ted wrote on Jul 12^th, 2005 at 10:54pm:



Sorry Ted,

Most departments today will flag your file as PNC "Purposeful non-cooperation," and that will be the end of your your application if you are an applicant.  If it is a criminal test, different departments have differing rules.  There are some who will write the exam up as "deceptive" because one of the definations of countermeasures is, "Deliberate actions taken by a deceptive examinee in an effort to appear non-deceptive."

However, as I said, it does differ from department to department.

Nonombre

darkcobra2005 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2005 at 3:21am:

If countermeasures are a sure way to get disqualified for life, and you are in a no-win situation if you are caught using them, why on earth would anyone want to heed your advice about the only way out being to tell the truth about use of counter-measures?

If an examinee chooses to try countermeasures instead of rolling the dice on the polygraph, what possible incentive could he have to admit to any accusations of countermeasure use?

I suspect that, despite all the claims to the contrary, polygraph examiners remain completely unable to detect any countermeasures more subtle than a tack sticking out of a bloody shoe.  Why else would this type of advice be offered?  It seems rather paradoxical to write that countermeasure use will get you disqualified for life, therefore you’d better tell the truth if you are accused of using countermeasures.

Jeffery wrote on Jul 13^th, 2005 at 5:06am:


Hey Jeff,

Nice to hear from you.  I'm sorry, but it is a little difficult to answer your question without desending back into the old , "We can and do  identify countermeasures,"  "No you can't,"  "Yes we can,"  "No, you can't,", "Yes, we can,..."  etc.   

Hopefully, without starting any fights here (hard to do).  I and the other examiners in my section have disqualified many applicants for PNC without any "confessions" of countermeasures.  We didn't need a confession, the countermeasures were just that obvious.

Okay, let the games begin.

Nonombre
   

I can see how'd you think the guy was not cooperating; but to be so bold as to claim it purposeful, is well... as you pointed out, leading into the old "no you can't/yes we can/my dad can beat up your dad/mine's bigger" discussion.

All I know from personal experience is that my polygrapher was either lieing, thought he was a god (and wasn't) or was just an asshole.  Not saying that all you guys are.  Just the ones I've met.  I don't think I was officially  "PNC" but he did say I wasn't cooperating.  "You're breathing too fast!  You're breathing too slow!  You're controlling your breathing!  Stop thinking about your breathing!  You're not cooperating!"

my mental response: "asshole, now that you said don't think about my breathing -- guess what!!!  It's now all I can think about!  Tell me how you want me to breathe!"

Must be nice to end careers simply on unsubstantiated suspicions and mere allegations.  I hope the good you've accomplished in your life outweighs the damage you (your profession) have casued.

What still baffles me is this...

What happens during the pre-test, if the examinee chooses to lie to one of the control questions in the first instance.  Rather than providing an initial "Yes" response and then being steered into an eventual denial ("No").   

What I mean is, what if the examinee  answers "No" in the first instance simply because he/she has an unrelated issue (unrelated to the relevants) in their past that he/she doesn't want to discuss with the exmainer

Obviously, the examinee's response to that particular control question will be augmented.  Would the elevated response to the control question cause the examinee to pass assuming he/she was truthful to the standard 3 relevant questions?  Would the control response be interpretted as as countermeasure?

Sergeant1107:

Do you think that an examinee would automatically fail the test, becasue he/she has freely lied to a control question without actually being steered into the lie by the examiner?  Is that considered a countermeasure ?   

In my case, I was unaware of countermeasures when I underwent a crminal polygraph test several months ago.  I answered "No" to one of the control questions without being prompted or steered by the examiner.   

There were three controls and three relevants from what I remember.  I was unaware of the difference between control and relevants at the time.  The reason I answered "No" in the first instance to one of the control questions, was becasue the examiner had steered me into a denial with the other controls discussed before hand.  I figured I would save him the effort of "Other that what we discusssed...", blah, blah, blah.

In regards to the 3 relevants, I was truthful and answered "No".

At the conclusion of my test, the examiner  indicated that there was a "problem" with the test.  He  indicated one of three things had occurred.   

A) He suggested I was guilty, 
B) He suggested I had knowledge of the crime, or 
C) He suggested I had something on my mind that I felt  guilty about. 

I denied his accusations and abruptly ended the meeting.  I am curious as to your thoughts on the outcome of my test.  How would the test likely be scored?  Would the elevated response to my control question cause a pass ?  Or would it be perceived as a countermeasure and scored as a fail?

Sergeant1107 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2005 at 4:13pm:


Sergeant,
 
Allow me to reiterate that when I brought up how some departments and agencies define countermeasures, I was simply reporting a commonly used (and very traditional) definition.  I was making no statements about my own personal beliefs.  Still that definition is very much out there and it is based on that definition that certain examiners and their agencies will immediately brand the examinees attempting countermeasures as "Deceptive."
 
An interesting point to consider is before web sites like this was out thee, I would guess that the VAST majority of examinees attempting countermeasures were in fact guilty people trying to "beat" the test.  In fact, I still believe that most of the examinees attempting CM's, are indeed doing so because they fear being caught in a lie.
 
However, I also realize that because of this site and others that actively encourage truthful people to engage in countermeasures, the dynamic has indeed changed a bit.  Therein lies the point I am about to make.
 
Based on what I have seen thus far, I fear there are a significant number of people who following the advice of this website, have gone into a polygraph exam and practiced countermeasures unnecessarily.
 
Perhaps in some cases, their activities have "helped" them in some way (although I tend to doubt it).  But who I am truly concerned about are the truthful people, who based on what they have been told on this site, have practiced countermeasures, have gotten caught, and whether they ultimately owned up to them or not, have found themselves immediately disqualified from a job they otherwise would have gotten (or worse).
 
Now I know you or someone else will immediately counter with "What about all those people who went into the polygraph, told the truth, and were called "deceptive."
 
As I have said many times, I know there is a false positive rate (I too have read the research).  That is why I strongly push a "point system." that treats ALL the subjective portions of the police applicant process equally.  Under a point system, an applicant can completely blow virtually any portion of the process (including the polygraph) and still get the job.
 
Food for thought
 
Nonombre