Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts (Read 54851 times)
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 #60 - Dec 15th, 2001 at 1:19am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  

J.B.

I am extremely glad you are still participating in this discussion, but I must take exception with the concluding remarks from your latest post.

J.B. McCloughan wrote on Dec 15th, 2001 at 12:14am:
There is only one known and studied reason for someone to employ countermeasures and that is to attempt to hide their deceptive answers with distortion of the tracings.  

I warn anyone who follows this discussion that, if you employ countermeasures, you will be found to be inconclusive at best and most likely deceptive.    



I am a LAPD applicant and successfully employed countermeasures to avoid a second "false positive" outcome.  The details of my first polygraph exam are located under another topic on this bulletin board, so I won't repeat them here.  I followed the behavioral countermeasures found in the "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" and cardio/breathing countermeasures found in Doug Williams publication "How to Sting the Polygraph."   Specifically, I controlled my breathing during all relevant questions and produced "deceptive" breathing patterns on all control questions.  Additionally, I constricted my anal spinchter muscle accordingly to manipulate my blood pressure and pulse rate during control questions.  It was quite easy to manipulate both my breathing and cardio tracings during the entire test.  We ran seven charts: one "diagnostic," and two sets of questions performed three times each.

My test was taken on a computerized polygraph and was administered by a retired Detective who, at one time, ran the LAPD polygraph program.  He is currently employed under the USIS/LAPD contract and also works for the LASD administering polygraphs in their pre-employment screening program.  Following my exam, he told me he was passing me and noted that I had absolutely no problems with any questions whatsoever.   I can attribute my success to: my previous experience, information found in "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" and Mr. Williams manual.

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



Posts: 131
Joined: Mar 16th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #61 - Dec 15th, 2001 at 1:32am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.

You wrote that countermeasures produces distorted responses:

"As I said in my last post, ” ..not because one would produce greater or lessor response but
because the distortion would negate it as a true reaction/response.”"

If you are right and the response produced by countermeasures are not true responses, then how would it be possible to categorize the charts as anything other than inconclusive?

You stated that the person employing countermeasures will be found inconclusive or deceptive.




  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6060
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #62 - Dec 15th, 2001 at 1:44am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

With regard to my observation that you are presently unable to articulate "a testable hypothesis regarding how polygraph countermeasures such as those described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector can be reliably detected from the examination of polygraph charts" you wrote:
Quote:
My explanations have met the defined criteria for a testable hypothesis.

In your rambling and oftentimes incoherent discourses, the only thing approaching a testable hypothesis which you offered was your suggestion that rounded pneumograph tracings indicate controlled breathing which in turn indicates attempted countermeasures. Such a hypothesis could be tested. But it is prima facie implausible, as Figure 9 ("Normal (Nondeception) Respiration Patterns")  in Reid & Inbau's Truth and Deception: The Polygraph ("Lie-Detector") Technique makes abundantly clear. I had supposed that you had abandoned this hypothesis. However, your mystifying insistence that the respiratory tracings in Reid & Inbau's Figure 9 "do not appear as they would" (and by implication are somehow altered) makes me question my suppostion that you had abandoned the notion that rounded pneumograph tracings indicate attempted countermeasures. If this is still your hypothesis, I admit that it is testable. But it is also absurd.

Your other suggestion is that there is some nexus between apneas and constriction of the anal sphincter muscle which will enable better than chance detection of countermeasures from the examination of polygraph charts. But you have still not formulated a testable hypothesis in this regard.

Second, with regard to my conclusion that you are presently unable to articulate "a theoretical explanation of how sophisticated subjects (those who understand the nature of CQT polygraphy) can be expected to produce stronger physiological reactions to 'control' questions if truthful and, conversely, to relevant questions, if deceptive" you wrote:
Quote:
I cannot give a theoretical explanation of something that will not occur.  They are not expected to or will they produce any more or less...

Your response is an utter non sequitur, and helps to illustrate my point.

By the way, the Rovner, Raskin, and Kircher citation to which you refer (Rovner, L. I., Raskin, D. C., & Kircher, J. C. [1979]. Effects of information and practice on detection of deception. Psychophysiology, 16, 197-198) "clearly demonstrates" nothing. It is an abstract of a study that has never passed peer review. And Rovner's 1986 article in the (non-peer-viewed) American Polygraph Association quarterly provides inadequate evidence of anything. Rovner doesn't even disclose what information about the CQT he provided to his test subjects.

