Polygraph Malcontents and others

Interesting back and forth about taping/not taping.  Our agency always tapes as a matter of practice, but I can understand how an agency might find that cumbersome. Many things are not recorded in an applicant process (and that is why most of you are here after all) like the physical tests where folks are routinely dismissed for a lack of flexibility or a few seconds over on the run.  Those of you that have failed, and are lashing out via your polygraph experience, just what do you expect an agency to do? keep a video data bank of thousands of prospective applicants to look for the slightest impropriety?  Put your hatred of the polygraph aside for a moment and put yourself in an agency (any agency) recruiter mode.  You have hundreds of applicants a testing cycle that your administration has asked you to narrow down.  The recommendation here is to provide a video, charts and who knows what else to every applicant of the polygraph experience.  Would you do this as an administrator?  You folks sense a cover up, I say its a practical matter.  We dont send the psych tests out for review, or what questions were missed on the written, or a recording of the oral board to see if you were subject to bias / subjective scoring.  I guess any applicant, police or corporate, has to have a certain measure of trust.

Im always amused when the subject of hypocrisy comes up.  The thinking here is that the term does not fit, because we are concerned with polygraph only. Interesting.  I believe that is what the word means in this context.  Pretending to be excessively outraged about the polygraph, knowing full well that many qualified applicants are lost through a variety of other preventable causes defines the word.  When this is pointed out (and I have many times) the idea is dismissed as "off topic".
The fact that many who post here are hypocritical is undeniable in my view.
Based on my experiences, I also have to say that some of the stories presented here lack complete detail, which is expected from those that fail and do not accept an agencies judgement that they are indeed lacking.  I will tell you this, if an agency really wants you-you will be hired.  I wish I had a dollar for every applicant that swore his application was complete, failed the polygraph, and then made specific admissions in the failed area.
Capt. Jones has not only failed his FBI polygraph, but one for a reserve position.  That which repeats itself is not due to chance.  Think about it.

Im seeing alot of posters lately make comments about "dusting" polygraphers or in one hero's example using sophisticated multi level countermeasures.  If you are taking multiple polygraphs you have probably not been hired.  Perhaps you would be more specific as to the agency and the polygrapher?  As no crime is committed in clenching your buttcheeks during a pseudo-scientific ritual, what would you fear from disclosure? simply post the results, or get your charts and show those as well.  In other words stop the idle boasting, and prove how easy this countermeasure business really is. You are not working for the agency anyway, and have nothing to lose. 
Awhile back George, I asked if you wanted to do this on an organized basis and post the results.  You have ignored that request in favor of unscientific, unprovable personal accounts riddled with factual omissions and exaggeration.

And as I looked around the site briefly George I noted that you are not censoring some of the same language that you felt necessary to censor in one of my last posts where BT showed his entire ass.  Is this intentional, or are you engaging in selective censorship on this "free" site?

Breeze,

First of all, if an agency is going to pretend they use guidlines regarding polygraphs according to the APA then why would they choose to disregard this measure?

Secondly, I assume you never applied for a fed agent position.  Failing a written exam will not dq your employment, you will be given second, and third chances.   

Addressing your example of applicants be rejected by the running a slow time in a physical exam.  Running a measured distance is a objective measure of one's ability.  A polygraph is far from objective, and no where near scientific.
" Pretending to be excessively outraged about the polygraph, knowing full well that many qualified applicants are lost through a variety of other preventable causes defines the word."
That is so insane, I'm sorry people on this board don't equate getting dq's cause your 6'0" 310 lbs and run the mile in 12 minutes, as opposed to be some attempt to measure truth which is as accurate as flippping a coin. 

So before you cast everyone on here as hipocrits, try to understand the absurdity of using a polygraph as the sole criteria for employment.  Someone also needs to explain to me how something that claims to be 98% accurate can be re-administered to someone if the "results" show someone is lying.  Shouldn't the agency trust the reuslts enough not to allow another polygraph.

Orolan,

Thanks, that makes the score Batman- 1 (maybe two because I think someone else conceded a point to me awhile back, but I'm not sure); Everyone Else- 110.

