I recently took a pre-employment polygraph test for a local law enforcement agency.  I was found deceptive on certain questions.  The paleographer told me at the beginning of the session that if I were deceptive I would fail.  There was no second chances or anything.  However, I have been rescheduled for another test because I was deceptive.  I have also had a high ranking individual involved in a totally different section of the agency tell me to just come out and tell all.  This individual sat there and related to me about the similar branch of military we were in, similar problems we had, and was just my buddy for the conversation.  Now in "the lie behind the lie detector" this seems to fit (as far as the trying to get a confession) in except the part with the individual not involved with the test at all.   

And any info I volunteer on the pre test questions is the same as a confession, correct?

Quote:

Furthermore, if you filled out information regarding your drug history on a written application, such an admission even during the pre-test phase may be considered an admission to falsifying your application.

My advice is to be truthful to a potential employer from the first time you are asked about something. Once you have told them the truth, do not deviate from it no matter how much pressure they put on you.

You are experiencing emotional symptomatic responses to the physical act you are initiating.

Physical responses and emotional triggers to those responses are a two-way street. In other words, the 'Fight or Flight' response can be initiated by visual cues or by intentional mimicing of the physical manifestations of the response. In other words, 'sadness' can be felt by tightening the diaphragm, decreasing the depth of your breathing and increasing the rapidity of breaths, and 'stuttering' or catching your breath on the exhalation just like when you were a child and you were trying to stop crying.

So, whatever you're doing physically as you are practicing your countermeasures is dredging up some sort of symptomatic responses that are 'running chills' up and down your spine.

OK.
I just got back from the test.  I passed.  The tester was kind of surprised that I gave all the same answers on this pre-test questions as the last one and passed.  He asked if I was thinking of something the last time that made me nervous.  In fact there were a few things I felt might have been contradictory of what I read in the book.  When I got in his offices (cluttered with investigation work and stuff on every inch of the wall) he sat down and said "check it out dude.  John Dow is really pushing to get you hired.  Tell me the last year you have ever used any drug and we will fix the days and go off that."  Instead however, I decided to go with the stuff I read and stick with my story just in case it was a set up.  I used the countermeasures exactly how I read them and passed.   This agency is also known as a "back woods hillbilly" place so maybe they are not as professional as explained in the book.

Any ways, I am a total believer in this book.  I see how the polygraphs are unreliable now. The book was also interesting reading.  I will tell friends and family about this site.

Oh and I need to get this off my chest.  I only lied about some minor drug use I did about 10 years ago.  I already put it on my application and didn't want to get denied for changing my story later.  So this site didn't help some murderer or crazy person pass a poly 

Saidme wrote on Aug 12^th, 2003 at 7:36pm:


So, will Saidme now publicly admit he was wrong and retract his statement?

Doesn't really matter, of course -- it was only a rather poor attempt at suggestion, anyway, and the facts just aren't on his side.  Still, it would be nice to see him admit his prediction was evidently very wrong.

Skeptic

Saidme wrote on Aug 13^th, 2003 at 1:46am:


A simple acknowledgement that you were wrong in your prediction regarding countermeasure efficacy would suffice, Saidme.  But as I said, it's hardly necessary, as the accuracy of your confident, expert prediction is now obvious.

Perhaps detecting countermeasures isn't quite as easy as Saidme likes to assert...

Skeptic

George

Where is my 5th star.  You don't think I play these games for free do you?

Skeptic

You stand corrected on a couple of comments:

First let's take your CM statement.  I have no doubt CM's can cause physiological changes during the course of a polygraph examination.  My contention is that a competent examiner can and will detect CM's (turn off the clock Drew).  We (polygraph examiners) have and continue to demonstrate it regularly.  I know Drew would like a little lab coat and white room to do his test but face reality, the important work is in the field.

Regarding specific issue testing (which is what I do).  Your coveted NAS study (which I have no regard for) states something to the effect that specific issue testing is "far above chance" but less than perfect.  Is far above chance 90%, 95%, 98%.   I think I would take any one of those numbers to the bank.  Let's even concede 85%, still pretty damn good.   

Let me caveat this next statement so your co-horts don't take this out of context.  The most recent (and more recent) shuttle disasters were horrendous.  America lost a lot of great astronauts in both instances.  The shuttle and the technology driving those shuttles is awesome.  The people working on them are extraordinarily bright.  Were the shuttles 100%?  Obviously not.  Would I volunteer to ride the next shuttle to space?  In a heartbeat.  Anytime you factor in the human element you've got room for error.  Polygraph is no different.  It's pretty damn good but face it, nothing's perfect.

I guess my long winded point really takes a jab at the scientific community.  They of all people should know that nothing is 100%.  Unfortunately you get whiners like George who claimed to have been wronged.  And none of us truly know why George failed his  polygraph, do we?