Myth #8 -- People shouldn't complain about the polygraph test since few things in life are 100%

One can just imagine a polygrapher coming home from a test with a 50% and using this excuse on their parents -- few people scored a 100% on the test, so there is no reason to complain about their score.

Of course, the list arguments of against polygraph testing doesn't end with the (valid) complaint about its poor accuracy.   It also includes, for example, the foolishness of allowing people who are paid to lie, harass, and use bad technology to evaluate the suitability of applicants.  Given that we expect people charged with protecting our national security to be truthfull, respectfull, and technologically savy, why on earth do we allow people who choose to get paid to do the exact opposite of these things to tell us who is a good person and who is a bad person?


Additional note on myth #6 -- during one of my exams (second with this agency), my polygrapher insisted that I must tell her something to explain why I responded to one of the questions.  I refused to do so, since I had nothing relevant to say about that question.  She said that she had to fail me unless I confessed something.  It appears that polygraphers will do anything to beef up their utility and accuracy statistics -- if the applicant confesses something, then they can claim the test was accurate, if they don't then they must fail.  Few people won't come up with something to confess in this situation.  I confessed nothing, so I failed the question, but was still able to pass it during my next (third) examination.

During this exam (second) I mentioned to my polygrapher that I know people who have made up stuff to appease an examiner, but my concerns were dismissed.  Others lied to appease the polygrapher and passed, I held on to the high moral ground and failed.

Two Block,

I was VERY confused during the verbal assault on my character. Since I had been completely honest, I didn't know what to believe. I thought it may have been some sort of additional testing or that something had really gone wrong with the test. While my examiner said horrible things about me, I was busy trying to defend myself and convince him that I had told the truth. It's hard to keep up--the put-downs and slams are flying so fast. I have a fair amount of patience, but I had been pushed so far with the insults, that at one point, I almost completely lost my temper and felt a strong urge to curse at the examiner and tell him exactly what I thought of him. However, the little voice inside my head told me that no matter what had gone wrong with the test, cursing at the examiner couldn't possibly help. I took the high road and even though my examiner treated me like a piece of trash, I exercised restraint and was respectful to him at all times. That doesn't mean, however, that I didn't give him some back. I challenged him, even putting him in the hot seat, at one point. Looking back, not losing it and not allowing him to get the best of me satisfies me. It wasn't easy to maintain my composure, resisting the tempation to tell him off. By the time I left the examination room, my examiner was really worked up and bent out of shape. He definitely earned his money that day, if there is such a thing when it comes to polygraphy. 

Onesimus

I would like to understand how you or anyone, for that matter, can just do nothing while being verbally assaulted. What is going through your mind while being cursed and belittled? Did you think the polygrapher had a right to abuse you? Do you think a job is worth it? NO LEO has a legal or moral right to verbally assualt anyone especially on someone who is just seeking employment.

In my younger days, I have had my butt chewed out a few times by my boss. Most was done professionally and I accepted them as a learning experience. One boss "started" with a few choice curse words and called me a name that I don't take from anyone and he went down and out. I was looking for a job when I found that one.

I would like comments, to the first para., from anyone who has been verbally abused by a polygrapher. Your comments may be used in a research paper if I can ever find the time to complete it.

Onesimus wrote on Feb 8^th, 2006 at 5:19am:


Onesimus,

The truth of the matter is that, George's Minions wouldn't even exist, if the BS that is the Polygraph didn't exist. So they (the polygraph community) now has to live with the reality (not a myth), that their little trade secrets and world is out in the sun, for everyone to know. Thats why if you took a polygraph anytime in the past, the examiner always told you never to speak or discuss it. Bottom line they are feeling the heat and everyone knows their little scam.  And everytime they give a polygraph George's Minions increase. Its a self defeating prophesy for the polygraphers. There are more of us than you !  And with numbers comes political clout. I hope your polygrapher reads this, and fully realizes that he will be the one hit on the ass as they terminate him because he is now obsolete. But telemarketing firms are always hiring, they could use a good bunch of fast talking BSers. But if your polygrapher had any nerve at all, he would come on in and support his position. But alas, no guts no glory and hiding behind a worthless machine. There are a few Polygraphers that do come on I can respect because they are at least willing to debate.

Regards ..... 

Looks like the streak is at least partially broken as I passed the CI portion of my exam this time.  My examiner was a senior polygrapher who spent 30 minutes plus yelling and cursing at me.  He was mad at, among other things, George for outting him and me for my polygraph myths and for being a "jerk" to his polygraphers.  He referred to this site's members as George's minions and said he didn't care if I posted more polygraph myths.  He either said, "I don't care if the door hits your ass on the way out", or "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out" -- I don't remember, and they never give me the audio tape after the exam He also seemed to think he had busted one of my myths when I passed the CI portion, but as far as I'm concerned he actually busted his own polygrapher's myth since she is the one who told me I would fail.  He also used some of the variant myths on me which I had not yet posted.  He also shouted out several times during the exam that the polygraph machine does not detect lies

Thanks, Johnn

I have a list of some more that I still haven't posted, but they are just variations of the existing ones.  It's disappointing that none of our polygraph experts have attempted to rebut any of my claims.

I'm going for yet another polygraph (#7) tomorrow morning at 8:30, and I was informed by my last polygrapher that I would fail again, so perhaps I'll extend my fail streak to 5 and have some more good material tomorrow.  My last polygrapher also tried to convince me to drop out of the process, but to no avail.  It’s almost fun to listen to Polygraphers/adjudicators tell me how I'm going to lose my job if I don't do better on the polygraph.

