Myth #8 -- People shouldn't complain about the polygraph test since few things in life are 100%

One can just imagine a polygrapher coming home from a test with a 50% and using this excuse on their parents -- few people scored a 100% on the test, so there is no reason to complain about their score.

Of course, the list arguments of against polygraph testing doesn't end with the (valid) complaint about its poor accuracy.   It also includes, for example, the foolishness of allowing people who are paid to lie, harass, and use bad technology to evaluate the suitability of applicants.  Given that we expect people charged with protecting our national security to be truthfull, respectfull, and technologically savy, why on earth do we allow people who choose to get paid to do the exact opposite of these things to tell us who is a good person and who is a bad person?


Additional note on myth #6 -- during one of my exams (second with this agency), my polygrapher insisted that I must tell her something to explain why I responded to one of the questions.  I refused to do so, since I had nothing relevant to say about that question.  She said that she had to fail me unless I confessed something.  It appears that polygraphers will do anything to beef up their utility and accuracy statistics -- if the applicant confesses something, then they can claim the test was accurate, if they don't then they must fail.  Few people won't come up with something to confess in this situation.  I confessed nothing, so I failed the question, but was still able to pass it during my next (third) examination.

During this exam (second) I mentioned to my polygrapher that I know people who have made up stuff to appease an examiner, but my concerns were dismissed.  Others lied to appease the polygrapher and passed, I held on to the high moral ground and failed.