Add Poll
Options: Text Color Split Pie
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
Topic Summary - Displaying 5 post(s).
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jul 8th, 2004 at 8:04am
  Mark & QuoteQuote

You're quite right that a lack of consistency doesn't prove that CQT polygraphy is not a scientific test.

However, it is telling that although the CQT has been in use for over half a century, there is still virtually no research regarding CQT polygraphy's test-retest reliability, that is, how well different administrations of the same "test" relate to one another. This is an area that DoDPI and others in the polygraph business seemingly would rather not explore.

Posted by: guest
Posted on: Jun 26th, 2004 at 7:48pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
But if poly testing was a science, results would be CONSISTANT, no matter who administers the test.  I.e., an ametuer's attempts would be have the same results as an expert's.  That's not the case w/polys.

I'm not defending polys here, but it isn't true that scientific tests are consistent even if administered by someone who doesn't know what they are doing.  In a high school physics class, I managed to prove that the value of the gravitational constant was I think 8 m/s/s, rather than 9.8 m/s/s.  For a more relevant example, X-rays can say different things depending on who reads them.  And those results can vary between professionals, not just between amatuers and professionals.  But I don't think anyone would argue that an X-ray isn't a scientific test.

The lack of consistency doesn't prove that a poly isn't a scientific test.
Posted by: Jim Banks
Posted on: Jun 25th, 2004 at 5:50am
  Mark & QuoteQuote

So does that mean you lied the first time? Do you need to keep having the questions 'rephrased' for you to pass?

So what do you considered a "skilled" poly operator? Someone that gives you results that YOU say are correct?  So are you saying operators that don't give you correct results are "unskilled???"

The point is, why is it so important to get the "skilled" operator if the machine suppose to be accurate?????????????????????

Sounds to me like the science doesn't work, unless you get a "skilled" operator...    ???
Posted by: Inactive Cop
Posted on: Jun 11th, 2004 at 11:33pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I took the CVSA today and passed it! I was completely honest, and talked about my previous CVSA experience. One question had to be re-worded and when the test was administered again I was told that I "did fine". From what I was told it seems that being "keyed up" or anxious will reduce the accuracy of the CVSA, whereby the Polygraph is supposed to be more accurate the higher your stress level. I believe that this instrument, in the hands of a skilled operator, and when used properly can perform the function for which it is intended (which is to 1) have the candidate be as truthful as possible in the pre-test and 2) give the background investigator some areas to focus on.
Posted by: Inactive Cop
Posted on: Jun 9th, 2004 at 5:49am
  Mark & Quote
Here is the situation. I passed a Poly about 5 years ago. Since then, I moved and tried to get hired on with another PD (this was about a year and a half ago) and they really torqued me up in the CVSA/pre-test/post-test interviews. I never lied, and was totally honest, yet the CVSA said I was indicating deception on 3 key questions. They used a background investigator, and his sgt (who administered the test) and the first words uttered to me in the pre-test were "I really don't want to travel to [name of state omitted] to do your background investigation. After failing the test I gave up and didn't want to be a cop anymore. Well, I have been out of the job since then, and I just can't stay away. I have applied with a local agency for a reserve position, and I have an upcoming CVSA. I am extremely nervous that it will call me a liar again, but by the same token I am determined not to let a machine decide my future. I need to have someone put my mind at ease so I am not nervous as hell when I take the test!!! Help!!!