wrote on Oct 14^th, 2002 at 6:00pm:

Fair Chance, hopefully as your name implies you will consider the following: Knowing full well that GM, BT and others will jump all over me, many, myself included, do not believe the polygraph should be used as the sole determinant.  That being said, despite what you state, it SHOULD be used as part of the fact gathering process ~note what YOU said ~FACT GATHERING ~ To be fair, yes there are cases (most?, I do not think so) where a "negative" (as you call it) polygraph can stop an application in it's tracks.  But what people should know is that in these cases, during the pretest, the applicant has denied some behavior that MIGHT preclude his hiring...he takes the examination, fails it and then confesses to lying about witholding the information.  Congratulations to him for being honest, but alas, he was too late. I assure you he was told up front to be honest (see the FBI manual on this site), but CHOSE not to be.  Now it is NOT a matter of the polygraph, rather it was his CONSCIOUS decision not to be honest.

Oh, but it is a matter of the polygraph.  What happens if this applicant, not being a lawyer, "fesses up" to something he or she considered minor and not initially worth mentioning after polygraph interrogation (the screening questions are generally subjective, you know)?  What if, after a rough session or multiple polygraphs, the desperate applicant falsely confesses?

Polygraph screening is a form of psychological torture, pure and simple.  No hiring decisions should ever be made based upon this process.

Skeptic