Gordon,

It was not clear to me that the question you asked directly concerned any statement in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. I supposed you were referring to the current "headline" on the AntiPolygraph.org home page:

DESPITE POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS'
CLAIMS OF GREATER THAN 90% ACCURACY,
POLYGRAPH "TESTS" HAVE NEVER BEEN PROVEN
TO BE MORE ACCURATE THAN CHANCE
BY PEER-REVIEWED RESEARCH
CONDUCTED UNDER FIELD CONDITIONS 

Regarding peer-reviewed field studies of the CQT we write at p. 8 of the 1st edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector:

Quote:


Gordon, just what in the above passage do you think needs clarification? Or are you referring to something else?

You wrote, "Based on the comments others have made to this board, I'm sure I'm not the only one who misunderstood what your position is." To which comments do you refer?

Finally, you asked, "Just out of curiosity, what field studies do you accept as showing that the polygraph works?" The short answer is "none," as I thought I had made clear in my earlier reply.

George & Gino,

I'll be away for several weeks, and will start a new thread when I return if JB has not already done so.

Peace.

Gordon

George,

Yes, I was referring both to the pronouncement on your site and to your publication of Lykken's view without dissent or comment; to me that implies you agree with the view you are publishing.

Peace,

Gordon

Just thought I’d jump in here with my own polygraph experience.
(I posted this a while back on the NoPolygraph web site.)
Here goes:
In my last year on active duty I was posted to a “secret” job near Wash DC.  I was scheduled and took a CI polygraph administered by the NSA.
The questions were, “Do you intend to answer truthfully,” “Are you concerned about something we have not discussed,”  “Other than what you have told me, have you disclosed classified information to unauthorized personnel,” “Do you watch TV,” and “Have you answered truthfully.”
Well, according to the polygraph operator the first and last question, along with the watching TV and "concern" questions indicated “no deception,” whereas the “Other than what you have told me, have you disclosed classified information to unauthorized personnel” question was inconclusive.
Great.
If I intended to lie I would have indicated something on the first question, right?  And if I did lie, the last question would have trapped me, right?  However, somehow, the middle question was inconclusive.  This makes no sense and I was/am at a complete loss as to why it was supposedly inconclusive.
Story does not end.
The results were turned over to my military service’s investigators and they started a full-blown investigation. . .all on an inconclusive.  I was called in, interrogated, took the polygraph again, but this time the questions were expanded and included such things as “Have you ever stolen anything of any value from anyone,” and “Have you ever lied or cheated on any test or measurement.”  Again, the result on the one question was inconclusive.
Things didn’t end.
I was interrogated again and again, and was told by my organization that as long as I kept going back I would keep my clearance, but as soon as I said “no more,” I would be denied access to classified information.  Not officially suspended, barred or terminated, just not allowed access.
I went back and back, all with the same result.
Eventually, the investigators became more and more beligerant and the questions now included such things as “IN YOUR LIFE have you ever. . .”
(Casting a net. . .jsut to see what may be out there?)
At this time, and after 4-months of putting up with this abuse, the investigators wernt over the line and threatened my retirement---AND insisted I was hiding something—all because one question was inconclusive.
I spoke with a lawyer, told the investigators to pack sand, and I retired. Got my homorable discharge too.
I am still angry over this abuse and hold polygraph operators in such low regard that I seriously question their integrity and honor.   
I am a former civilian police officer, held the highest security clearances for 20-yrs in the military, served on the ground in Iraq, NEVER compromised security, and then the last year of my career this happens??
Disgusting

I am taking the LAPD polygraph in 3 1/2 weeks - can you email some specifics? Please?  I would greatly appreciate any specific control and specific relevent questions asked - my email is experiment77@hotmail.com

I'm not sure that the pass rate is low as 1 in 150. Nonetheless, I believe that that LAPD is falsely accusing a large number of candidates of deception (both by percentage and by numbers as a whole). Furthermore, the possibility of differential pass rates for whites and minority applicants is extremely likely. As many of the frequent visitors to this site know, the polygraph is the perfect "tool" for conducting racist or reverse-racist hiring practices in broad daylight.

Those who have been wronged by the LAPD polygraph should seriously consider getting together as a group and filing a lawsuit similar to the one Mark Zaid has filed against the FBI, DEA, and Secret Service. 

Those interested are encouraged to use the AntiPolygraph.org message board for networking purposes. Once a group forms, a wise idea would be to visit as many attorneys in the area as possible for free consultations. The goal is to find an experienced employment law attorney with interest in the case.

I sincerely hope that some of our participants will step up and put some heat on the folks in LA and let them know that government wrongdoing will not be tolerated.