Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7 ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts (Read 54852 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box MissionPoly-ban
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov 13th, 2001
Gender: Female
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #30 - Dec 6th, 2001 at 6:19am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.

The Polygraph results started with a page of all the admissions I made.  Then, after the last description of admissions, it states:

After the pre-test interview,  two polygraph tests were performed on the subject.

It is in the examiners opinion that there were no emotional responses indicative of deception on any any of the relevant questions, and that the subject was truthfull on all the relevant questions.

Thats all the polygraph results state.

Go figure?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box therock
Senior User
***
Offline



Posts: 50
Joined: Nov 17th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #31 - Dec 6th, 2001 at 7:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Here's a question, what if polygraphers do read this site, and learn about these counter measures being used by applicants, then basically I'm screwed if the polygrapher performing my interrogation learns about these techniques and would probably assume I used countermeasures, how can I get around this?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. (Guest)
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #32 - Dec 6th, 2001 at 6:49pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Netin,

Are the admissions you made in the pre-exam the same as the relevant issues on the exam?  If so, my prior post would possibly explain the examiner's findings.  I read one of your other posts on another discussion.  You said you had admitted to drug use in the late 90's.  Depending on the department?s cutoff, within the last five or 10 years, you may have made an admission to a relevant issue.

The Rock,

Properly trained examiners already know about all the countermeasures purported on this site and others that are not.  There is some good information to educate yourself on polygraph, so it is not so mystique when you take one, located here and on the internet.  I would advise you not to take any one site as the law on this issue.  I would tell you to look at all the information, read the research material in its entirety, and become truly educated as to the factual validity of the process you are involved in.  I must point out, that the issue of specific issue testing and pre-employment are separate and not to be confused.  Pre-employment deals with multiple issue testing and has not faired well in studies.  I have posted in the past, that if you have issues that you know you will have to be deceptive about, do not take the exam.  The only way the information on this site can hurt you is if you attempt to employ countermeasures on an exam that you have no deceptive issues on the relevant.  There are no studies to support that this venture will help you and I would argue it would inversely cause detriment to your outcome.  Again, if someone attempts to alter or distort the results of any examination, the motives of that person would become suspect.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box MissionPoly-ban
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov 13th, 2001
Gender: Female
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #33 - Dec 6th, 2001 at 10:16pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B. 

Yes I admitted to using Marijuana in 98/99, and that was a relevat question.  I thought the department wanted a 2 year break from any drug use, which seems to be the norm around here, but it turns out the wanted a three year break, and so I "didn't make the cut."  I was eliminated based on this admission to a relevant questions.

However, this was the only relevant question I messed up on
by making admissions. 

During the interview, they also asked questions about dealing, being involved in a felony, and knowingly receiving stolen goods. 

These questions are all WAY more serious, in my opinion, than the use of Marijuana (A "drug" grown by the goverment, distributed by the government, and prohibited by the government based on an inability to create a fullproof way of marketing it.  Gee...what is the public supposed to think...they see the government giving packages of Joints to sick people to do a study to see if it helps them feel BETTER and aid in the recovery process.  Some things just absolutely AMAZE me...but enough about Marijuana).

I lied in the interview about these issues by saying no involvement and never did any of them.

I also lied on these three issues during the test, using a physical countermeasure on the controls.

I passed the test, and have read the results stating, "There were no emotional reactions indicative of deception on any of the relevant questions, and it is in the opinion of the examiner that the subject was telling the truth."

JB:

Your missing the point that I passed the test using the oldest trick in the book.

There is obviously something to countermeasures. 

Netnin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. (Guest)
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #34 - Dec 6th, 2001 at 11:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Netin,

I think you are missing my point.  There are examiners who pass individuals on the exam even if the exam is deception indicated.  They justify this by saying the reactions to the relevant were caused by the admissions in the pre-exam phase. 

