nonombre:

The next time I run an exam Ill have to wear a tin foil hat as a counter-counter measure when I put the spaghetti strainer onthe guy's head.

nonombre wrote on Aug 1^st, 2006 at 12:31am:

[quote author=Onesimus link=board=police;num=1153347347;start=20#29 date=07/30/06 at 12:12:18]

Were you trying to polygraph a rabbit?



tried to interrogate a rabbit once.  SOB bit me

Dippity

alterego1 wrote on Jul 31^st, 2006 at 7:18am:


Absolutely.  I have also had people walk in with the perverbial "tack in the shoe,"  dark sunglasses that they TRIED to refuse to take off ("Prescription, they said.)  I took them off and examined them.  The glasses were dime store plastic.  And my personal favorite, teeth wrapped in aluminum foil because they were told that would "confuse" the polygraph....

Regards,

Nonombre

My concept of eliminating the breathing data variable is to NOT alter the breathing pattern at all.  To maintain an absolute pattern without exception, even to the point of answering the question at the same point in the cycle each time for every question.  Use CMs to alter the other data and let the breathing be a mute point.

Oh... nonombre and Sergeant, just for the record, I run 5k (3.1 miles) in 22 minutes - that is three 7 min miles back to back.   

One other comment about breathe control.  I'm a master diver and on average I only take 4-5 breaths per minute when diving and I maintain that rate for up to 90 minutes.  Six breathes a minute (2 every 20 seconds) sounds like a luxury, nonombre.

So nonombre.....you really had subjects who tried to take 2-4 breaths per second  ???

Food for thought, Eosjupiter.  I will take that into consideration...

Regards,

Nonombre

nonombre wrote on Jul 30^th, 2006 at 4:48pm:


Nonombre,

Well good to see you stuck around for some more fun and games. Now as far as the breathing rate is concerned and other manipulations that can be effected by the subject. The person has to find his own comfortable breathing rate and level. Adaptation is the key. If you can't adapt the methods and practice to yourself then nothing will work at all. Hence you get to expel your words of wisdom on the individual you are currently interrogating, and supposedly make him stop his now obvious attempt to employ countermeasures.  But from my own experience, and other sources, you may catch a rookie, but the masters are tough. 

Regards ..... 

nonombre wrote on Jul 30^th, 2006 at 4:48pm:


Were you trying to polygraph a rabbit?

Nonombre,

Fair enough, understood.

Just curious... what do the polygraph examinee's say in response to you questioning their breathing rate of one or two breaths per 20/25 seconds.? 

Do they actually admit that they were trying to control their breathing, or, do they tell you that they did not realize they were only taking one to two breaths per 20/25 seconds?


triple x

Quote:


Triple x,

Truth is, I see it all the time.  Subjects taking 2-4 breaths per second in an effort to affect the outcome of their polygraph examinations.  I believe someone else referred to these folks as "dumb asses.")  I must agree.  However, that does not mitigate the fact that there are lots of them out there...

Like I said, I talk to each of these people and explain the facts of life.  Approximately 95% of them will then drop their attempts to manipulate the test and we will then get along just fine.  The remainder are considered good candidates for a job at Pizza Hut, or the local donut shop.  Not my police department....

Regards,

Nonombre

alterego1,

I completely agree with you... anyone who goes into a polygraph trying to breathe only once or twice every 20/25 seconds deserves to fail. That's completely idiotic.

What post did Nonombre get the idea that someone would want to basically hold their breath during a polygraph? Actually, I think there is a short reference in Doug Williams book, "How to sting the polygraph" that describes holding your breath for short periods during a polygraph exam. However, I would have to go back and read his book again, but I think even Doug Williams advised against holding your breath during a polygraph.

v/r
triple x

TripleX

I think the instances of individuals being "caught" using breathing countermeasures (such as those nonombre described) are simply accounts where the examinee is just a complete dumbass and has no clue what he/she is doing.

If one uses breathing countermeasures as per TLBTLD, then I would find it very hard to believe they could be detected.  Otherwise, all of the internet celebrity polygraphers (such as nonombre) would have already stepped up to the plate to accept Andy Richardson's Countermeasure Challenge  

Nonombre,

You write in part:

"Look at your watch, Okay, now do you best to take no more than 2 breaths in the next 20 to 25 second period.  Does that feel natural?  Do you think that looks natural?  Go ahead, practice for awhile.  Does that feel natural yet?  Is your body feeling a little oxygen starved?  Go ahead, keep it up for awhile..."

Where do you get that anyone on this message board thinks we can only take one to two breaths per 20 to 25 seconds during a polygraph exam.? Obviously, this does not feel natural, who ever said that it did.? With a little focused attention and a few minutes of practice, anyone can learn to control their breathing rate, 4-seconds per breath... or, 2 seconds in, and 2 seconds out. Not to exceed no more than 4-seconds per breathing cycle.

If you think someone trying to control their breathing would actually take only one or two breaths per 20 to 25 seconds would be foolish. I would have to agree with you on this issue. It would obviously appear that the examinee is holding their breath if only they only took one to two breaths per 20/25 seconds.

Who on this board would argue with you on that... you're right! They would be foolish. 

Those of us that have actually taken polygraphs and employed cm's which include controlled breathing rates know that you should maintain a breathing rate of approximately 4-seconds per breathing cycle, in & out = 4 seconds. 

