Kona-

Good question. The answer is this: I experimented with CM's on a couple of 'Control' questions, just to see if there was any distinct variance(s) between the use of CM's or the straightforward truth. Unfortunately, (and I should have foreseen this) I never was able to view the charts afterward, and even if I had been able to, I don't suspect I would have been able to determine if there was any difference in the physiological responses, since I am not a professional 'chart gazer' and don't possess the exquisite training afforded to the elite 'professional' polygraph examiner community. I unobtrusively increased my breathing and heart rate and visualized 'exciting' scenarios in my head to accomplish the electrodermal responses, but have no clue whether or not they did anything on the chart. I find it strange though, over my career in federal service, after holding and maintaining TS-SCI level clearance, that I have never been polygraphed by any of the agencies which afforded me that level of clearance. Odd. Anyway, to answer your other question, I had no valid reason to use countermeasures other than perhaps to offset the guilt of being in presence of others who were using drugs illegally. The fact that I hold a clearance and consider myself a law-abiding citizen I suspect was enough for me to feel guilt during the questions about drug usage, and thus, damaging physiological responses during these same questions. I would think that the FBI would appreciate the fact that candidates for employment would feel guilty about having been present where a 'crime' was being commited, even though the prospective employee never engaged in the actual 'act' of the crime itself. So, I decided not to use CM's throughout the entire 'test' for ethical reasons. I don't think it's such a bad thing to feel some measure of guilt about past involvement in things one knows is against the law, even when that involvement was not active engagement of breaking a law. Except of course, when one is engaged in taking a polygraph 'test'. I read TLBTLD essentially for background information on the polygraph and it's administration, not for the effective use of countermeasures. I'm not sure that I could have identified the control questions without having read TLBTLD, however. And really, I didn't need to identify the control questions at all, since I had no plans to use CM's. Hope this dissertation answers your questions.

Undesirable

Marty-

I made an error in judgement. I should have decided before the 'test' to either use CM's throughout the 'test' or not. I thought I would attempt CM's on a couple questions just for the hell of it to determine if the examiner would notice anything (about myself or the charts) during the application of CM's and say something to me about it. Nothing was said. Perhaps I should clarify my 'experimentation' with CM's. The first series of questions regarded counterintelligence. Three separate charts were taken, with the order of questions changed for each of the three charts. No CM's were used. The second series of questions regarded drug use and veracity of information on the FD-140. Three separate charts were taken, order of questions changed for each chart.  On the second series of questions, for the second chart, I attempted CM's on a couple control questions. That was the extent of my use of the CM's. I know that there was probably no discernible difference in physiological responses, and nothing was said about it. These 6 charts were all identified, according to TLBTLD, as the PLCQT format. I was then given another set of questions regarding drug use and veracity of information contained in the FD-140, this time with what appeared to be some relevant/irrelevant questions such as "are you sometimes called XXXXXX" and "is today "XXXXXXXX", interspersed with the relevant questions and standard control questions I recognized from the PLCQT format previous to this set of questions. The order of the questions was changed for each chart recording, and three charts were taken. At the conclusion of the 'test', I was given my coat, asked to take a seat in the corner of the room, and my examiner said I had 'hit' on the drug questions and the veracity of information contained in the FD-140. I explained my reasoning behind the 'hits' on the drug questions as being unable to disassociate myself with events that had taken place in the past, even though I was not guilty of any actual wrongdoing. The examiner seemed satisfied with my answer, and concluded our 'session', by asking me if I had any questions. I said I had none. He asked me what I thought of the 'test'. I responded that it was 'interesting'. He said 'Interesting?' and I said yes. This concluded our time together. We shook hands, and I left. Conclusions? Hell if I know.

Undesirable

Undesirable,

It's unfortunate that you didn't attack the polygraph with the employment of full countermeasures.  Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't make any sense why you would "experiment" with CM on a "few" control questions.  What did you hope to accomplish with this techique?  Since you experimented with a few questions, you really had nothing to lose by employing full CM.  If you had done this, the outcome of your examination might have been different.   

Good luck to you in the future.  I think you'll know what to do next time.   

Kona

Quote:
Interesting possibility. I can kinda see how that may occur.
Quote:
Very possible. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss this as I am trying to get a feel for the spectrum of responses people have to minimize my own a-priori bias.

-Marty

The results are in. I failed. Now it's time to write the appeal letter and request all pertinent documentation relating to my application. For those who have not actually seen a DQ letter, here is a representation of mine. 

Dear Mr. Undesirable, 

This is to advise you that our conditional offer of appointment dated XX/XX/XXXX, is hereby rescinded.

Although your desire to become affiliated with this Bureau is appreciated, we are unable to further process your application, based on the results of your polygraph examination on XX/XX/XXXX. As you are aware, all applicants for FBI employment must successfully pass a pre-employment polygraph examination. The results of your polygraph examination were not within acceptable parameters.

I know that this decision will be disappointing to you, but trust that you understand the FBI's position in this matter.

                                         Sincerely yours,

                                          Blah blah blah blah

I am composing my letter, and requesting all my applicant information including polygraph charts and videotapes. Any advice from the group?

Another victim of false positives.

Undesirable

Yeah, I have two of them!  Keep it.  Someday your grandkids will have a good laugh that there was ever a time when we relied so heavily on this nonsense.

By then -- most probably after a few more Robert Hanssen-style episodes at the Bureau -- you may find it comical, too.

PS: You may not want to bother appealing.  You may request documentation, file a letter or protest, etc.  But my hypothesis is basically that they only bear the expense of multiple tests because they assume examinees will attempt countermeasures (just like they assume lies on probable-lie questions), and therefore they consider it a chance to learn more about the CMs in use.  If being the subject of such an encounter sounds fun, more power to you.  I think the chance of success on a second test is very, very slim.

Kona-

I'm sending a Privacy Act request for all my records, and requesting Director Mueller to grant me a re-examination not necessarily to obtain a position with the FBI, but to ensure that when my current security clearance comes up for adjudicative review sometime in the future, that my FBI records don't reflect unfavorably upon review. This is not to say that I have a better chance of passing a second polygraph, rather, I intend to use full CM's this time if granted a re-test which may or may not give me a better chance at passing. Besides, I already have a decent job making good money, and I don't want to necessarily move out of state and take a pay cut just to be associated with the Federal Bureau of Interpretation. If I fail a re-test however, that would, I suspect, be double jeopardy when it comes time to reviewing my current clearance. Since my position requires a clearance, I suspect I would be out of a job if I had the results of 2 polygraph examinations that both concluded I was deceptive when answering questions regarding drug use and sales. This would also lead me to believe that under the circumstances, I would be under virtually double the anxiety about passing a second time, which in and of itself, without using CM's, would almost guarantee failure. So to answer your question, yes I have a lot to lose. Not only my current clearance and ultimately, my job, but I will not let the Federal Bureau of Intimidation get away with an affront to my integrity and honesty. I'll keep you informed........

Undesirable