Polycop,

You wrote in part:


Quote:

4.  Bottom line, this person passed because he TOLD THE TRUTH.  You will never admit that but I have learned to accept your close mindedness...

Why do you suppose that there is a causal relationship between Canuck's having told the truth and his "passing" that which is wrongly called a "test?" The R/I technique is thoroughly discredited and has absolutely no grounding in the scientific method. (See the message thread, Peer-review and the Relevant/Irrelevant Technique?) I think that Canuck might better ascribe his passing to good luck.

Then again, any behavioral countermeasures he employed, and his augmented reaction during the "stim" test, may well have helped to increase his odds of passing.

As for countermeasures to the R/I technique, we stand by what we wrote in the 2nd edition The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.