therock,

The questions you list are not all relevant questions. Let's review them:

#1 is a relevant question, but will no doubt not be re-worded as something like "Other than what you stated in your application, did you ever use an illegal drug?"

#2 is not a question that can be asked during a polygraph interrogation, as all questions must be answered yes/no. This question may be asked in the "pre-test" interview, however, and your answer to it may affect whether question #3 can be used because....

#3 is among the most commonly used probable-lie "control" questions in pre-employment polygraph screening!

#4 may be either a relevant or an irrelevant question -- it depends on the value of stolen merchandise. If the question is "did you take anything worth more than $500," the question would clearly be relevant. But suppose you admit to taking a few pens or pencils, and the polygrapher then asks, "Other than what you told me, did you ever steal anything from an employer?" This is a commonly used probable-lie "control" question.

#5 Any question about stealing money (as opposed to say, pilfering petty items) is clearly a relevant question.

Regarding the differences between relevant and "control" questions, review Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, and for further reading, see Chapter 8 of Professor Emeritus David T. Lykken's book, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd edition, Plenum Trade, 1998). You may also find AntiPolygraph.org's recently updated Frequently Asked Questions list to be helpful.

Good luck, and please don't hesitate to ask any follow-up questions. You might also consider posting a note to the Share Your Polygraph or CVSA Experience forum after your polygraph interrogation.

The Rock:

If it is a probable-lie control questions test (most likely), here is an example of what they will do:

Pre-test interview:  The examiner will go through a number of questions with you to see if you make any admissions.  During the interview, they will mix up relevant questions and questions that he or she will turn into control questions during the test.  Examiners make the examinee think that the questions they are asking (that they will turn into control questions during the test) are as equally important as the relevant questions.  This is not the case.  The examiner is going to ask the question (that he or she will turn into a control question during the test) and hope that you make an admission, so that during the test, you will be required to respond by saying "no," when the fact is that nearly all people would be considered liars by saying no as a response  (what the examiner is doing is asking you particular questions during the pre-test interview so that he or she can CREATE control questions to use specifically on you during the test).

Here is an example:

Pre-test interview: (the examinee may go over some questions very similar to the ones below and fill out a report on your admissions and responses)

1)Ever used drugs? relevant

2)Ever do any very serious felony crime that went undetected? relevant

3)Have you ever lied to anyone of authority? 
Question number three is the trick.  This is a question (example) that the examinee will turn into a control question during the test.  

-the examiner will ask you "have you ever lied to anyone of 
authority?"
-you will say yes
-The examiner will say, "ok...who can you think of that was an authority figure that you lied to"  (Making you think that this is a totally serious question, while it is not).
-You will say "ohh...a parent and a teacher"
-the examiner will say, "can you think of anyone else?"
-you will say "no"
{The fact is that most people have lied to a number of individuals of authority over their lifetime, and the examiner knows this and expects that you have lied to many people!}
-Next (this is important), during the test the examiner will ask you to respond to all questions with a yes or no.  You already told the examiner you can't think of anyone else you have lied to, so they expect you to say "no" to the idea of lying to anyone else.  
-The examiner will REWORD THE QUESTION ON YOU during the test by asking, "OTHER THAN WHAT YOU TOLD ME, is there anyone else of authority that you have lied to?"
-You are expected to say "no," and then obviously doubt your answer because most people aren't able to think of all the people they have lied to in their lifetimes.  This is the trick of the examiner to see what your physiological responses are like when you are doubting yourself and feeling anxiety, as you will question in your mind if your parents and teacher are the only ones you lied to.  This is WHAT THE EXAMINER WANTS!
They could care less if you lied to someone else (unless you stop in the middle of the test and say "I must confess...I'm a spy and have been deceptive toward the FBI for 10 years now"...lol).  
-Above is an example of how they will use a question during the pretest interview to get you to make admssions ONLY SO THAT THEY CAN TURN IT INTO A CONTROL QUESTION ON YOU.

More examples:
Question during the pretest interview:
"Have you ever stole anything before the age of 18?"
You say
"Yes"
They say
"Who"
You say
"A magazine, deck of cards..."
They say
"Is that it?"
You say
"Yes"
The examiner will then ask you during the test,
"OTHER THAN WHAT YOU TOLD ME, did you steal ANYTHING ELSE before the age of 18?"
***Again, the examiner expects all people to doubt themselves when responding by saying "no."  Again, the examiner expects an anxiety reaction to this control question.  And again, the examiner expects that ALL PEOPLE will doubt themselves when responding by saying "no."

It will be TO YOUR BENEFIT DURING THE pretest interview 
to make admissions to these types of questions that will be turned into control questions during the test.  IT will benefit you in the sense that you will have a clear idea of what will be the control questions (because it will be clear that the question can be turned around on you and because it is not a serious question...VERY BROAD and VERY MINOR in severity).


Another question that may be turned into a control question:
Ever drove under influence?
You say yes
They ask how many times
You say ohh...a few
They say, can you think of any other times?
You say no
During the test:  "Have you ever drove under the influence any other times other than what you told me?"
Again, same rules apply...The examiner expects that all people who admit to drinking have drove A LOT while buzzing.  Again,  they expect an anxiety reaction because you will doubt yourself when you say "no" during the test.

This is the GAME polgraphers play. Pretty funny that they are the ones lying for sure during the test....

