does increase the odds of false positives but there are no published studies on this of which I am aware. One must assume polygraphers believe this as I doubt they would lie if they did not believe it made the polygraph more accurate.

-Marty

i believe it to be unethical to use countermeasures

Undesireable and Pillpopper,

Sorry to hear of your results.   

May I ask why you didn't use countermeasures knowing everything that you know about the polygraph?   

Kona

you are correct. now i am looking for help on how to appeal. this is the best site for that. I have also corresponded with polygraphers ffrom pro-poly sites in the last 2 days.

actually, i avoided this site for weeks before my 2nd poly thinking it would not affect me then.

i believe I would have passed without visiting this site. knowledge of all the stuff printed here made me incredibly nervous.

if i do get a re-test then I will go into detail about everything relateing to this site that causes me angst. if that doesnt do it, then it wasnt mean to be.

undesirable, will you tell me what you put in your appeal letter that was successful in getting your re-test?

did you tell your polygrapher that you had read all this stuff? I did not, i only said that i had visited internet sites.

Bill Crider wrote on May 27^th, 2004 at 10:10pm:




Then why do you spend so damned much time on it every day? You've studied the whole site backwards and forwards and read TLBTLD a dozen times I'm sure...

this is exactly what happened to me. ( i am the same as 2 time loser and cave run on this post)

I failed my re-test and was very tense during the test knowing when the relvelants were coming. I am going to send in my letter as well. my first test was inconclusive. the fact that you got a re-test after a fail gives me some hope that i'll get 1 more chance to fail it

no offense, but this sites only hurts innocent people who dont use countermeasures. just knowing what i knew made me "feel" deceptive during my poly

and no, im not some polygrapher trying to back door anyone. I just had my 2nd poly on monday and failed

All interested parties-

Just an update. I failed my second poly, no surprises there. I noticed that during the 'in-test' phase, I was anticipating the relevant questions just as I did during my first test. I suspect this contributed to my failure, as no countermeasures were attempted. I would have to say that visiting this site and reading other's accounts of polygraph tests before submitting to one's own increase the apprehension about the test, and therefore may significantly contribute to increased chances of failure. I don't plan to contest the results this time. I don't see any point to it, although I will request all records of my previous polygraphs citing the FOIA.

Regards,

Undesireable

your story gives me hope. i am going to appeal my 2nd poly whihc i am sure will result in the thin letter.

Dear FBI Applicant,

I was found inconclusive on my first test and rescheduled for a retest within six weeks without any action on my part.  I was found "not within acceptable parameters" and appealed the official letter I was sent about three weeks after the second test.  My appeal for the third polygraph went for almost two months before I was scheduled for a third.  I "passed" the third but there is nothing in writing, they just proceed with the hiring process.  Anonymous is correct that the appeals process is not documented or welcomed by the FBI.  The letter they send infers that the decision is final and that is that.   All things in politics and government are subject to appeal.  People make mistakes and the government makes mistakes.  You just have to find the right person to talk or write to.

The FBI is in a jam right now.  The Director has stated that between attrition and new hires, over 1,100 Special Agents and 2,400 support personal are approved for hiring in fiscal year 2004 (Congressional Statement to Congress, Congressional Budget Office, and response to shortcomings in the 9/11 Commission findings).  This money has to be spent or lost.  Assuming the 50% failure ratio that has been publicly documented in interviews in the past, at least 7,000 polygraph test will have to be performed in order to attain the numbers.  

Do not be surprised if the "polygraph failure rate" gets bumped down in the next few months to accomodate the Director's goals.

All appeals are going to take alot longer since there will not be as many open slots available with current examiners or equipment which are taxed to the maximum at this time.

Regards.

FBI Applicant,

A letter reading "not within acceptable parameters" is the FBI's pleasant method of indicating that you indicated deception during your polygraph - meaning you failed according to their terms.

Cave run is correct in that an inconclusive polygraph typically results in a retest initiated by the examiner on the examinee's behalf simply because inconclusive results do not necessarily indicate deception.