I have plenty of good notes from #6 that I haven't posted as well as notes from earlier ones with different agencies.  

Not sure yet how much/when I'll post this other information.

Hopefully I'll at least be awake for my poly tomorrow as I have a long, traffic filled drive and I'm not a morning person.

Onesimus -
Very good!!

No rebuttals on any of these?

I'll be adding some more later.

Onesimus,

Excellent points! You might want to provide your polygrapher with a printout of this message thread tomorrow.

Myth #7 -- People who complain about their polygraph experience have something to hide.

No comments about this one other than that I’ve heard it from several sources and it really annoys me.

Myth #6 – Polygraph testing is useful for extracting confessions.   

I strongly suspect that the utility statistics reported to congress are inaccurate.  For example, during my last polygraph test, I was asked questions about foreign nationals.  Since I have nothing of great interest to say to this or any other question, I made a few remarks about some people I knew in college and that one of my neighbors may or may not have been a Russian citizen.  I was cut-off when the polygrapher realized I had nothing substantial to say and later polygraphed.  Subsequently I was told to say more about foreign nationals.  On the confession tape, the polygrapher stated something like “After polygraph testing, he then admitted…”.  But at no point did I give the polygrapher any damaging statements about foreign nationals.  Furthermore, the reason that some of these statements were made after polygraph test was because I was directed to do so by the polygrapher.  I have had other similar experiences that lead me to question the accuracy of the utility statistics.

I suspect that the only reason polygraph tests are used for pre-employment screenings is because of their alleged usefulness in extracting confessions given that congress must be well aware that the test itself is not accurate.  Attacking the utility statistics may be a very powerful an under-utilized weapon on the war against polygraph screening tests.  Keep in mind that polygraphers are paid liars.  Thus, it is not reasonable to believe their utility statistics are accurate.

Myth #5 -- Polygraphers have advanced degrees.

I wouldn’t listen to someone who had a P.H.D. in astrology.  I don’t care how many years a polygrapher has spent honing his bogus trade.

You can tell I’m getting tired of this, as the last two got short write-ups.

Myth #4 -- You shouldn’t talk to the victims of the polygraph test, but rather polygraphers who give the test all the time.  Each polygraph experience is different, so you should not be bothered by horror stories you may have heard in the past.  People who have only been polygraphed a few times obviously not experts and should not be listened to.

I find it hard to believe that many people fall for this myth.  Just replace polygrapher with rapist and the lunacy of this argument should be self-evident.

Myth #3 -- You aren’t around people the people you know who have failed polygraphs every second of the day, so they must have something bad in their background causing them to fail that you just don’t know about.

I’ve heard this several times from polygraphers.  They ask near the beginning of the test what concerns I have and I mention that several people who I respect have failed their polygraph tests.  They polygrapher then attempts to assure me that they deserved to fail, and that if I am truthfull, I have nothing to fear.

The first problem with this argument is that I have failed, been inconclusive, and passed polygraph tests.  Does the polygrapher really believe they can convince me their test works when I know first hand that it doesn’t?

Secondly, it is not reasonable to believe that in a few hours time, using de-bunked methods, a polygrapher can more accurately determine someone’s trustworthiness than I can after having known them for years.  In order to believe this, I would also have to ignore that many of those people have passed polygraph tests with other agencies.  If it was just one person, this might be plausible, but in general the people I know who are both intelligent and actively religious have great difficulty with the polygraph test.  The only intelligent and very religious person I have known to easily pass a polygraph had a very laid-back personality.

Myth #2 -- You can’t judge the polygraph community by a few bad apples.  Every profession has bad apples, including the doctoral profession

This is a false analogy because there are good doctors.  When a good doctor does his job correctly, he can save someone’s life.  When a “good” polygrapher does his job, he attempts to use an instrument incapable of detecting lies to decide if his victim is lying and intentionally lies to and often harasses his victim.  A comparison to con-artists would be more apt than a comparison to doctors.

Myth #1 -- You can’t put a price on national security.

There are two problems with this myth.  First, people put a price on their own security every time they don’t buy the safest car out there, don’t buy a house in the safest neighborhood, buy cheaper health insurance, etc.  If we really couldn’t put a price on national security, we’d pay for guards every ten feet on the border, ships everywhere on the coastline, etc.

Secondly, it is likely that polygraph testing is harmful to national security.  The test is based on lies and deception.  Not surprisingly, lies and deception are also the norm for people who work in cleared professions.  Truth is defined as what is beneficial to self, company, or organization.  This is then dressed up as actually being best for national security.  The test is based on pseudo-science.  Again, not surprisingly, there are serious technical deficiencies with many people who work in cleared professions.  If only they replaced the polygraph test with a competency test!

In order to get into college, I took tests to measure my intelligence and was interviewed by intelligent people.  When I went to college, I was surrounded my intelligent people.  When I joined a Church, I was asked questions about religion by religious people.  When I go to Church, I am surrounded by religious people.  When I started my career I was lied to, harassed, and given pseudo-scientific tests.  When I go to work, I am surrounded by many unethical and non-technical people.  Fortunately there are a few good ones there out there too that slip by the polygraphers.

Well, I was nice during my first poly with agency #3 (5th poly overall).  I put up with the lies and half-truths told during the exam, as well as the spin on my confessions at the end of the exam and gave them my screen name on this site.  I put up with all this because I thought I had passed and because it was one of the least un-professional exams I had taken.  Since they are making me take poly #2 (#6 overall) tomorrow, I see that strategy did not work.   

Since I don’t want to waste too much of today writing this, I’ll try to make this quick.  I apologize for any ambiguities, grammatical errors, or errors of fact.