Advice: Listen carefully to the questions being asked during 
a polygraph test pre-test interview.  If they are very general questions (seem like questions that most people could respond to with a number of responses) and cover a long span of time, and if they seem like questions that can very easily be turned around on you as well, then you will be able to easily detect what will be the control questions.   It will be easier during the test than you think.  I wouldn't sweat about it or lose sleep at all.  Just think during the interview, "does this question really make me that bad of a person?  Don't most people do this particular act a NUMBER Of times in their life (lying to people, for example).

What the examiner will then do after you take off is look at the  chart and see if your responses to the control questions 
(called "PROBABLE LIE CONTROL QUESTIONS" because, as  I said,the examiner expects all to be lying when saying no to the questions turned around on them) are stronger or weaker than the responses to the relevant.  They figure if the person responded so strongly to the controls, but didn't respond much at all to the relevants, they are telling the truth.   If the responses to the controls are weaker than responses to the relevant, then they are lying.  (They base this on the idea that you are probably lying on the control questions by saying no, or atleast doubting yourself, and they expect a reaction from you that shows what you are like/how your body responds to anxiety.  If the anxiety to the controls is stronger than relevant, the relevant didn't bother you then and you must be telling the truth.  If you anxiety was even greater than the relevant, then you must be lying. They are comparing your responses to the relevants to the responses to the control, and they expect that you were feeling like a liar on the controls.  I suggest you re-read THE LIE BEHIND THE LIE DETECTOR until these ideas are clear in your mind. 

Hope this helped.

PS.  As far as countermeasures, I don't really know what to tell you other than using them on ONLY the control questions during the test.  I just took a test about a week and a half ago and used the tac in the shoe trick (don't do it...I practiced until it was unnoticable) on the controls, but haven't gotton the results back yet.  I would suggest, from all the reading I have done, that You tighten the anal pucker during the controls (totally easy to hide and unobvious) and take a slight pause in breath after responding "no."  I talked to an examiner that said pausing in breath after a question is a sure sign of deception, and I know for a fact that the anal pucker affects GSR (Sweating/electrical activity and bloodpresssure/heartrate).  That is the tactic I am going to use next time around if the tac in the shoe didn't come through for me.

SIncerely, Netnin

what do u mean by severity of the question can determine if it's a relevant or control question, this is even confusing me way, way more, i have read chapter 3 and 4.  their example of a relevant question for FBI have u ever violated this agencies drug use, for dept of energy, have u ever worked as a spy for another country, ok and control are more general questions that tend to generalize a bigger period of time than relevants are and controls are not so specific, now what about the severity is supposed to help me determine if it's a relevant or control, in all due respect, this is too too confusing.

Damn Netnin calm down a bit, alright u made ur point and i was making it harder on myself, i just thought relevant questions dealt with the specific agency but now i can see that relevant means specific to the point, it was just a misunderstanding of it's definition, sorry for having troubled you.  Thanks for the help.

Covert 1,

You wrote in part:
Quote:


It is unlikely that any question about illegal drugs in the context of a pre-employment polygraph interrogation was a probable-lie "control" question. For more on "control" questions, and how to recognize them, see Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

The physical agility test for the academy is slated for Dec 17 and I still haven't heard from my background investigator after turning in my background packet on the 15th of November, and there is still a polygraph, psychological, and medical to be conducted, I'm nervous about giving hima call to check on my status.  This is the closest I have been so far and it's been so many tests back and forth and finally i have gotten to this stage, and I just hope I don't fall short, the only thing he got on me was for speeding tickets even though i don't have any convictions or suspensions or so, just got on my case, but I think I'll give him a call tomorrow.

Netnin,

Please note that Covert1 did not state that he was polygraphed for a law enforcement position. 

Quote:


The question about homosexuality implies that the "test" was not done for a law enforcement position. Intelligence agencies (CIA, NSA, etc) are indeed known to ask extensive questions about sexual behavior (including homosexual acts). Certain law enforcement agencies also ask questions about sexual behavior. The question “Have you ever had sex with a farm animal?” is frequently used by the US Secret Service. 

Quote:


In actuality, while uncommon, this has been known to happen. The most likely situation is one where the examinee has a special skill that the agency needs.

Quote:


I disagree that walking out on an abusive interrogation indicates anything you cite above. One of the most professional ways to deal with an abusive examiner is to politely terminate the interview. Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity in an employment application process.  If one is berated by false accusations, profanity, etc, the best response is to deny the allegations one more time and then terminate the interrogation. This tack is certainly more professional than getting into a screaming/cursing match with the examiner and allows you to retain more dignity than you would if you remained silent and endured the shower of abuse.

At one point, I thought that the purpose of an aggressive “post-test” interrogation was to see how an examinee reacts to stress, etc. Considering the large numbers of individuals who say that they remained for the entire interrogation, made no admissions, and were still rejected, I now know that this is not the case.  The purpose of a polygraph interrogation is simply to determine truth/deception by chartgazing and to solidify “deceptive” findings with admissions. Nothing more, nothing less.

In an overwhelming number of “tests” (including virtually all of those conducted by the FBI, Secret Service, and DEA), once the polygrapher accuses you of deception and begins probing for a confession, you have already been rejected for the position. At this point, you can choose to be rejected for “results not within acceptable parameters” or run the risk of having a false confession attributed to you.  The latter is far more damaging if you try to apply for other jobs in the future.

Walking out is the best thing one can do once a polygraph interrogation “goes bad,” especially if the polygrapher behaves abusively. The “post-test” interrogation gives rise to a substantial number of false confessions (which do far more damage to one’s reputation than “failed” lie detector tests).