In his 17 October 2001 remarks before the National Academy of Sciences' polygraph review panel, retired FBI polygraph expert Dr. Drew Richardson spoke about the inappropriateness of evaluating polygraph examiners based on the amount of admissions/confessions obtained, noting that it creates an incentive for polygraphers to exaggerate or even fabricate admissions. He noted that the FBI at one time evaluated its polygraphers on the basis of admissions obtained (and may still do so today).

Retired CIA polygrapher John F. Sullivan confirms that the CIA evaluates its own polygraphers on the basis of admissions obtained at p. 174 of his new book, Of Spies and Lies: A CIA Lie Detector Remembers Vietnam (University of Kansas Press, 2002). Comparing the functions of CIA case officers and polygraphers, Sullivan writes:

Quote:


Evaluating polygraphers on the basis of admissions obtained would certainly give them an incentive to play up the significance of any admissions, especially, perhaps, in the context of pre-employment screening, where the applicant has no right under the Privacy Act to obtain the polygrapher's report and to learn what admissions the polygrapher has attributed to him.