Realize that based on what you said was written in your letter and the fact that your examiner said you were having "problems," you likely did not pass the polygraph as opposed to producing inconclusive results.  This is why you have not been contacted yet for a retest.  Rarely will you hear an FBI polygraph examiner use the term "failed" as that would be calling you a liar.  Rather, the FBI wants to make the disqualification more "legitimate" by indicating that you were not within "acceptable parameters."  In a sense, they are trying to align the polygraph examination with the other steps in the process - Phase I, Phase II, PRT/PFT - all of these need a particular quantified "score" to pass.  The FBI would like you to view the polygraph in this same light to avoid calling you a liar.

The appeal process for a failed polygraph is rather informal and can take a very long time.  Before you are scheduled for a retest you will most likely be interviewed/interrogated by an agent to determine your "sincerity."  It is up to the agent to probe you well enough to provide a report that is then used to decide if you will be granted a retest.

Good luck.

I guess I should explain...the letter did have the words "not within acceptable parameters" but the tester told me that I was having "problems".  I have to think that it was inconclusive then but who knows how things work.

As I said, my background check would not bring anything up so I know I would be vindicated if that was allowed to proceed but it won't because of the polygraph.

Thank you for your answers and hopefully in the next month or so I should hear something one way or the other.

i too had an inconclusicvve poly but was told that warrants an immediate re-test which i will have soon

Dear FBI Applicant,

Two months from the receipt of your letter is not unusual.  An inconclusive letter is better than a "not within acceptable parameters" letter.  The difference is slight but signicant in the end result.  You should request the second polygraph from the office (return address) that sent you your not acceptable letter.   This may not be at all related to anyone that you have dealt with earlier. 

The system is heavily overloaded due to the burden of only hiring people who can "pass" the polygraph.  Your appeal is very important because it serves as an official letter that you contest "not being within acceptable parameters."  Your appeal also lets them know that you are one more taxpayer, as well as applicant, who want some kind of accountability for repealing a conditional job offer based only on polygraph results.  Are truly the "smartest and brightest minds" going to apply for a job that proudly touts the polygraph as being "highly accurate" after reading  the NAS report?

I think the most frustrating part of anyone being not hired due to polygraph results is not being able to get the background check to defend one's reputation and integrity (blind heresay accusations treated as fact would not be acceptable according to the Constitution).

Regards.

FBIApplicant-

I too had problems with my polygraph results, and sent a certified letter to Director Mueller as recommended on this site. I received a reply approximately 2 months after the letter had been received, and now have a second polygraph examination scheduled. I'll post with the results at a later date.

Best of luck to you,

Undesireable

I am hoping that someone here will be able to answer this question:  How long does it usually take to get any answer, one way or the other, regarding an appeal?

I wrote an appeal letter regarding a DQ letter I received in February (the DQ was in regards to an inconclusive poly- wasn't told I failed just that I had problems which I am sure that the background check would prove that there were no problems).  The person I sent the appeal letter to replied and told me that they were not the correct person but they assured me that they would pass my appeal letter on to the correct people and that I would soon be hearing from them (I have no reason to believe that they did not do as they said they would since they are the ones that offered me the job in the first place).  The person I sent the appeal letter to is in the higher management of the office I would have been working for at FBI HQ and is also the person I was told by personnel to send the letter to since my applicant co-ordinator was not answering messages (I had left 4-5 messages in a two week period with no response).   

This was over a month ago.  Is this standard for the amount of time for an appeal?  I assume that they would actually notify me one way or the other but maybe I am mistaken.  Should I send another letter to the same person in the hopes that they will try to find out what is going on (although, I don't want to upset someone I "may" be working for by sending a bunch of letters to them)?  Should I send a letter to the applicant co-ordinator referencing the letter to / from the person I contacted in February / March?

If anyone has any information regarding the length of time it takes for appeals, I would greatly appreciate the help.  And I want to thank you all in advance for any help / information.