No argument with you on the one to two breathes per 20 to 25 seconds here... 


triple x

To the anonymous poster:

I'm sure nonombre and the rest of the pro-poly camp don't appreciate your "anatomical trivia," but the rest of us sure do  

The following informed commentary was forwarded to AntiPolygraph.org with a request that it be posted anonymously:

Underlyingtruth,
 
You write:

Quote:

 
Although you are correct in your assertion that the respiratory channel can be manipulated knowledgably, at will, and under control by the examinee, the phenomenon is much more all-encompassing and significant than you realize.  Polygraphers are taught that there are roughly a dozen or less scorable respiratory responses (see various AntiPolygraph.org reading room documents outlining these responses)* that you and anyone can be taught to produce with about 5 minutes of practice.  Let me repeat--not only can you generally affect the respiratory channels, but also you can easily and specifically produce the responses to control questions that are widely recognized and scored.   
 
Adding even more significance to this phenomenon is the fact that the eletrodermal (sweating) center and the respiratory center are in close proximity in the medulla of the examinee's brainstem.  Trust me--lol---this little bit of anatomical trivia does have some significance--almost any manipulation involving respiration (because of the cross or dual activation of the two centers) will be mirrored in some way in the electrodermal channel, i.e., you get twice the bang for your buck as it were, i.e., affecting two dependent variables (respiration and sweating) for your efforts at manipulating one (respiration).  This latter connection is so well known in polygraph circles, that your examiner would like you to take a deep breath before the substantive test without his instructing you to do so just to see if the electrodermal channel is functioning properly. Make no mistake--taking a deep breath at control questions (or any other point within the exam) is not a successful respiratory countermeasure (either thought by your examiner to be a countermeasure or an artifact leaving you likely to be accused of the former), but producing the known and widely scored respiratory pattern alterations (part of the public record available to everyone on this site) is most definitely one part of a logical route for successful countermeasure effort(s).

* Note: See, especially, the DoDPI Numerical Evaluation Scoring System. --AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

Sergeant1107 wrote on Jul 25^th, 2006 at 3:09pm:


Hey Sergeant,

How ya doin'?  Okay, I guess the final word I will say regarding "controlled breathing" is this:

Look at your watch,   Okay, now do you best to take no more than 2 breaths in the next 20 to 25 second period.  Does that feel natural?  Do you think that looks natural?  Go ahead, practice for awhile.  Does that feel natural yet?  Is your body feeling a little oxygen starved?  Go ahead, keep it up for awhile...

Sergeant, on the polygraph, that looks exactly like what it is, a deliberate and intentional behavior.  Is it a countermeasure?  Or is it all this fine "Police Training" I have been hearing about in the last few days?  Who knows?  Who cares?  In any case, when the VAST majority of the applicants observed engaging in this behavior are told to STOP, they do.  No harm, nor foul.  Those that don't are sent on their way, highly recommended for employment in the fast food or house cleaning industries...

Regards,

Nonombre

Sergeant1107 states it clearly.  If the polygraph were truly an effective, reliable devise, it would be able to detect (scientifically) when someone is telling the truth or being deceptive regardless of the way one may breathe.

I think this is a touchy subject for examiners because breathing is one input that the tester can consciously control.  If there are only minimal variations in the breathing patterns throughout the test questions, this will somewhat eliminate that variable all together.  Compound that with deliberate fluctuations on CQs and you have skewed up to half of their data.

nonombre wrote on Jul 24^th, 2006 at 5:06am:

Nonombre,

My point is, why is controlling your breathing in a stressful situation a problem?  It is an important skill for a police officer to have, and it has absolutely nothing to do with whether they are answering questions truthfully or not.

How a subject breathes shouldn’t have anything to do with passing a purportedly scientific test that is allegedly able to detect when someone is telling the truth or being deceptive.

The part that I consider to be “too bad, so sad” is that some percentage of police applicants (whether it is 2.5%, 25%, or whatever) are disqualified because they don’t allow themselves to become stressed in a stressful situation, and the polygraph examiner doesn’t know if they are doing so in an attempt to lie or are doing so because they are simply skilled at maintaining their calm in stressful situations.

If only there was some method of determining if these people were actually lying or simply breathing to control their stress because that’s how they deal with stress…  Hmmm…

It's a pad that some examiners will have you sit on.  It's pretty sensitive, and only detects movement.  I've never heard of it being incorporated into the chair itself, but I suppose it's possible.

To handle stress when dealing with your job requires training, knowledge, experience etc. How can this person justify using a poly exam to test someone who comes into the exam thinking if they tell the truth, then they have nothing to be concerned about!

Has this person never heard of a cold blooded killer? ???
When they kill, they remain calm. From what I have read about how to pass the poly, one stays calm until one decides to elevate a responce to a control question.

By the way, I have heard of chairs being able to detect the pucker CM. Is this true? I hear no and yes.

retcopper wrote on Jul 24^th, 2006 at 5:04pm:


OK, KM, since I never really expected a polygrapher to answer the difficult questions anyway, I won't.

Perhaps a new DQ should be called, more appropriately then, "too nervous for LE work"?  Some of the best LEO's I have known and worked with, including in some very tense situations, have done poorly at best on a polygraph.  I certainly didn't consider them too nervous for LE and I know that their character was/is beyond any "reproachable" standard that we would objectively apply.

Underminingtruth

If you have taken as many polygraphs as you say you have then I care not to respond to people like you. So keep on posting your nonsense but  do not include me in your rhetorical drivel.

retcopper wrote on Jul 24^th, 2006 at 3:27pm:


It IS good to see you back!  There are many questions and comments for you guys that retcopper is afraid to answer.