For commentary regarding Professor Honts' dubious claim that knowledge of CQT methodology does not affect CQT validity, see my earlier post, A Criticism of Honts' Testimony on Countermeasures.

You also wrote:
Quote:
There is only one known and studied reason for someone to employ countermeasures and that is to attempt to hide their deceptive answers with distortion of the tracings.

Nonsense. As Professor Emeritus David T. Lykken of the University of Minnesota observes at p. 277 of the 2nd edition of A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Polygraph, "...if I were somehow forced to take a polygraph test in relation to some important matter, I would certainly use these proven countermeasures rather than rely on the truth and my innocence as safeguards..."

And in a recent study published in Polygraph, Professor Honts and collaborators wrote, "Field polygraph examiners appear to operate under the notion that a detection of countermeasure attempts is synonymous with attempted deception to the relevant questions of the examination [reference deleted]. Clearly, that notion is incorrect. The results of this study show that an examiner's decision of countermeasure use is unrelated to both countermeasure use, and to deception. These results strongly suggest that the field practice of equating countermeasure attempts with deception to the relevant issues of an examination should be abandoned." (Honts, Charles R., Susan L. Amato, & Anne K. Gordon. "Effects of Spontaneous Countermeasures Used Against the Comparison Question Test," Polygraph, Vol. 30 [2001], No. 1, pp. 1-9, at pp. 7-8)

J.B., you concluded your post with the admonition:

Quote:
I warn anyone who follows this discussion that, if you employ countermeasures, you will be found to be inconclusive at best and most likely deceptive.


Prove it.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #63 - Dec 15th, 2001 at 10:18am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
AMM,

As I have said, my comments regarding polygraph are restricted to criminal specific issue only.  I do not support, believe in, have never conducted, or will ever conduct a pre-employment polygraph screening in its current form.  In my opinion, polygraph was not designed for this type of examination and there are no studies that support or validate it.

Mark,

If there is unexplainable distortion in the charts, you are absolutely correct that the only proper decision would be inconclusive.  However, if the distortion is a known countermeasure and the examiner can explain it, the decision could be deceptive.  Again this is for criminal specific issue exams. 

Netin,

My intentions are to give unadulterated and unbiased education to those interested in polygraph.  My life and career does not depend on polygraph.  If polygraph was gone tomorrow, I would still have a job.  I do not tell people not to use countermeasures because I fear they will "beat" a polygraph examiner or me if they did use them.  Inversely, I tell them this because there is no evidence that supports they do or will work.  The only scientific study about countermeasures and polygraph deals with an examiners ability to detect them.  As George has eluded to, in quoting Honts et al, the popular belief is that if they are used it is for the purpose of masking deception. 

Dr. Honts and many other psychologists have studied and use validated psychological tests.  I do not see them supporting or saying that someone should distort their answers to these tests.  If someone was to distort their answers to a psychological test, I am sure they would be asked to come in for further psychological examination.  This usually entails a psychologist interrogating the person about their answers and what they "really meant by that answer."

If I were attempting to mislead anyone and purposely trying to confuse them, I would probably say the following: Polygraph is 100% accurate; It can be used in any form to detect truth or deception;  If a person has an instrument, trust them, they know exactly what they are doing and won't make any mistakes; You don't need to know anything but to show up, get attached to an instrument, and read the results.  Now that would be a load from the farm I would not wish to be down wind from. 

I have and still do support people educating themselves about polygraph.  I have said pre-employment polygraph screening is invalid in it's current form and polygraph was not designed for this type of use.  I have told them to check the licensing requirements in their area and those of the examiner. 

The reason this discussion has become confusing to some is because I was replying to George repeated call for scientific evidence to support the detection of countermeasures.  I explained it in simple terms.  He again asked for scientific proof and the stating of a testable hypothesis.  I explained it a little more complex.  This cycle continued until we have come to the last post which I know is confusing to those who have never had any formal education in anatomy or physiology.  I have had formal college education in both and I am not including polygraph training.

