Normal Topic GK countermeasures (Read 9312 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Bill
Guest


GK countermeasures
Apr 22nd, 2003 at 10:09am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Does the countermeasures discussed in chapter 4 apply the same to the guilty knowledge test the same as the others?  There wasn't as much info on this type of test, and I was getting pretty confused when comparing to the CQTs
  
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: 6147
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #1 - Apr 22nd, 2003 at 11:04am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
The same kinds of techniques could be used to produce reactions to the control questions in the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT). David T. Lykken discusses countermeasures and the GKT at p. 303 of the 2nd edition of A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector:

Quote:
[font=Garamond,Palatino,Times]
Countermeasures


The GKT will be susceptible to distortion by a guilty suspect who is skillful enough to covertly augment his reactions to the controls. As is true also in lie detection, the best defense against such countermeasures is an observant examiner. Since the GKT is to be used only in criminal investigations, as a guide to the police, it does not much matter that a suspect invalidates the test in this way as long as his efforts are noticed. In lie detection, an innocent suspect might augment his control responses because of a justified fear of failing the test even though innocent. Only a guilty suspect would have reason to try to beat the GKT, the cardinal virtue of which is a vanishingly small likelihood of false-positive errors. More importantly, an innocent suspect could not systematically self-stimulate on the controls, since he would not know which alternatives are controls and which are relevant. Therefore, the police investigator learns just as much from the fact that a suspect tries to defeat the test as he would learn from a score in the guilty range. In both instances, he will focus his investigation on this suspect, searching for admissible evidence against him.

Under special circumstances, it may be worthwhile to attempt to get a valid GKT score in spite of obvious attempts by the respondent to defeat the test. This will require perhaps five presentations of a ten-item set in order that the method of expected ranks, described earlier, can be employed. When this technique was tested experimentally, 20 subjects were allowed to practice self-stimulation to produce misleading responses, and they were offered a money prize if they could "beat" the test; none were successful. Whether the method will work as well in real-life applications remains to be seen.[/font]
  

George W. Maschke
I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time.
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 Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #2 - Apr 22nd, 2003 at 4:43pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George and/or J.B.,,

I have read much about the GKT test.  In this illustration that you quoted, were the tests blind (i.e. were there five hundred test subjects and 20 unknown subjects who tried to use countermeasures)?

My question leads to the obvious.  If I am offering a reward for beating the GKT with countermeasures but I know this ahead of time and I know that all test takers are going to try and use countermeasures, how do I objectively transfer this study to the real world where I am not going to be sure if a test subject is trying to use countermeasures?

Regards.
« Last Edit: Apr 22nd, 2003 at 5:27pm by Fair Chance »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Bill
Guest


Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #3 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 1:11am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
I'm misunderstanding.  Does this mean that the GKT has a much higher percentage of accuracy than the others?  And if you're innocent the control questions are unrecognizable?  I guess that would mean there is a higher risk of false positives, since control question reactions couldn't be augmented.  Does that make sense?
  
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: GK countermeasures
Reply #4 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 5:36am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Bill,

You are correct that in a Guilty Knowledge Test the controls are indiscernible to a person not involved in a crime or its scene.  This is considering that the correct answers (known as keys) have been properly concealed. 

You are incorrect to assume that false positives will be much higher.  Inasmuch as the key and controls would appear equally plausible as the key to the ‘innocent’ suspect, the person not involved in the crime or its scene will have a low probability of giving their strongest response to the key.  If one test is given and there are 6 alternative answers to a question but only one correct, an unassuming subject has theoretically a 1 in 5 chance of giving their strongest response to the key.  If there are five of these tests on separate areas of the crime and its scene, the probability of the subject giving their strongest response to the key diminishes with each test and as well with the increase in the number of controls within a test.  Furthermore, an ‘innocent’ suspect would be unwise to use countermeasures on this type of examination because they may well augment their response to the key and the examiner can advise them prior to the examination of the statistical probability of error for the test that is to be administered.

