George

   I really expected better from you than this.  I do not "simply" decide to pass or fail people who take polygraph examinations.  I know that is what you want people to believe, but in my agency at least, it doesn't work that way.  I give people a polygraph, then I evaluate their responses and determine whether or not they are practicing deception.  But that is only a tentative determination.  As the entire interview is then reviewed by two senior examiners for Quality Assurance.  Certainly an unethical examiner could construct a test to achieve a pre-determined outcome, but with the current review process utilized in my agency, that examiner would be found out and eliminated.  As I'm sure you know, polygraph in the military is regulated starting at the Department of Defense level with DoD Directive and Regulation 5210.48(R).  Essentially, the regulation restricts the use of polygraph to individuals who are the focus of a felony criminal investigation and other investigative actions have failed to resolve the issue.  What this means is by the time someone comes to see me significant evidence has been accumulated that indicates their involvement in the crime.  Is that evidence ever wrong?  Of course, circumstantial evidence or eyewitness testimony can easily be wrong.  To that end I have personally exculpated 15% of the people I spoke with so far this year.  My rate seems to run between 12%-20% per year.  The variance seems to be attributable to the experience level of the investigators I work with.

But, back to the topic.  What we agree on is a person who committed a crime should not take a polygraph.  We disagree on whether or not innocent people should take one, but as I stated I know several who are happy they did.  We also seem to agree that everyone should make their own choice regarding how to deal with their individual situation, and should do that based on all the information available to them.  In that vain, we do not agree regarding making admissions apparently.  I thought we did.  I certainly would agree that it is not always in a person's best interest to confess, conversely there are certainly times when it is in their best interest.  Each person needs to weigh the pros and cons of their situation and decide how best to mitigate it.  Sometimes that will certainly be by telling the truth.

I appreciate your clarification of the information in your download, obviously I did have the options in the wrong order.  I was happy to note that your advice to criminals is do not take a polygraph and it ends there.  I would agree that countermeasures will not mitigate their result.

With regard to complete honesty, I knew what you were talking about, its very clear in the download.  They should be completely honest about their efforts to research polygraph.  I support that.  I continue to maintain that it is not a barrier to conducting a polygraph.  When I became a polygraph examiner I had been an investigator for 17 years.  In that time I had observed hundreds of CQT polygraphs.  I most certainly was fully aware of the basis format.  Add to that I was intimately familiar with the question order and specific test format.  I had to submit to a polygraph to get accepted into the program.  Despite my knowledge this was no problem.  Examiners themselves have to take polygraphs from time to time.  Their knowledge doesn't seem to be any barrier.  Certainly I'm not a researcher or an applied psychologist, so I don't know that I'm qualified to discuss theory, Dr Barland can do a much better job of that.  My belief that it is no obstecle is obviously ancedotal.  I would consider it to be naive of any examiner today to believe that the people they are talking with are completly ignorant of the process.  I welcome any discussion or questions the people I speak with have.  

As for blame, I think we've come down to a matter of mere semantics.  In light of your expansions upon your advice covered in this and other threads, I'll yield that point.  I hope that people who obtain and consider using your download take the time to fully explore your message board.

I do find it very revealing that you chose to answer for Wannabe, as the question to him dealt with what HE was basing his statements on, I still hope to hear from him on that.  Regarding your further contensions about the availability or lack of peer-reviewed research I find that pretty misleading.  While I would defer this topic entirely to Dr Barland, because I do not have the background to fully address it, I will make some comentary.  The brief for Amicus Curiae by the Committee of Concerned Social Scientists, 1997, for the Supreme Court in case #96-1133, United States v Scheffer lists about 40 peer-reviewed studies, which support the reliability and validity of the CQT.  With regard to uncontrolled/able variables I would certainly agree with that.  That issue exists with virtually all psychological research.  This is probably why psuedo-experimentation is the preferred method of conducting experiments for research psychologists.

Once again we seem to be mixing screening and criminal testing formats.  As I said previously these two areas are entirely different.  My comments are related to criminal testing only.