anythingformoney wrote on Feb 27
th, 2005 at 7:53pm:
Exactly. How else are we to believe that countermeasures extolled on this site actually work?
Anecdotal evidence provided by anonymous persons in response to your challenge will not provide genuine evidence that countermeasures work, just as anecdotal claims by polygraphers to have detected countermeasures do not prove that polgyraphers are able to detect countermeasures at better-than-chance levels.
But peer-reviewed research strongly suggests that CQT polygraphy is vulnerable to countermeasures that even experienced polygraphers are unable to reliably detect.
Quote:Innocent examinees don't need countermeasures.
The finding of the National Acamedy of Sciences that polygraph screening is without validity does not support this assertion.
Quote:For innocent examinees to say that they passed their exam because of countermeasures is like saying that the fizz in carbonated beverages keeps you from getting cancer because the cancer cells are expelled in burps. Silly, silly, silly.
It is true that an innocent person who employs countermeasures and subsequently passes a polygraph examination cannot know for sure that the countermeasures were resonsible for his/her passing. But the same is also true with regard to the guilty person who employs countermeasures and passes. He/she cannot truly know whether or not he/she might have also passed absent the use of countermeasures.
Quote:You dispense a placebo, George, nothing more.
While you assert this to be the case, you have not presented any compelling evidence or argument for such. An understanding CQT procedure, as well as peer-reviewed research, strongly suggests that augmentation of reactions to the "control" questions to increase one's chances of passing is more than just a "placebo."