If someone makes an admission in the pre-test to an issue that excludes them from the process in pre-employment or that implicates them in a crime, the test should not be administered on that issue.  Example; John Doe is being tested for stealing 100 dollars from his employer.  In the pre-exam phase he admits to stealing 10 dollars of the 100.  The examiner would note these admissions and not test the subject.  The reason is that the test questions will refer to "any of that money" and not exact dollar amounts.  If the subject fails one relevant issue, they fail the exam.   Administering the exam on that issue would result in deception indicated and knowing the prior admission invalidate the exam.  The examiner cannot seperate the test questions and score one no deception indicated and another deception indicated.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Drew Richardson
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 427
Joined: Sep 7th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #35 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 12:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

Quote:
Pre-employment deals with multiple issue testing and has not faired well in studies.


That which defines pre-employment or other screening is not that it is a multiple issue test (it may or may not be), but that it seeks to address one or more issues that are not known to have occurred at the time of the polygraph examination.  This type of polygraph examination is by definition a fishing expedition.  You are quite correct, though, to (1) raise the issue of (pre-employment) screening (it is that which has brought most of this board's readers to this site) and in accessing that it has not faired well in studies (and, in fact, in theory either).  Due to base rate considerations, one would expect that a screening exam that had an 85 per cent accuracy rate (far higher than I would assume but that which the Attorney General of the United States has suggested) for innocent subjects would produce 1500 times more false positive results than true positive results in an effort to find one spy in a population of 10,000 FBI agents.  This phenomena would, of course, make it highly unlikely that the spy would be rooted out (akin to finding a needle in a haystack) while it would almost certainly lead to a significant number of people being falsely accused and likely having their lives and/or careers ruined.

Quote:
Again, if someone attempts to alter or distort the results of any examination, the motives of that person would become suspect.


In view of the aforementioned false positive/true positive rate on a screening exam discussion, is there really any question why an intelligent person with any sense of self-preservation would attempt to manipulate the results of a polygraph exam?  I think not.  I suggest that a knowledgeable and innocent examinee would have to be incredibly pollyannaish regarding his examiner's good intentions to participate in an exercise with such stacked odds and not attempt to manipulate those odds in his favor...  Contrary to that which your quote would suggest, it is the motivation of such an examinee (one who realizes the need and methods to protect himself but fails to do so) that should be questioned.



« Last Edit: Dec 7th, 2001 at 2:10am by Drew Richardson »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box MissionPoly-ban
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov 13th, 2001
Gender: Female
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #36 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 12:22am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.

Let me correct you again.  A man of science and logic, you are surely not.  I conclude that you are just another polygrapher coming on this board in an attempt to help protect your profession (in what little ways you can).

Let me try, for the third time, to clarify this.  I'm going to put this in third-grade language so that it is easier to follow (I believe my last post was at the fourth-grade level).

Here it goes:

I was given a pre-employment polygraph examination...that means that I had to take a "Lie-detector" test for a job I was trying to get.

The test was a probable-lie control questions test.

In the pre-test interview (not hooked up to the polygraph machine, just a face to face interview),  the examiner went over a group of questions with me.

Some of the questions were clearly relevant questions,  while others were clearly questions that were going to be set up and used as control questions during the examination.

During the course of the interview,  I admitted to nothing except (making the mistake of admitting to) using drugs in the late 90's. 

This question was not asked during the adminstration of the polygraph examination it was stated in the admissions section of the results so that the employment agency to eliminate me based on a stated admission.

During the exam, there were Five (that's 5....hold up one hand and thats how many fingers are on it) relevant questions asked with control and irrelevant questions mixed in in an appropriate fashion.

Those five questions--RELEVANT QUESTIONS--were questions that I said "No" to during the pre-test interview.  I denied having any part in any of them.

During the exam,  I stuck with my "no" answers and lied on the RELEVANT QUESTIONS ASKED ON THE EXAM.
I also used a countermeasure on the control questions.

Here's where it gets tricky J.B....see if you can follow me here:

BASED ONLY ON THE RELEVANT QUESTION ASKED DURING THE ACTUAL POLYGRAPH EXAM (NOT BASED ON ANYTHING ELSE),  the examiner found that there were

"no emotional responses indicative of deception on ANY of the relevant questions, and that the examinee was telling the truth on all relevant questions asked during the exam."