As for your polygraph, I do not know your examiner or by what protocol he goes by.  To tell you the truth, I am baffled by what you have told me.  For instance, put a precursor in front of a relevant if there was an admission.  As far as I know and I read and research daily, comparison questions are the only questions that may contain this.  If you make an admission prior to the exam that disqualifies you from the process, there should be no exam.  The most valid reason, considering the invalidity of the pre-employment exam, is you have already disqualified yourself.  The purpose of the exam is to see if you have been truthful about all of the areas they are concerned about and for which they would not hire you if you had not.  His administering an exam after this just made an invalid test worse.  Did the report say you made the admission prior to the exam?  I have never said that someone could not beat an examiner.  I never said that countermeasures will not produce  tracings but that the tracings will not be normal and they will have the indications I have discussed.  I will say this, from what I have heard our results don?t surprise me. 

George,

For the sake of not confusing others with physiological terms and definitions, I will explain one of my current testable hypothesis in layman?s terms. 

If a sphincter muscle contraction is employed, the first indication the examiner will see in the chart is a short flattened mark within the respiration tracings.  The next thing that must be present to support this is a direct correlation with a GSR response.  If the examiner can draw a line from the flattened tracing in the respiration to the beginning of a GSR response, the person has used a sphincter muscle contraction countermeasure.

For you, the tracing and correlated GSR response I described is not nor is it indicative of apnea or its appearance in the tracings.  If you would read and check my prior post, the reason for apnea and when it occurs is described as it will so similarly be in any physiology text.  It will not occur within the inspiration or expiration.  It will not occur in normal settings with a healthy person breathing at a "normal" rate.  It is induced by the sudden lack of carbon dioxide within the blood.

If you would please explain to me, what is there about this hypothesis that makes it not testable?  I ask because I am testing it now and wonder if you have knowledge of something I have never read, learned or know.

As for my statement about the use of countermeasures, this is a moot point.  You are prescribing that people use something that is not proven to work at all and I am telling them not to use it based on they have by scientific study a chance and by my experiences far greater than chance ability of being detected.  We both know what Honts et al recent study says.  I think we can both agree to say, "Call, write, e-mail your state?s senators and representatives with the facts on pre-employment polygraph screening."  We both have a common goal in this and in wanting honest people to remain and be treated as such.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6060
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #64 - Dec 15th, 2001 at 3:41pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

You wrote in part:
Quote:
For the sake of not confusing others with physiological terms and definitions, I will explain one of my current testable hypothesis in layman's terms.

I think you needn't fear confusing others with physiological terms and definitions. The problem with your highfalutin responses to simple questions on such topics as how polygraphers can detect countermeasures from the examination of polygraph charts, and on what theoretical basis CQT polygraphy can be expected to work with subjects who understand the trickery behind it, is that they (your responses) have been largely non-sequiturial, which might lead readers who understand the terms you are using to conclude that you have merely been putting into practice the popular maxim, "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit."
Quote:
If a sphincter muscle contraction is employed, the first indication the examiner will see in the chart is a short flattened mark within the respiration tracings.  The next thing that must be present to support this is a direct correlation with a GSR response.  If the examiner can draw a line from the flattened tracing in the respiration to the beginning of a GSR response, the person has used a sphincter muscle contraction countermeasure.

Here, I think you have finally articulated a hypothesis that could be tested. If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that respiratory blocking (your "short flattened mark") timely with the onset of a galvanic skin response indicates that the subject has contracted his anal sphincter muscle as a countermeasure. Such a hypothesis is testable, but on its face seems implausible. As Netnin pointed out, it is a trivial matter to constrict one's anal sphincter muscle without concomitant respiratory blocking.

You also wrote (by "it," I presume you mean "apnea"):
Quote:
It is induced by the sudden lack of carbon dioxide within the blood.

Do you mean to say that instances of apnea (whether blocking or holding) which occur as scorable reactions in the context of a polygraph interrogation occur because the subject's blood suddenly lacks carbon dioxide? You're joking, right? If not, please tell me where I can read more about this phenomenon.
« Last Edit: Dec 16th, 2001 at 12:20pm by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
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 #65 - Dec 16th, 2001 at 1:26am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.

