valleyheat14 wrote on Apr 15^th, 2006 at 11:13pm:


Matt,

You will find this website chock full of folks who have taken and failed polygraph examinations.  In fact, this site was started by a guy who took and failed a pre-employment polygraph examination.

Some of these folks failed because they lied and are now appalled that the government was allowed to perform such an intrusive test.

Others failed because they are legitimate victims of something called a "false positive" result.  False positives do happen, but I believe they are far more rare than the people on this site would have you believe.

You say you are "scared to death," about taking a polygraph examination.  I understand.  I was also terrified when I took my first polygraph examination.  I was mostly afraid because I was hiding a childhood mistake.  I failed the exam, I was caught.

Luckily, the examiner talked to me and gave me a chance to redeem myself.  I told the truth and passed the next examination.  That was 17 years ago.  I am now a senior officer on my department, a detective, and a state licensed polygraph examiner.  My present and future are secure.

My advice?  Tell the examiner the truth.  Tell him/her everything.  Pass the test, and see your dream come true...

Good luck; my friend...

Nonombre

valleyheat14,

If telling the truth would guarantee passing a polygraph test, as nonombre simplistically suggests, this website would not exist. The fact of the matter, however, is that polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis, and many truthful persons are wrongly branded as liars and disqualified from the hiring process based on polygraph results. In fact, the "control question test" format commonly used in pre-employment polygraph screening depends on the secret assumption that even people the department would like to hire will be less than honest when answering the so-called "control" questions. The more candidly one answers the control questions, and as a consequence feels less stress when answering them, the more likely one is to fail. Nonombre knows this, but chose not to mention it.

As EosJupiter pointed out, you'll find polygraphy explained in detail in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Chapter 3 exposes the trickery on which the "test" actually depends, and Chapter 4 provides suggestions for reducing the risk of a false positive outcome.

For past discussion of the LVMPD's pre-employment polygraph process, see the message thread Las Vegas Metro's poly.

In response to our pal the polygrapher, who plans to improve his voodoo science with help from George... (hmm... if he's looking to make the test much more accurate, standardized, etc., what does that say about the test as currently constructed?):

>>...In fact, this site was started by a guy who took and failed a pre-employment polygraph examination.<<

Without trying to speak for him, check the other posts, nonombre.  Said founder asserts he was one of your "rare" false positives, and I support him on that...

>>False positives do happen, but I believe they are far more rare than the people on this site would have you believe.<<

Even one is too many, and there exists no reasonable recourse for a false positive.  Thus, you have a pseudoscience falsely screwing people, and we don't even know which ones.  Is that what we want?

Remember, there are false negatives, too.  Aldrich Ames pulled off two of these, one while under active investigation for spying!  How did he do it?  His Russkie handlers said to relax.  Period.  He did, he skewed the test, and he kept on passing secrets for however long...

>>...I was also terrified when I took my first polygraph examination.  I was mostly afraid because I was hiding a childhood mistake. I failed the exam, I was caught.<<

Now, interrogators tell you that they always want the truth, but as is mentioned in TLBTLD (read it 3 times), if you're truthful on control questions (which this "mistake" business seems to be), you're more likely to fail as a result.  Plus, all truthful responses make it such that there is no comparison capability between truths and nontruths whatsoever, as if that concept even mattered.  Coming full circle, physiological responses to "lies" on control questions are never some form of diametric opposite of a "truthful" trace, especially to a relevant question but also to any other control question, as the two types of questions are different.  One you know to be important, and the other you may well know not to be.  Following me on this?

>>Luckily, the examiner talked to me and gave me a chance to redeem myself.  I told the truth and passed the next examination.  That was 17 years ago.<<

I don't believe this for a second.  Confess, and be saved!  I am your salvation!  Here is your chance to lay bare your sins to me, the polygrapher priest!  I can absolve you in the name of the Pneumograph, and of the Sphygmomanometer, and of the Finger Sweat Doohickie, Amen!

>>My advice?  Tell the examiner the truth.  Tell him/her everything.  Pass the test, and see your dream come true...<<

Tell them you know their shell game, or better: tell them you've read all about the poly, every facet.  You did so to be better prepped, which would not be a lie.  Be polite, but do it.  It'll throw them off, for they'll know that YOU know their interrogation techniques.  Just my advice.

>>Good luck, my friend...<<

The polygrapher is never your friend.  Even if I, for example, had to pass a poly to get a job, did so, and then worked with the polygrapher as part of that job, I would grow eyes in the back of my head to watch him.  And he wouldn't be coming to any barbecues I have.  I don't have personal relationships with snake oil salesmen...

Nonombre:  better yet, you bring the Axciton, I'll bring the Lafayette.

I'm willing to bet it's easier to knowingly LIE and pass this instrument.  Telling the truth is far more likely to get someone like me in trouble.

I plan on telling my wizards that I have never studied polygraphy, etc.  If I "confessed" to all I know, can you imagine how quickly I would be branded a liar, cheater, drug using, child molesting, seal beating, flower stomping, puppy kicking jerk?  Yeah...I'll be sticking with the cm's thank you very much.

edit:  and if anyone gives me a suggestion on how to tape my session without getting caught, i'd be happy to post them, pass or fail.

Wouldn't it be funny if the mic caused some interference with the "equipment."    That sounds like an excellent idea.  I was considering using my phone or palm pilot to record onto an SD card, but I like your idea better.   

I think many people would feel much better if they could actually see/hear the nonsense that goes on in these interrogations.


Nonombre,
Do you prohibit your subjects from recording the sessions?  Do they have any obligations to inform you that you are being recorded?

cesium_133 wrote on Apr 18^th, 2006 at 10:56am:


Okay, okay, fine, whatever you say,

But...

Why can't I come to the barbeque?