Barry_C wrote on Oct 20^th, 2007 at 12:08am:

The research shows many examiners aren't good at detecting CMs, but thankfully the research shows, as this topic points out on post number one, it doesn't matter since they don't work.  We don't need to speculate.  We have data.

You have insufficient data to conclude that self-taught countermeasures don't work. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, the 2007 Honts & Alloway study has serious design shortcomings that make any generalization to field conditions all but impossible.


Quote:

You'll find that the only CMs that were effective (in the Honts study touted here so often) were those for which the subjects had hands-on training - not likely in the field, unless one hires the gentleman from the other site, but his suggestions are laughable.

Honts' contention that his earlier countermeasure studies prove that hands-on instruction is required for countermeasures to be effective is not supported by the evidence of his research. In his studies, conducted under extremely low motivational conditions, where there were no adverse consequences for failing to pass, subjects received a maximum of 30 minutes of instruction in polygraph procedure and countermeasures from graduate students. The notion that Honts's graduate students can teach examinees to fool the polygraph, but that they cannot figure it out for themselves (under real world conditions, they typically have considerably more than 30 minutes to prepare themselves), is wildly implausible.