I thank you for taking criticism in a mature manner, and for your persistence in contributing to the boards.  You have assisted greatly in advancing an already interesting topic.

But I do find myself totally confused when reading your explanation as to how an "anal sphincter contraction" is detected via visually analyzing the polygraph chart.

You are ultimately claiming that, regardless of when implemented, the anal sphincter contraction will cause apnea because of a sudden build-up of carbon-dioxide. 

The respiration tracings are based solely on two pneumo tubes fitted around the upper and lower abdomen.

Respiration tracings go up on inhalation, and down on exhalation.  They also go flat when there is no breathing activity.

The polygraph test does not deal with carbon-dioxide levels within the body.  Respiration tracings are based on the PHYSICAL MANIPULATION of the pneumo tubes, and only based on the physical manipulation of the pneumo tubes.

Are you claiming that the contraction of the anal sphincter
will undoubtedly correlate with the appearance of apnea within repiration tracings?  Furthermore, are you claiming that this apnea will be present regardless of when the anal sphincter contraction takes place? 

I would have to thoroughly disagree with your claims.

I have practiced (and I BEG of anyone who reads this post to practice) the following a number of times:

     Breathing at a uniform and steady rate, and then contracting my anal-pucker during all phases of the breathing process.  During inhalation, there is NO INDICATION that breathing ceases, by any means, when the anal pucker is contracted.  During exhalation, there is NO INDICATION that breathing ceases, by any means, when the anal pucker is contracted.  And during the slight pause after exhalation, there is a slight phase of apnea because THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE A SLIGHT pause in breathing.

Are you claiming that the pneumo tubes can detect a pause in breathing even though my human hands--and overall bodily sensory perception--tell me that there is absolutely no pause in the expansion or contraction of my rib-cage when employing an anal-pucker contraction during the course of breathing?  I find this hard to fathom.

And, just for the sake of argument, lets say that there is a detectable apnea when employing the anal-pucker contraction during either inhalation or exhalation (I strongly do NOT believe this is true...I even find the claim absurd!).
If this were the case (again, I'm only expressing this idea for the sake of argument), then one would have absolutely NO PROBLEM successfully using the anal-pucker countermeasure during the "slight-pause" phase of the breathing process.  The very short time period between the end of an exhalation and beginning of inhalation is a time period where breathing ceases slightly.  If one were to employ the anal-pucker technique at this point in the breathing process, there would be no visible detection of apnea on the charts because there is a normal cease of breathing at that point in the breathing pattern.  It takes a FRACTION of a second to tighten the anal-pucker.

As for an apnea in the GSR as the result of an anal-pucker contraction,  how do you come to this conclusion?  It is my understaning that, if ANYTHING, a muscle contraction (of any kind) will cause a heightened GSR response(?).....

J.B:

I ask you to drop your discussion about the "build-up" of carbon dioxide as it relates to polygraph tracings.  Anyone who is even remotely familiar with how the polygraph works is fully aware that a build-up of carbon dioxide has nothing to do with respiration tracings.  The pneumo tubes are either manipulated outward, or inward, resulting in lines that go up, go down, or stay level.

Discuss your theory on the basis of how tracings are RECORDED...polygraph chart tracing elements are VERY restricted in their abilities, and are unbiased in many ways.

Is it just me, or does anyone else following this post find some of the claims on this board absurd, illogical, and irrelevant?

Netnin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6060
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #66 - Dec 16th, 2001 at 1:42am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Netnin,

If you re-read J.B.'s most recent post, you'll see that he attributes apneas to a "sudden lack of carbon dioxide within the blood," not a build-up of CO2 levels. In addition, J.B. nowhere spoke of "an apnea in the GSR" as you suggested.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
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 #67 - Dec 16th, 2001 at 10:20pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.:

I am aware of your previous posts regarding the validity (or complete lack thereof) of  pre-employment polygraphs and I should have acknowledged  it in mine.  Thank you for your honesty; I applaud you for participating in this forum.

The point, obviously buried in my last post, that I was trying to make was that despite my extremely limited experience with polygraph countermeasures, I believe I could pass a Control Question Test polygraph (criminal or pre-employment) by employing the techniques I learned.  I also believe that deceptive candidates in either criminal or pre-employment settings could use the same techniques to defeat the polygraph.  This truly scares me especially when considering the National Security implications and our country's apparent reliance on the polygraph to ferret out spies.

