George W. Maschke wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 4:41pm:


Judging by the explicit nature of the questions regarding sex, this polygraph would appear to be one done by a federal agency. 

Aunty Agony wrote on Sep 13^th, 2015 at 5:21pm:


Thank you Aunty Agony !  I've never seen it stated better !  Some anti-polygraph people may argue against recommending that applicants research and conduct countermeasures or do research to learn the true nature of the polygraph fraud.  I don't think anyone can disagree, however,  that promoting the understanding that polygraphers are con-artists who will twist your words and use everything against you is the right thing to do. 

ITookAPoly wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:

It is a bad idea to make minor confessions of any kind at any time during a hostile interrogation.  Your inquisitor will take this as a sign of weakness, inflate its importance, and pretend to believe that it proves you are a despicable criminal.

A pre-employment lie-detector interview is a game of chance.  There is no strategy that guarantees a win, but there are some moves that guarantee a loss.  One of the losing moves is a minor confession.

In general, an applicant must decide -- very early in the application process -- what misdemeanors to admit to, disclose these misdemeanors on the proper forms, and never never never admit to anything else.  This not only gives the superficial appearance of complete honesty, but also establishes the applicant as a hardheaded warrior who will not take any crap from some egghead hiding behind squiggly lines on a graph.

-Aunty Agony.

Aunty Agony wrote on Sep 10^th, 2015 at 4:13pm:

During his discussion of everything sexual others have told him, he seemed to be attempting to get an admission of some sort, saying if there's ANYTHING at all that comes up in your head when I ask the question, is gonna show on the machine, so you need to "get it out" now.

ITookAPoly wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:

Absent any post-test interrogation, when would you have made such a confession?

-Aunty Agony.

ITookAPoly wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 5:08pm:


I wonder if his chief had to take a polygraph if the chief would pass ?  It makes me sick to see these guys carry the rank of detective or special agent.  They are a stain on the badges of the real detectives and special agents.  

George W. Maschke wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 4:41pm:


It was a police department in a pretty bad part of town, with a reputation for being the one of the worst departments in the state. The polygrapher was a detective, he once had a news article written about him being one of the top paid officers, due to the mass overtime he worked.

Yes he said 90% fail, then even told me how many tests he's done that month, and how many passed. It was low. Even going as far as saying if you ever make it in this field, you'll hear people call me all kinda of bad names because I failed them. He also stated he was one of the best in the state.

Ex Member wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:


Indeed, that is another unusual thing. I'm not aware of any agency with a 90% pre-employment polygraph fail rate, and it is unusual for a polygrapher to say such a thing to an examinee.

It's not at all unusual for truthful people to fail the polygraph, but certain aspects of your experience are not so common. For example, it's not so common nowadays for a polygrapher to focus so heavily on sexual matters in a pre-employment polygraph. What sort of job was this for? Was it with a federal agency?

Second, it's common practice for polygraphers to confront the examinee with the results when the charts are scored as "deception indicated" and to interrogate the examinee in an attempt to elicit a disqualifying admission. So the absence of a post-test interrogation is unusual.

ITookAPoly wrote on Sep 9^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:


IMHO, this is a real pre-test sin, contaminating the entire exam.

Hello, recently I was the subject of a pre employment polygraph, and informed I failed by letter afterwards. 
It was 3  hours with only 20 minutes hooked up to the machine. It began with the examiner asking what I know about it, then convincing me that it works. Then he went into telling me how he's heard everything, and he doesn't care, it won't leave the room. He said he fails about 90% of people who he tests.  And he doesn't care about me or my past. He spent over an hour telling me what people have admitted,  Everything was sexual, sex with animals, cheating, anal sex, homosexual,  strangling yourself, everyone has something,  ect. A little bit about how important the job is, and how much trust is needed. How your whole life is around making decisions.  I didn't confess to anything. The polygrapher seemed like a real scumbag in my eyes, almost walked out. Then test time came, few questions with a  minute break  between sets. After each set he asked is I had any questions, I did not. He said we're all done here, keep your head up and nose clean. It appeared we left on good terms. 
There were less than 15 questions, 1 or 2 controls.. I may have reacted too strongly to a control.

Does this sound like a common polygraph? 
Should I have given this guy some minor confession to satisfy him?