Now if we read the above in English, this means that I was found to be truthful on the questions that I was asked during the polygraph examination.

If I was found to be deceptive on any of the relevant questions asked during that actual exam, the results would read, for example,

"There were no emotional responses indicative of deception on questions 3,5, & 8....

There were emotional responses indicative of deception on questions 2,4,6,7,..."

I don't know what reality your living in, but this is the way the polygraph results are expressed.  They specify what questions were found to be deceptive on the polygraph exam.
If they didn't, THEN HOW THE HELL would the employment agency know whether the examinee was telling the truth if the examinee denied everything in the interview?

Your statement:

"There are examiners who pass individuals on the exam even if the exam is deception indicated.  They justify this by saying the reactions to the relevant were caused by the admissions in the pre-exam phase."

Does not correspond to the situation I have expressed to you.

AGAIN, you are missing the point that I LIED to 3 very relevant question during the interview,  then was hooked up to the machine and LIED about those very same questions again,  and was found to be telling the truth about THE RELEVANT QUESTIONS ASKED ON THE EXAM.

If an examinee admits to a relevant question during the interview,  the examiner will either: 1)Use another relevant question on the exam since there was an admission, or 2)Create a modified relevant question based on the admission.

That is how the exam works.  Your suggestion that the examiner wouldn't state whether or not deception was indicated on particular relevant questions asked during the exam is MIND BLOWING!

They have to so that the employment agency knows whether or not the examiner was lying on questions that no admissions were made to.

For you to argue against my situation and insist that I did not pass the test using countermeasures would be to deny reality itself.  Moreover, it would be a clear indicator of your intent to coming on this board.

Face it buddy...countermeasures CAN work.  If they couldn't ever work, then your ass wouldn't waste your time coming on here trying to insist to everyone that they don't.  You would just let the liars use their countermeasures and "easily get caught," as you suggest would happen when using countermeasures.

Netnin

(PS: Slap yourself upside the head and get with it)









  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box AMM
User
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Aug 24th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #37 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 1:56am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Netin:

I have been watching this topic for a while and am a little dismayed by some of your comments to J.B.  While it is commendable that you've done some research into polygraphy, I would remind you to be courteous and civil to polygraph proponents as well as to those opposed to its use.  It is extremely important that polygraphers participate in this dialogue and that we treat them respectfully.  While J.B.'s opinion is incongruous with yours, there is no reason to be smug, condescending or rude even if it is in response to the same.

V/r

AMM

 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box therock
Senior User
***
Offline



Posts: 50
Joined: Nov 17th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #38 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 7:59am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
So let me get this str8, if the issue about theft of money from employment comes up, and let's say the question comes up did you ever steal money from an employer, adn I say when I was 13 I stole 10 dollars from my fathers register, then does this mean the the question will not be administered during the "in test" phase, or am I missing something?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box MissionPoly-ban
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov 13th, 2001
Gender: Female
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #39 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 9:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
AMM (George or Gino--which ever one you are in disguise):

You are right.  I was a total ass in my last posting to J.B.

J.B.:  I am sorry for my "know it all" and condescending attitude.  I just went back and realized that I didn't correctly clarify my situation in the post before my "outraged" post.

I just was really frustrated because in reading your other posts, I could tell that you truly are a man of intellect, and I was angry that you couldn't figure out what I was trying to say.

Maybe it was my own inability to clarify my situation that was subconsciously causing my anger--anger at one's self so to speak.

Again, I apologize.  I expect that my last post clarified the situation (in an ass-hole-ish manner).

Sincerely, Netnin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. (Guest)
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #40 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 9:46am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Netin,

You wrote in your first post regarding this question;
Quote:
Quote:
The Polygraph results started with a page of all the admissions I made.  Then, after the last description of admissions, it states:

After the pre-test interview,  two polygraph tests were performed on the subject.

It is in the examiners opinion that there were no emotional responses indicative of deception on any any of the relevant questions, and that the subject was truthfull on all the relevant questions.