My question to you is this: If countermeasures can be discerned during criminal or incident-specific polygraphs, how is it that, (using the same type of computerized polygraph equipment) seeminly qualified, experienced examiners are missing them during pre-employment polygraphs?  It would seem to me that if the techiques are the same, polygraphers should be able to detect countermeasures in either situation.

I realize you may feel bombarded from all sides from time to time, but I truly hope that you will continue to participate in this discussion.

AMM
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #68 - Dec 17th, 2001 at 9:03am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
AMM,

First, The information provided is crucial to administering a valid polygraph.  The more information an examiner has on an issue, the greater the probability they will ask the right questions.  Pre-employment screening has little to no information on the issues at hand.  Sometimes the only information the examiner has is obtained through a pre-test question form and interview.  Even if the examiner was dealing with only one specific issue, a pre-test question format would most likely not provide enough information for a good exam.

Second, the relevant questions asked on a polygraph exam must be relevant to the issue at hand.  In my opinion, relevant questions that only a person's memory that committed the crime could hold are better then a generalized question.  Pre-employment screening polygraph operates on multiple issue relevant questions that are generalized to the issues because they don?t know what the issue may or may not be.

Finally, Even if the examiner had all the information and asked all the right questions, their ability to discern physiological tracings is only as good as their training.  Many examiners who work outside the "espionage" arena have never been trained in detecting and don?t think everyday persons no how to use plausible countermeasures.  Why?  Because until recent years the information was not readily available to the everyday person and they would have been mostly correct.  As I have said previously, there are examiners who graduate from a polygraph school and get minimal to no advance training after that.  Training and education play a major role in the examiners abilities. 

I hope this answers your question.  I will add that the techniques are not the same because they are not the same exam. 
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #69 - Dec 20th, 2001 at 10:37pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

I have been posting physiological reasons for certain occurrences of tracings caused by physiological responses or voluntary responses(countermeasures).  I am not suggesting the tracing in the respiration is caused by apnea or is apnea but that it is caused by intrinsic muscle contractions.  It is not apnea.  I have explained the basic principle of why apnea occurs within a healthy conscious person.  I did not talk about obstructive, central and mixed apnea because they are caused and seen in physical and physiological disorders.  One of the texts I have previously suggested reading will explain the causes of normal apnea.

Quote:
From: 'Essentials of Anatomy and Physiology'; by Seely, Stephens, Tate; Pg. 394

Stimuli that influence respiration, such as blood levels of carbon dioxide, blood pH, blood oxygen levels and emotions, do so by altering the activity of the respiratory center.  Carbon dioxide levels in the blood and blood pH play an extremely important role in influencing activity of the respiratory center....decreasing carbon dioxide levels in the blood and an increasing pH results in slower rate and depth of respiration.  Respiration may even stop for a period of time until carbon dioxide levels increase and pH decreases to a level that stimulates respiration.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6060
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #70 - Dec 21st, 2001 at 12:50am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

The salient point here is that apnea (whether blocking or holding) is a scorable physiological reaction according to the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute. Apnea is simply a transient cessation of respiration, and it is readily producible at will. There are, to my knowledge, no published studies whatsoever that suggest polygraphers can distinguish between apneas induced by fear of detection (or fear of consequences) when answering a particular question and apneas produced either willfully or as an unintended consequence of the contraction of the anal sphincter muscle.


  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #71 - Dec 22nd, 2001 at 9:38am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

I would agree with you that both holding and blocking are listed as scorable criteria for the purpose of deceptive respiration in the DODPI training material you have acquired.  However, material you are reading and the cartoon characterized drawings that are associated with it are for basic discussion and basic training purposes.  The information I have been providing you is a more advance description of apnea and its physiological causes.  More specifically, I have been speaking of the chemical changes within the blood that trigger receptors to cease respiration. There are more intrinsic physiological factors associated with apnea holding and blocking then the simple cessation of respiration.

