2525 wrote on Sep 6^th, 2007 at 4:49pm:


Other than George's case, I've never EVER heard of anyone failing ALL of the relevant questions on a polygraph screening exam.  On a single-issue exam, such as a criminal exam, yes, but not on a screening exam.  The relevant questions are of too wide a variety on a screening exam.

In my experience, there are only two reasons why someone would fail ALL of the relevant questions on a polygraph screening exam.  First, they are actually lying on all of those questions, which in George's case I don't actually believe occurred.  Or second, and much more likely, they have made the RELEVANT questions more significant to themselves by knowing or realizing that those are the only questions of true importance in the exam.  I believe that a person's knowledge of countermeasures, and their attempts to amplify the reactions on the comparison questions can actually backfire because they make the relevant questions even more significant to themselves during the exam.

TheNoLieGuy4U,

Posts to this (or any) discussion thread should ideally address the relevant topic. In this case, the relevant topic is Dr. Richardson's challenge to the polygraph community to prove their claimed ability to detect polygraph countermeasures. This challenge has now gone more than six years without a single taker.

The study you cited in your post above has been discussed at length elsewhere on this message board. Please see  Latest Study Indicates "Lie Behind the Lie Detector" Hurts Innocent, Doesn't Help Guilty.

TheNoLieGuy4U wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 11:45pm:


I can attest that Dr Richardson did indeed graduate from DODPI and he had no trouble with the academic portion of the training.  

     Hi YankeeDog,

  Thank You for attesting to his graduation, but that was not in question.  My source told me that it takes a 70% minimum to graduate, and that he did not get much at all above that.  I was shocked if this were true, as the expectation of one with a PhD after their name might imply the ability to grasp the information at a much higher level.   

   My question dealth with his class standing and average in the class.  70%, 80%, 90%  /     1st in the class, or  4th out of 36    etc.   

Thanks,

From a retired deputy and polygraphist from Florida.  You can beat the examiner but not the instrument! Its how you interview, the polygraph is just a tool. Criminal and pre employment testing are two different tests.  If the examiner knows what he/she is doing, and they are good, they should see the countermeasures. Even when they decide to play with their sphincter, if its not at the right time you loose!  As far as the GSR tricks, the GSR can be placed in other areas with good results. 
As far as a book to beat the test, its a fishing expediation on a pre employment- see what you nibble at.  Criminal tests are the best and easy.
I did quite a bit before law enforcement and college.  If on the street, ya dump the dope whatever. Speeding, a warning.  I was one that rembers his roots, and wont stroke you for something I did. 
The examiner can go by their gut.  I know if you arent upfront, I dont have to fail you on a drug question if I have good vibes on a person.
I will inform the applicant inbetween tests only, to quit the countermeasures.  If by the third question or so I will stop the test and let them out.
You get a good examiner that is upfront and phrases the question best for the applicant, then they wont need the counter measures.  Change the question to:  when was the last time you ..... Puts the applicant at ease. No other problems, continue the person in the process, and note reactions to CYA. If you flatline from a drug or its overacting on GSR (depends) reschedule, or ya get a question from left field and see what happens.  No reaction,  process stops there! (there is more to this)
Best to be upfront from the start-BUT, to an extent!!!!!!!! Why people say the things they do beats me. 
FYI:  I stand while testing the person. Screw up on a counter measure, and the next weekly meeting of background examiners, that are from different departments, and one  mentions your name, you are SOL!!
98 % validity on specific/crime test. PE-pre employment is a fishing expediation  2% goes to countermeasures, BUT, this is with a good qualified examiner and done properly.
If you arent sure, YOU/I let the person continue in the process. An examiner that takes the time to explain things to the applicant  they wont have to use counter measures.  Look, You made it to this step (or you are gathering information) dont screw it up.
A book? Its a joke, dont waste your money.  Takes 2 areas to knock a person out of the process.  Your a bad apple, you will most likely mess up on the poly, psych, or oral. Dont blame the examiner.  Been doing this since 84
Its a great job, but when you resort to a counter measure, and I see it, you are done!! Find another career. 
You people are so negative on polygraphs. I have gone out of my way to get somebody hired that was too honest, but the problem areas were in the past and the applicant was over standards.  Exceptions can be made!!!!!!
If you cant get the first two questions right, you BETTER USE COUNTER MEASURES!! NO BOOK WILL HELP!!

TC
The 2% on a specific test if done correctly is from counter measuers.
The pre employment is about 12 questions repeated twice with a 2-3 minutes inbetween to rest the arm.  Iy I suspect one is using countermeasuers say with breathing, I will let the charts run inbetween charts and see the change in the cardio for breathing.  You dont see my paper going, and I might ask you something or instruct you to breath naturally. Your breathing changes on the second test to normal fine, if not I might rescheduld or plain end your process at that point. Subjective, up to the examiner and how I feel towards the applicant. Never stim an applicant!!! Never say inbetween tests you show reactions to say for example to the drug questions.  If done, that question will be on the persons mind and show a larger reaction the second test.  If that ever happens, tell the examiner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I have seen it done by polygraphists. Tell the person in charge of your process, and they will set you for another test. Be advised, you fail the first examiner, 9 out of 10 times the second examiner will go with the firsts rec.  I call it the way I see it! But on the other hand have passed people that have been failed as well. Same for the psychological, People can request or pay for it on their own if the dept says it is ok and must be one of the many psychs the dept uses.  There are good examiners and bad ones. Same for doctors or lawyers.
AGAIN, the 98% is fact.  The book is The Scientific Validity of the Polygraph.  Takes 2 areas to be declined!!!  You should be more worried on the psychological or oral board!!!!!!!! 
Hope that helped some

Since my recent challenge to George and Gino to establish their credentials, there has been a few renewed comments regarding Drew Richardson's polygraph countermeasure challenge. This thread begins with Drew relating the amusing and informative story about how he first laid this challenge before the NAS committee. 

Since new interest has been generated, perhaps it is time for the readers to read, as Paul Harvey, R.I.P. used to say "The Rest of the Story" about his presentation to the NAS.

According to BFL incorporated, the prestigious Dr, Drew Richardson, former Chief of the FBI's Counter-Terrorism Unit,  joined Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories in 2001 as Vice President of Forensic Operations just a few weeks before Sept. 11, 2001. They are a privately held commercial interest promoting and selling theory and technology for the use of the "P300/MERMER" (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response wave for the detection of deception and concealed information. This provides Richardson with a financial motive to try to convince folks that polygraph does not work.  

Based on George’s notes, which he has posted elsewhere on this website; at the time Richardson spoke to NAS on October 17 2001 he represented himself only with his FBI and Research credentials and failed to inform the committee of his possible conflict of interest based on profit. His BFL Inc. boss, Lawrence Farwell, immediately followed Richardson’s presentation with a P300 sales pitch. YES, conveniently right behind Richardson’s criticism of polygraph. The final NAS report does not indicate that they had any knowledge of Richardson’s employment or financial interest in a technology attempting to compete with polygraph. 

If George is telling the truth about Richardson’s presentation to NAS and Richardson failed to disclose an obvious profit based ulterior motive that potentially colored his comments, I believe that he conducted himself in an unethical manner. 

George's motives are arguably "Not for Profit". I don't think the same can be said for Dr. Drew Richardson. I think his motives are more about the money.

Now you know "The Rest of the Story"                Good Day

P.S.  Sergeant, how would you feel about having your brain scanned as part of the police applicant process? 

P.S.S. Cullen, How would you feel about a periodic counterintelligence brain scan as a condition of continued employment?