I hope this answered your questions.
  

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: GK countermeasures
Reply #5 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 5:49am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Fair Chance,

The way countermeasures could be detected in the field is by utilizing statistical probabilities of an unassuming subject’s ability to augment their response to any or all but the key without the knowledge of the key.   Expected rank scores may be check as well.  Considering the key is randomly moved to different position, their ability diminishes even more with each test and each control added.  As I stated to Bill in my previous post, there are no reasons for a false suspect to employ countermeasures to this type of test.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #6 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 6:47am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Dear J.B.,

I understand your "key" in using the statistical probabilities during GKT usage.  I believe that it deserves more research and serious study. This is coming from a victim of polygraph prescreening.  Like Marty, I agree that  CQT polygraph cannot differentiate between truth and deception but attempts to document physiological repeatable events during countermeasures might be feasible.  That is another discussion altogether.

My previous question goes more into the weak studies that  most previous statistical results are based upon.  I do not doubt that the GKT is a different animal then the CQT test.  I only wish that any studies done by proponents of this system would seriously construct a valid blind test which could withstand normal scientific scrutiny. "Paying" known subjects to try and "beat" the test is certainly not scientific and does not represent the way to persuade authorities such as the NAS panel or people like myself who are willing to be "constructively skeptical" (and willing to accept new technology if research is acceptable).

As stated by many on this website, the baby is getting thrown out with the bath water because of the insistance that CQT pre-screening polygraph is a valid and accurate test in applicant and employment screening. CQT has certain utility for eliciting confessions but certainly little or no ability to detect a trained spy.

If the CQT proponents would have admitted that maybe the "science" of its use was weak upon the publication of the NAS report than the door would have been more open to review other forms such as GKT.

Despite what many polygraph proponents think, I am open to science but it must be independent and scientifically repeatable by organizations with no vested interest in the outcome of the studies.  This would remind me of the days of tobacco companies doing lung cancer research as their profits depend upon the sales and use of cigarettes. The APA cannot be the fox watching the hen house.  

As it is, your well thought out intelligent presentations are getting lost in the CQT "polygraph noise."

Regards.
« Last Edit: Apr 23rd, 2003 at 1:33pm by Fair Chance »  
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: 6147
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #7 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 7:58am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
George and/or J.B.,,

I have read much about the GKT test.  In this illustration that you quoted, were the tests blind (i.e. were there five hundred test subjects and 20 unknown subjects who tried to use countermeasures)?

My question leads to the obvious.  If I am offering a reward for beating the GKT with countermeasures but I know this ahead of time and I know that all test takers are going to try and use countermeasures, how do I objectively transfer this study to the real world where I am not going to be sure if a test subject is trying to use countermeasures?

Regards.


I haven't read the study to which Lykken refers (D. Lykken, The validity of the guilty knowledge technique: The effects of faking, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1960, 44, 258-262). It's possible that the polygraph charts were blindly scored. Note that Lykken is not saying that countermeasures were detected in this study. Rather, he is saying that they were not successful against the GKT.
  

George W. Maschke
I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time.
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 Bill
Guest


Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #8 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 8:00am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Thanks guys, that actually helps a lot.  However, how can we tell which test we are getting?  The LBTLD gives an example of some GKT questions, but I'm just a little confused how they differ from the CQT.  I'm understanding it almost like multiple choice answers to one question, but what are the response reactions compared to as in the CQT?
  
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: 6147
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #9 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 8:12am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
Fair Chance,

The way countermeasures could be detected in the field is by utilizing statistical probabilities of an unassuming subject’s ability to augment their response to any or all but the key without the knowledge of the key.   Expected rank scores may be check as well.  Considering the key is randomly moved to different position, their ability diminishes even more with each test and each control added.  As I stated to Bill in my previous post, there are no reasons for a false suspect to employ countermeasures to this type of test.