I may be losing but I keep on coming back, is that good for a point?


Hey Anonymous: 
 
Wake up Dude...I repeat, regarding Batman's dark side; the character for Batman was originated by Bob Kane based on a few different inspirations, Leonardo da Vinci's man with wings was the inspiration for the cape and a man being able to fly, Douglas Fairbanks, Sr was the inspiration for Bruce Wayne, but most importantly the old 1935 movie, 'The Bat Wispers' was the inspiration for the overall character.  The movie is about a criminal who led a dark, shadowy life, thus the dark side of Batman!   
 
I know, for I am......   
 
Batman (and I have one hell of a dark side) 

Batman,

There is a considerable difference between the types of thoughts and behaviors that might be loosely grouped together under the heading of "a dark side" and the routine vulgarity you display.  Please share with me anything that Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. did or said on screen that approaches your latest vulgarity addressed to me.  No dude, you are not a depressive genius personality, just a vulgar twit....

And with regard to your listing of agencies on another thread, an impressive listing of bureaucrats perhaps...care to list a dozen of so individuals from any or all those agencies with the academic credentials in the fields of psychophysiology, statistics, etc that were represented on the NAS Panel?  I don't think it was by accident that this independent group of stellar scientists was selected for the relevant study and report and not some ad hoc group of bureaucrats from the agencies you so dutifully listed for us.

Breeze,
I still think that audio taping would suffice. And if the applicant passes, and is told right then that they passed, there is no reason to keep the recording. Or, with today's technology, the audio can be burned directly onto a CD on-the-fly in MP3 format by the same laptop the polygrapher is using for the test. I have one CD with 185 songs on it, averaging 6 minutes in length. That's 18.5 hours of audio. Three days worth of polygraphs on one CD. What is impractical about that? And again, I do not advocate giving copies to every examinee. Just make it available to the examinee, or make them pay for a copy if they want one. Plenty of other agencies charge for copies of records, so I'm sure the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. can do the same.
As for the "other causes", I concede that you have a valid point. (Must not be my day. First Batman, now you.) Biased, incompetent and prejudiced interviewers do cause a lot of people to be eliminated. There will always be people like this, because we're all human. Much like the battle to end racial profiling by patrolmen, it can only be stopped by reviewing the acceptance/rejection patterns of the various interviewers. Not sure about the physical fitness tests. But my health spa is full of electronic weight-lifting machines, stair-step machines, running treadmills, etc. Kind of hard to get the machine to discriminate, don't you think?
Having never actually "failed" a polygraph, I am not a pissed off person looking for revenge. But since I basically "flat-lined" a polygraph that I very evidently lied on, without the use or knowledge of countermeasures, I find the polygraph process to be suspect.

The_Breeze wrote on May 21^st, 2003 at 5:45pm:


Breeze, that polygraphy is susceptible to countermeasures is well established. By contrast, no polygrapher has every demonstrated any ability to detect countermeasures. The discusssion you referenced above is to be found in the message thread Thanks to TLBTLD I PASSED!!!. Skeptical readers may judge for themselves whose arguments regarding polygraphy are based on "unscientific, unprovable personal accounts riddled with factual omissions and exaggeration."

Quote:


You were not targeted for censorhip. On 18 March 2003, we upgraded the software used to run this message board. The new software included, by default, a "censor list" of vulgar words that would be automatically replaced by asterisks in all posts. This unintended "censorship" was discovered on 10 April and immediately removed.

Batman,
You speak of your dark side; I think your dark side is your true side.  You find pleasure in jerking the chains of all who post to this site.  You find a perverse joy in making your own prejudiced and opinionated remarks about all who post hear.  You always seem to look for a fight rather than the solution.

In your real job, do you ever get along with your co-workers?  Your entire career is most likely a linty of control material.  I state this only because you preach so much self-righteousness that one can only surmise that you must have a closet full of skeletons in your bat cave.

Did you ever succeed at anything in your life or have you lived such a small shallow existence that you must resort to offending and trying to bully all those with whom you disagree?

Batman does provide for interesting dialogue here, if you are a fan of Jerry Springer.