Thats all the polygraph results state.

Go figure?


In your second;
Quote:
J.B. 

Yes I admitted to using Marijuana in 98/99, and that was a relevat question.  I thought the department wanted a 2 year break from any drug use, which seems to be the norm around here, but it turns out the wanted a three year break, and so I "didn't make the cut."  I was eliminated based on this admission to a relevant questions.

However, this was the only relevant question I messed up on
by making admissions. 

During the interview, they also asked questions about dealing, being involved in a felony, and knowingly receiving stolen goods. 

These questions are all WAY more serious, in my opinion, than the use of Marijuana (A "drug" grown by the goverment, distributed by the government, and prohibited by the government based on an inability to create a fullproof way of marketing it.  Gee...what is the public supposed to think...they see the government giving packages of Joints to sick people to do a study to see if it helps them feel BETTER and aid in the recovery process.  Some things just absolutely AMAZE me...but enough about Marijuana).

I lied in the interview about these issues by saying no involvement and never did any of them.

I also lied on these three issues during the test, using a physical countermeasure on the controls.

I passed the test, and have read the results stating, "There were no emotional reactions indicative of deception on any of the relevant questions, and it is in the opinion of the examiner that the subject was telling the truth."


There is nothing in either one of these posts that would give me the information that the Quote:
relevant issue
you admitted to was not a Quote:
relevant issue
on the exam.

I am not protecting anything or anyone.  I am against pre-employment polygraphs in their current state and feel they are invalid.  Again, I do not conduct pre-employment exams.  I agree with Drew that there are no studies supporting this method and would add that polygraph was not designed for the currently used method.  As I have said previously, if there is one issue of concern in a properly investigated background investigation, that issue could be tested using specific issue.  Example; An applicant, who just graduated from college, says s/he has not used marijuana in the last five years.  However, a person contacted in the background investigation says s/he smoked marijuana with him in college.
 
Is there a possibility you may beat an examiner?  Yes.  I have never said that every examiner can detect countermeasures.  The examiner is only as good as their training, knowledge, and experiences.  You have told me that the examiner is reputable in your area and was recommended by other police officers.  Since you have not said so, I will gather you are speaking of police officers and not polygraph examiners who are police officers.  Police departments and police officers usually view polygraph examiners work in specific issue exams, not pre-employment.  Regardless of this, they do not know much about polygraph.  If you have read just the sections dealing with the exam outline in Quote:
The Lie Behind The Lie Detector
, you most likely have more knowledge on the issue.  I am not saying the examiner is not good.  However, it is an unfortunate fact that many examiners go to a polygraph school and get little to no training or education after that.  If you went to a dentist who had been practicing dentistry for 50 years, who only went to dental school, did no refresher courses, internship, continuing education, and simply updated themselves on current issues to keep abreast with the field, you would most likely have your teeth drilled with no Novocain and your filling material would most likely be carcinogenic.

As for your comments on my status of scientific thinking, I would gladly defend any comment or assertion I have made.  I have not made a comment regarding the scientific aspects of polygraph that I cannot back up with supporting information.  On an issue brought to one for comment or enlightenment, one can only do so based on the information that is available to one for comment on.

Drew,

I agree with you on the issue of pre-employment polygraph validity in its current state.  My point on the multiple issue aspect of pre-employment is that it is most often a multiple issues exam.  Cleve Backster has spoken at length about multiple issue testing and his feelings on its use and abuse in polygraph.  More directly to its use in his Zone Comparison Test format.  I am sure you have most undoubtedly heard this lecture and spoke with him on this issue.