Another example of the difference of Apnea and Anal Sphincter Contraction as they appear within the tracings and physiologically factors involved;  The onset of true apnea will result in a lowered blood volume, pressure, and heart rate. For the most part these factors are inversely seen in the case of an anal sphincter muscle contraction. 

Also, true apnea does not cause a subsequent reflex response within the inspiration or expiration  because apnea occurs at the end of expiration and before the inhibition of inspiration. The anal sphincter muscle contraction can and often does cause such reflex contraction reactions within the inspiration and expiration tracings.

It appears to me that your definition of blocking and/or holding would be a willful and wanton cessation of respiration.  This would be much like a child, who when angered at his parents, holds his breath to get his way.  This example, if it describes your definition of apnea, is not apnea.  A person may hold or block their respiration voluntarily to attempt to slow or block physiological responses to, among other things, physical exertion or attempt to thwart detection. This is why a person attempts to employ controlled respiration countermeasures.  This would be holding/blocking or controlled respiration but not apnea or the holding or blocking of it.  The two are much different in how and why they occur. 

Maybe Drew will help discern the intent of the wording in DODPI?s scoring criteria for added reference and clarification.  This would also give us a mediated opinion of this discussion.  I would suggest we wait for his response to avoid further impasse.

Another reference for the definition of apnea:

Quote:
From: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2309&rd=1

Apnea: The absence of breathing (respirations). There are three type forms of apnea: blockage of the airways, cessation of respiratory effort (usually brain-related and referred to as "central"), and a combination of airways blockage and central apnea.

  

Quam verum decipio nos
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 #72 - Dec 22nd, 2001 at 3:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B.,

Quote:
Maybe Drew will help discern the intent of the wording in DODPI?s [sic] scoring criteria for added reference and clarification.  This would also give us a mediated opinion of this discussion.  I would suggest we wait for his response to avoid further impasse.


I appreciate your suggesting that I represent a source of (neutral) mediation, but I'm afraid my former posts do not qualify me for such consideration.  I have clearly stated and do believe that polygraph exams are readily countermeasured by motivated, knowledgeable, and trained examinees.  With regard to the present thread it would appear that we have two parallel trains of thought going on (both largely correct) but neither directly addressing the other.  Because this thread is both titled and relates to the detection of countermeasures via polygraph chart recordings, I am afraid it is you who must address George's concerns and not he that must engage you in a general discussion of physiology.  Your understanding and articulation of the etiology of physiological response is quite admirable (a "should be" model for your colleagues), but I am afraid it does not address the issue at hand.

I believe the issue to be:  For a polygraph exam involving both an experienced examiner and a motivated (to pass), knowledgeable, and trained (in countermeasures) examinee, is there information present in a polygraph chart recording that would allow that examiner to practically and reliably distinguish between a deceptive response to a control question and a response to that question which was manufactured (countermeasured) by the examinee?  For a variety of reasons (related to variation in uncountermeasured physiology and response and the power of countermeasure alternatives), I believe the answer is undoubtedly no.  My assessment aside, I do believe that the aforementioned question is the one before you, in need of being addressed, and the basis and subject for any hypothesis (es) you might care to test.

With regard to the DoDPI material you refer to, the types of responses depicted (albeit drawn in cartoon fashion) are clearly those that were taught (at the time I was a student in their basic examiner course and for many years before and after) to polygraph examiner students as being indicative of deception and therefore scorable as such.  There was (and presumably still is) no real additional level of sophistication and understanding taught beyond that which is evidenced in the referenced document with regard to categorizing and scoring polygraph responses.  

Please accept my best wishes for a pleasant holiday season and a prosperous and happy new year.  I will be away for several days during this time, but will look forward to future discussion when I return...

« Last Edit: Dec 22nd, 2001 at 4:00pm by Drew Richardson »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #73 - Jan 2nd, 2002 at 11:55am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

I hope your holidays were as joyful and memorable as mine.

I am going to try to stick to Drew's suggestions and respond to your questions more directly. First the sphincter contraction countermeasure discussion and then the ability of a knowledgeable person to better pass the CQT question.

First, I will try to explain what an anal sphincter muscle contraction countermeasure will create in the polygraph tracings, physiologically why and how it can be labeled as an imposed tracing.

