As much as polygraph operators would like to avoid the disinfectant effect of sunlight, I think that even they realize that NDAs would be inappropriate. 

Remember, one of the central tenets of polygraphy is that it masquerades as science.

Legitimate scientific techniques do not involve opaque “black boxes.” Methods are made public, and others are encouraged to replicate them to prove validity. 

Even the polygraph operators are smart enough to know that this won’t fly. 

Remember, admission/acceptance in court is the holy grail of the private polygraph world. Leonarde Keeler, huckster who first commercialized polygraphy in the 1920s, was obsessed with getting the device into the courtroom. This has been a priority for polygraph operators ever since.

The operators would have to abandon the pitch for court admissibility (and thus legitimacy) if they tried to go NDA route. The second the first case got to court, everything would be made public anyway.

While secrecy may work for the federal government’s national security polygraph apparatus, it’s never going to fly for the private polygraph schools. 

Related note, the biggest place you see “it’s a secret” is with regard to countermeasures. 

The polygraph operators know that the emperor is naked. They will tell you that it’s “advanced material” to be taught in seminars, etc (the Krapohl book listed above takes this approach). 

The reality is that they have no ability to detect countermeasures. They are embracing secrecy because they have no other choice. 

When you get to the secret meeting, you find out that the methodology consists of bluffing, and leveling false accusations at those who made gross motor movements because they were nervous. 

Bringing things full circle, I would pay to see a private polygraph operator attempt to defend an allegation of countermeasures in a courtroom, it would be highly entertaining.

Correct.

Thank you for the reply.   If this is true,  then there is nothing legally binding by either the "schools" or the government which prevents professional polygraphers from coming forward(like Doug Williams) and admitting that its "garbage"? 

I do not have first-hand knowledge in this respect, but I have never heard of any polygraph school requiring students to sign any non-disclosure form regarding the training they receive, though student handouts might be copyrighted.

The polygraph techniques in use today are not secret. They're discussed, for example, in the American Polygraph Association's publications which anyone can obtain, as well as in various handbooks, for example:

• Reid, John E. and Fred E. Inbau. Truth and Deception: The Polygraph ("Lie-Detector") Technique. Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Co. 2nd ed. 1977.
• Abrams, Stan. The Complete Polygraph Handbook. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1989.
• Matte, James Allan. Forensic Psychophysiology Using the Polygraph - Scientific Truth Verification - Lie Detection. J.A.M. Publications, 1996
• Kleiner, Murray, ed. Handbook of Polygraph Testing. London: Academic Press, 2002.
• Krapohl, Donald J. and Pamela K. Shaw. Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice. Oxford: Academic Press, 2015.

And of course, there is the federal polygraph handbook, which you can download here:

https://antipolygraph.org/documents/federal-polygraph-handbook-02-10-2006.pdf

Hello, I was wondering if training for polygraphers requires them to sign non-disclosure agreements... For example:  If I want to attend the Baxter school of truth detection (or whatever its called)
Do they in return for the training require signing a non-disclosure?
Effectively preventing people who are officially trained from spilling the beans?