My comments on countermeasures stand as is.  Given that there are no studies to support a truthful subject can better their position with the use of countermeasures, I would not suggest one use them and chance a heightened risk of being deemed deceptive.  Literature and studies both point to the success of countermeasures in repetitive training.  If one employs countermeasures and is found in doing so they will most likely be found deceptive.  If you consider the limited research, which I will only for the context of what if,  Honts et al say examiners can detect countermeasures at no better then chance.  This would say approximately 50 percent.  If the examiner could only detect countermeasures even 20 percent of the time, it would still produce a higher rate of false readings due to their venture then the percentage of false positives.  I am unsure of the from what you are deducting the Quote:
1500 times more false positive results than true positive results in an effort to find one spy in a population of 10,000 FBI agents.
  If this is to suggest that 1500 of 10000 would be false positive, that would mean a 15 percent false positive rate.  If this is what you meant, I have seen nor read of such a study.  Even so, adding the low estimation of 20 percent found countermeasures to the false positive rate would in turn produce 3500 false positives in a pool of 10000 and 35 in a pool of 100 applicants,  as opposed to 1500 and 15 respectively with no countermeasures used. 

The only method to the madness is to find a pre-employment polygraph exam that studies support works, and/or stick to specific issue exams on pre-employment as I suggest, or simply abandon pre-employment screening altogether.  Regardless of the above numbers suggested for what if, I suggest either and both are to high for the likes of a truthful person who deserves better. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Drew Richardson
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 427
Joined: Sep 7th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #41 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 3:43pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

Quote:
I agree with you on the issue of pre-employment polygraph validity in its current state...The only method to the madness is to...simply abandon pre-employment screening altogether...Regardless of the above numbers suggested for what if, I suggest either and both are to high for the likes of a truthful person who deserves better.


Well, my friend, perhaps we do have a basis for meaningful conversation and collaboration.  Although we clearly have differences of opinion regarding the utility of countermeasures and the use of polygraphy for criminal specific-issue testing, once your colleagues can reach your level of appreciation regarding the cancer that we know as polygraph screening, we can make progress regarding the understanding and practice of the remaining issues.  There will likely be little to no progress until the foolishness and victimization of polygraph screening ceases.  Regards, D
« Last Edit: Dec 7th, 2001 at 4:35pm by Drew Richardson »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. (Guest)
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #42 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 5:18pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Drew,

As best as I can demise, the fuel behind this issue is not so much the examiners themselves but the departments who use it to save time and money.  Depending on how much a polygraph examiners existence depends on pre-employment screening, they may blindly push for its continued use.  I know from first hand experience that the heads of a department or agency, which are worried about the bean counting, usually begin inquiry into the use of polygraph screening.  As you know from working for the government, you can educate them on the issues, show them the studies, bombard them with facts, and warn them of pitfalls but if the money and time issue is still there it is hard to convince otherwise.

On what issue or issues of criminal specific issue examinations do we disagree?  I would be interested and open to hear your input on any differences.  You can post here if you think it is appropriate or send it to my listed e-mail address.

I do not profess to know it all and I never will.  I continue to learn with each day that I am blessed to wake and proceed in my path through life.  I subscribe to the school of thought that when and if you think you can learn no more you have stopped growing and life has ceased.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box therock
Senior User
***
Offline



Posts: 50
Joined: Nov 17th, 2001
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #43 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 5:18pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Nobody answered my post regarding the pre test question and in test question.  For example if they ask have you ever stolen money from work or if they ask have you ever stolen 50dollars or more from work in the pre test questions and I reply I stole so little amount 5-10 dollars from my fathers register when I was 13 at the store will this question pop up during the intest phase or if they ask have you ever stolen any amount of money from work and I reply when I was 13 I stole 10 dollars from my fathers register, will teh question be administered during the in test phase, just curious?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. (Guest)
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #44 - Dec 7th, 2001 at 7:23pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
The Rock,

The answer to your question would be dependent on the agency’s criteria for disqualification.  Most likely the question you posed would be a comparison question and any admissions would be covered by a preface in the exam question, if it were a probable lie exam.  In this scenario, the question would still be asked regardless of the admission. 

Again,  the status of the question depends on the criteria of the agency and the laws in your state.  For instance, if your state has a law that makes larceny from a business or employer a felony, your admission would be to that of a commission of a felony.  If this admission is a disqualifier, then you will have admitted to an issue that eliminates you from the process and a polygraph would not be needed. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X