You can enhance your privacy when browsing and posting to this forum by using the free and open source Tor Browser and posting as a guest (using a fake e-mail address such as nobody@nowhere.com) or registering with a free, anonymous ProtonMail e-mail account. Registered users can exchange private messages with other registered users and receive notifications.
Because polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis and false positives are common, truthful persons who are aware of polygraphy's shortcomings may prudently choose to employ polygraph countermeasures to protect themselves against the risk of a false positive outcome.
As the late David T. Lykken, a past president of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, observed in Chapter 19 (How to Beat the Polygraph) of his seminal work on polygraphy, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd ed., 1998):
Quote:
...if I were somehow forced to take a polygraph test in relation to some important matter, I would certainly use these proven countermeasures rather than rely on the truth and my innocence as safeguards; an innocent suspect has nearly a 50:50 chance of failing a CQT administered under adversarial circumstances, and those odds are considerably worse than those involved in Russian roulette.
Posted by: Tron Posted on: Jul 6th, 2009 at 5:43am
I don't see any advantage to using multiple breathing techniques. That said, one might want to avoid is making each breathing reaction look precisely the same, for example, by not maintaining each for a fixed time count. In any event, if one applies either mental or physical countermeasures, an accompanying breathing reaction is likely to occur without one having to consciously think about it.
Posted by: ncnative Posted on: Apr 12th, 2009 at 5:20pm
Would it be wise to use multiple techniques, rather than just stick with one? I was wondering this because I thought to myself that it would look more obvious by just using one certain technique the entire test. I dunno for sure just my suspicion lol