Mr. Gordon,
You write:
Quote:This speaker was being facetious in the opening of his presentation, and the remarks in my article were meant to indicate to everyone how scary such behavior would be. I agree with one of your responders that such behavior would be like "planting evidence," it would be extremely unethical, unprofessional, and I am sure would result in expulsion from the APA.
Thank you for clarifying this. Was the point that the speaker was trying to convey with humor that just as it would be unethical for polygraph examiners to use techniques that ensure failing charts, so too is it unethical for polygaph subjects to use techniques that ensure passing charts? Or was it something else? (Skip Webb has e-mailed me that the remarks were "apparently based upon statements made on [on AntiPolygraph.org] in the past about the R&I polygraph technique," but I'm not sure which ones.)
Quote:There is always concern about sites like yours that offer suggestions on how to beat the polygraph. I am of the opinion that if those who supposedly taught it actually knew, they would all have government jobs and top secret clearances.
Wishful thinking, Mr. Gordon. It was the experience of being falsely accused of deception based on polygraph chart readings that led Gino Scalabrini and I to research polygraphy, and ultimately to co-author
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. We didn't just make up the countermeasure information in our book. We based it on sources including peer-reviewed studies by Professor Charles R. Honts and collaborators and DoDPI documentation.
We know what we're talking about, and it scares the polygraph community. That's why Paul M. Menges, who teaches DoDPI's countermeasure course for polygraph examiners, has recently suggested that providing such information to the public
should be made illegal.
That the polygraph community is very concerned about the kinds of countermeasures described on AntiPolygraph.org is also supported by the fact that the topic of countermeasures has been on the agenda at most polygraph organization seminars held since we went on-line (including the American Polygraph Association seminars for at least the last three years running).
That the polygraph community lacks confidence in its ability to detect countermeasures is supported by the game of "hide-the-countermeasure-studies" that DoDPI and the CIA played with the National Academy of Sciences (see
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, 3rd ed., p. 160) and by the fact that no polygrapher has yet mustered the courage to accept Dr. Richardson's
polygraph countermeasure challenge (569 days and counting).
Quote:However, I will give your readers the secret. If you are going to lie on a polygraph test the best way to "beat" it, is don't take it.
Your sharing this "secret" suggests a lack of confidence in your ability to detect countemeasures....
Pages: 
Polygrapher Teaches How to Rig Exam (Read 42610 times)