J.B.,

A sophisticated subject might also produce a reaction to one or more keys in an attempt to confound any such statistical analysis.

I agree with you and Professor Lykken that there are no (good) reasons for an innocent suspect to employ countermeasures to a GKT. But that does not necessarily entail that innocent suspects won't attempt countermeasures.

In a laboratory study recently published in Polygraph (Honts, C.R., Amato, S.L., Gordon, A.K., "Effects of Spontaneous Countermeasures Used Against the Comparison Question Test," Polygraph, 2001, 30, 1-9), 45.8% of innocent subjects reported that they attempted "spontaneous" (untrained) countermeasures. It's possible that innocent suspects might attempt such countermeasures during a GKT.
  

George W. Maschke
I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time.
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 Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #10 - Apr 23rd, 2003 at 1:46pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
bill wrote on Apr 23rd, 2003 at 8:00am:
Thanks guys, that actually helps a lot.  However, how can we tell which test we are getting?  The LBTLD gives an example of some GKT questions, but I'm just a little confused how they differ from the CQT.  I'm understanding it almost like multiple choice answers to one question, but what are the response reactions compared to as in the CQT?


Dear Bill,

The questions asked could be very similar in both cases.  Both CQT and GKT tests can be used after an investigation and gathering of known facts and thus the creation of test questions could be similar.

The GKT is normally only used with an investigation that results in key facts that are hidden from the examinee.  The CQT is not always used in this manner.  The time and cost of a GKT test is quite a bit more than a CQT test if developed properly.   

George is correct that someone attempting countermeasures who is not well learned on the test or vice-a-versa could skew the test .

J.B. is correct that if the examinee is not using countermeasures that it could be a more accurate exam than the CQT.  In any case, rarely would a GKT be constructed for employment prescreening.

Regards.
  
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: GK countermeasures
Reply #11 - Apr 24th, 2003 at 6:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

Dr. Lykken writes more about statistical detection of countermeasures for the GKT.  I personally find it difficult to believe that even a ‘sophisticated’ subject who possessed concealed knowledge could confound this examination, given all the processing need to be achieved in a very short window period.

I do not have a copy of that issue of Polygraph at this time but will read it again.  It is understandable that college students taking a polygraph on a mock crime scenario may attempt spontaneous countermeasures, even those assigned to a truthful pool.  I have seen this happen first hand.  One reason an individual may use such countermeasures is that they want to see if they could beat the polygraph.  They are no inherent penalties for them if they produced a negative result being in a truthful pool.  In my opinion, the spontaneous countermeasure charts of a truthful individual on a CQT would not be indicative of those of a deceptive.  I would like to expound on this issue, however I must guard some opinions for later testing through research.

Regardless of the above, a properly educated innocent suspect would not use countermeasures on a GKT in real world settings.  It is up to the examiner to ensure that the test areas are foreign to the examinee, the examinee fully understands the procedure, and the examinee understands the ramifications of countermeasures on such a test.  Personally, I have yet to see this phenomenon apply in field use of the GKT. 
  

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: GK countermeasures
Reply #12 - Apr 24th, 2003 at 6:40am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Fair Chance,

The construction of the CQT and the GKT questions are polar in nature.  The CQT poses a direct question to the incident under investigation and proscribes a direct answer.
The GKT asks a question with multiple alternative endings and those endings are repeated.

One advantage of using the GKT is that it can save time and resources, which can ultimately equate to a monetary savings.

Pre-employment screening, as is regularly described and discussed here, is not an eligible use of the GKT.  The most recognizable reason is that there are no known keys to construct such a test.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: GK countermeasures
Reply #13 - Apr 24th, 2003 at 7:11am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Dear  J.B.,

Your answers prove that at least people of different opinions on the use of polygraph can have civil discourses.

As I said before, it looks as if any practical use of alternatives is going to be lost in the noise over CQT prescreening polygraph use.

Nice having a discussion with you.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GK countermeasures

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