Public Servant,
Thank you for sharing this anecdote. But I believe that you attach to it a significance that it does not have. This sample of one does not demonstrate that "it is difficult to artificially create physiological response which is greater than response created by answering an important question deceptively -- especially in regard to commission of criminal offenses." The foregoing assertion is not "a point [you]
made here long ago" (emphasis added). Rather, it is merely your
conjecture. While this conjecture may enjoy the status of dogma amongst the polygraph community, it remains unsupported by any statistically meaningful research.
Quote:Perhaps this may alleviate some consciences reagrding ethical issues I have raised in the past. But, perhaps, it should not.
My conscience is in need of no "alleviation" for having made information regarding polygraphy, including polygraph countermeasures, publicly available.
Quote:If nothing else, this is one example, of many, of how "the challenge" is being met.
No. It is not. Dr. Richardson's
polygraph countermeasure challenge would provide some evidence as to whether the participating polygraph examiner(s) has the ability to
reliably detect countermeasures (as opposed to occasionally guessing correctly).
This is a challenge that has yet to be met by any polygrapher. The undue significance you seemingly attach to the anecdote you've shared with us is a good example of the
confirmation bias that is all too prevalent in the thinking of the polygraph community.