Polygraphers often comment that examinees should not use countermeasures and just "tell the truth." OK, that is the most ethical thing to do - but only if it's possible. Let's examine the two principal scenarios involved. Both assume an "informed" examinee.

In the first scenario the examiner does not ask about the examinee's polygraph knowledge. So exactly how does a well meaning examinee, desiring not to use countermeasures, respond when reviewing the relevant and control question? An informed examinee will know the examiner will expect a lie on the controls. Should he lie? Is doing what an uninformed examinee is expected to do not using countermeasures? If he doesn't lie because he has been exhorted to "just tell the truth" the controls will be unusable, or even worse, the examinee will be telling the truth on the controls and thus failing to produce a NDI on the relevants.  Alternately, the examinee could then reveal he is aware of the purpose of controls at that time. How will the examiner deal with that person then?

Now lets take the case where the examinee tells the examiner up front she is "informed." If the examiner is trained in DLCQT's then that is one direction. Has anyone here had this result? OTOH, the examiner may not be trained at DLCQTs and may just try to bluff their way through.  Should an examinee then pretend to not recognize the controls and lie on them knowing the examiner anticipates a lie? In what ways would such a polygraph produce results different from a standard exam-examinee?

I'm interested in how both polygraphers and examinees who have taken exams without using CM's have resolved these questions.

To me it seems a little like trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together.

-Marty

Marty wrote on Jan 24^th, 2004 at 1:27am:


Yes Marty, but you fail to consider the PDQ, ETC, SOP, ASAP, AND PD.  TO SAY NOTHING OF THE SOB.  Who are you trying to impress with all your nonsense?