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 2 post(s).
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jun 28th, 2004 at 8:46am
  Mark & Quote
The most commonly used technique without "control" questions is the relevant/irrelevant (R/I) "test." Instead of comparing reactions to relevant questions against reactions to "control" questions, the polygrapher asks a series of relevant questions several times, each time in a different order. If the examinee reacts strongly and consistently to a relevant question, then he is deemed to be deceptive.

One approach to countermeasuring the R/I technique is to augment reactions to two different relevant questions during each question series, in order to prevent reactions to any single relevant question from standing out.

However, because of the very high false positive rate that would be expected with the R/I technique, it might be easier to explain away any reactions than it would be with a probable-lie CQT, and behavioral countermeasures (see Ch. 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector) might be enough to get one through the ordeal.

If the polygrapher sees no significant reaction to any of the relevant questions, he may throw in a "control" question to see if the examinee will show a reaction to that. A common way of doing this is to mis-state an irrelevant question that has previously been reviewed, for example, by asking, "Were you born on June 19th, 1980?" when it had previously been made clear that your birth date was June 9th, 1980. In other cases, a standard probable-lie "control" question may be inserted. If a "control" question is added to a relevant/irrelevant question series, then it would be beneficial to show a reaction to it.

In addition, some polygraphers may use announcements of the beggining and ending of the examination as a sort of "control" stimulus against which reactions to relevant questions will also be compared. Before asking the questions in a series, the examiner will state, "The test is about to begin." And at the end, he will state, "The test is now over." It would be beneficial to show a reaction to these announcements, too, if made.

For further reading on the R/I technique, see TLBTLD (p. 115 ff. of the 3rd ed.).
Posted by: dork
Posted on: Jun 28th, 2004 at 3:03am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
So, what about a test with no control questions, what do you do? any augmentations, and if so, when? thanks for your help.