Sorry, removed what was here before.

Bo Biddar,

I apologize for the previous posting. I was making an attempt at humor, not trying to make fun of you.

Quote:

The intent during the interview and question review is to gauge what control questions to ask and sensitize you to the ones the polygrapher feels you will be most responsive to. You are expected to react to some of these background questions. It also is used to promote belief in the near infallibility of the polygraph. This may seem manipulative - and it is - but it is meant to reduce false positives.

A very good way to better understand the polygraph is to understand the instrument AND what the examiner is trying to measure and hence why they practice a sort of deceit in their art.

Imagining yourself in their position helps.  BTW, it also helps get a good price when buying cars.

-Marty

Quote:


But choosing to not use CM's during the exam is still a form of thinking about them, and the thought of what a CM is had to have crossed your mind ("Don't change the way I'm breathing, forget what I read about breathing patterns.").

You've taken a bite from the forbidden fruit. There is no return to innocence.**

**Disclaimer: "forbidden" and "innocence" are from the standpoint of a polygrapher. There are polygraphers who will flash a becoming smile at you, share a few hearty chuckles over the very idea of beating the polygraph, and continue on with the exam after being told how you were so, well, bad, very bad for having tried to learn how polygraphs work and how they can (easily) be beaten, giving you a clean slate (but don't bet on it).

I went in having read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.  I had a good idea of how the test works.  Nevertheless, like lots of other people, I decided I'd just go in and tell the truth, as I had nothing to hide.

Part of my logic was also that I thought I might feel more anxious if I tried to use CMs.  My mind would be focused on identifying types of questions and employing the appropriate responses.  Instead I just relaxed.  Even though I basically had no faith in the instrument, I decided to roll the dice (since I had even less faith that I wouldn't inadvertently "spike" on relevant questions, etc).

When I say "controls", I actually mean "probable lie" questions.  Maybe this is the source of confusion.

I think part of the problem in my case was that the probable lie questions didn't provoke much of a response from me.  Based on prior discussion with the examiner, it seemed clear what level of magnitude of "sin" he was interested in.  The problem for me was that although I may have committed low-level offenses related to the probable lie questions, none of them rose to the threshold severity level the examiner said he was looking for.

As a consequence, all my answers looked about the same on the charts (I'm speculating, never saw them).  There was no real lie to use as a standard against which he could evaluate the "truthfulness" of my other responses to relevant questions.  (There was no pre-exam stim test either.)

I knew this at the time, but thought it better not to raise the issue, since suddenly the examiner would be interested in where I picked up my knowledge of polygraphy, and why.  Or it could turn into a "don't tell me how to do my job" type thing.  Or he could have though it was a cheap ploy by me to paint myself as an angel.  ("Oh Mr. Polygrapher, I know most people lie about those questions, but I honestly have never done that.")

For the record, there certainly are non-relevant questions out there that I'd probably lie about -- the examiner just didn't happen to ask them.

I'm sure people will read this and think "if he'd only not read about the polygraph and strategies to defeat it, he wouldn't have been anxious, and he would have passed."  I disagree, since I really was surprisingly relaxed.  I'd committed to a tell-the-truth-no-CMs strategy before going in, so it wasn't as if I was reconsidering or strategizing or anything during the test itself.  I just visualized an American flag billowing in the wind (the "happy place" I'd chosen to help me relax) and answered the questions as they came.

Didn't work.

No problem, thanks for commenting on the situation.

I'm not saying what happened in my case happens frequently, I really have no idea.  Put it does point up a potential pitfall for examinees if the prob-lie questions are poorly chosen, or if the examiner raises the "trigger threshold" too high during any off-the-chart conversations.

"Have you have stolen anything?" might be a good example.  If you seek clarification of that question prior to ever being asked while hooked up, and the examiner says that by "anything" he means priceless artifacts, then suddenly a prob-lie question becomes a question 99.9% of the human population can honestly answer "no", and therefore it doesn't serve its function.

I'm exaggerating to make a point, but the point is still valid.