First, at or near the onset of an anal sphincter muscle contraction one will see a very short flattened line in the respiration tracing(s).  This line is in direct correlation with an onset of a GSR response.  It may also be in direct correlation with a rise of blood volume and/or heart rate but may result in no change in the cardio tracing.

Second, the short flattened line in the respiration tracings is caused by a cessation of the relaxation or a sudden increased contraction of the diaphragm or intercostal muscles with no regards to loss or cessation of respiration. The physical exertion of skeletal muscles causes an intrinsic response in the sweat glands, GSR, to prepare the body for the above normal temperature that is expected with above normal resting activity.  The cardio response is also a preparatory response.  The active muscles need more and more frequent oxygen carrying blood.

Finally, the anal sphincter muscle contraction can be labeled as an imposed tracing within the respiration for the following reasons.  First, if the flattened tracing occurs within the respiration, meaning not at the end of inspiration or expiration, it is not a normal function of respiration activity or response.  Second, if the flattened tracing occurs at the end of inspiration and before the beginning of expiration, it will again be a flattened line not indicative of normal respiration activity or response.  There will be neither rounded nor pointed apieces as shown in the DoDPI illustrations of holding and blocking. Third, if the flattened line is at the end of expiration and before the beginning of inspiration, it will create a flattened line that may resemble an apnea tracing but that can be labeled as a sphincter muscle contraction because it lacks prior and post respiratory activity and/or responses and has inverse correlating GSR and cardio responses.

Now a separate issue.  The question of will a truthful person with knowledge of the CQT and countermeasures be better suited to pass.  I will use Drew?s question from his previous post as reference in answering. "For a polygraph exam involving both an experienced examiner and a motivated (to pass), knowledgeable, and trained (in countermeasures) examinee, is there information present in a polygraph chart recording that would allow that examiner to practically and reliably distinguish between a deceptive response to a control question and a response to that question which was manufactured (countermeasured) by the examinee?"  My answer is yes and no. 

Yes, if a truthful person knows how the CQT works and knows the needn?t dwell or worry about the relevant questions, they most likely will have little or no response to those questions.  Yes, if the in turn focus on the comparison questions, they will most likely have greater response to those questions. 
Yes, there is information presented in the tracings that can allow an examiner to practically and reliably distinguish it as a countermeasure.

No, if they attempt countermeasures at the comparison question, they are not guaranteed to produce a greater response then if they did not employ countermeasures.  No, there is no assurance they will be detected or not detected in employing countermeasures.  No, not every experienced examiner has the knowledge of how to distinguish between physiological and manufactured tracings.

So in part, "The Lie Behind The Lie Detector" does provide a credible means for a truthful person who reads it to pass a polygraph and more so then one who does not read it.  I think the knowing what they need to focus on and what they need not is probably the greatest and most undetectable tool for a truthful person.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box anonymous
Guest


Re: How Countermeasures are Detected on the Charts
Reply #74 - Jan 3rd, 2002 at 1:04pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
I have been reading the posts on this forum for sometime.  There are polygraphers out there and one in particular that states rather eloquently that he can detect countermeasures by reading of the polygraph charts.  They especially think that they can detect the use of the anal sphincter contraction.  If they truly believe that this is possible, they have been missing thousands of anal sphincter contractions on their charts and have been harming possibly hundreds of people by falsely accusing them of employing countermeasures.

What they fail to realize is: the anal sphincter contraction is a normal reaction of the autonomic nervous system.  When one perceives fear, it is quite normal for the sphincter to contract all by it’s little old self.   This contraction is the body’s way of not shitting on all over you. 

As a Police officer that has been in more than one shooting, I can personally attest to the great relief that this little function has given me.  Not to mention the lack of embarrassment.  If you doubt that this is true, please take note of the next time your autonomic nervous system is triggered, such as that little jump you get when someone backs out of a parking space right in front of you.  You will be able to feel the contraction.  Now everybody’s reactions are different, YES POLYGRAPHERS EVERYBODY’S REACTIONS ARE DIFFERENT.  The point that I am trying to make is; the sphincter contraction is all over the polygraph charts and they can not DISTINGUISH between how it is triggered.  This goes right to the point of showing how antiquated the polygraph really is.  It has no place in pre-employment and a limited role in criminal cases.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 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