I'm currently at a certain point in the application process for employment at a federal agency, although I cannot divulge which one nor how far along I am for obvious reasons (although - as will be soon equally obvious - it is some time before the requisite polygraph examination). I came to this website because, being curious about what to expect from this specific point in the employment process, it presented itself as one of the few websites that appears to delve into the nature of the polygraph examination with any significant depth. I have read Dr. Maschke's The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, and have also read quite a few of the posts here on this message board. It's apparent that the difficulty of finding concrete information concerning the examination is probably caused in part by how polarized opinions are about it, although Dr. Maschke definitely has presented, throughout his book and these forums, a great deal of studies (which, not coincidentally, generally support his viewpoint concerning polygraphy). After my careful reading of all that is presented here, including the opinions of the several admitted polygraph examiners, I have come to the following conclusions myself: -Successful polygraphy, with regards to the detection of deception or truthfulness, is predicated on a subject producing a psychologically-conditioned, specific response (BFB as measurable by the polygraph) to a specific stimulus (lying). Now, maybe others here can correct me if this assumption is wrong or too simplistic. If it isn't, though, then certain issues concerning the validity of examinations must necessarily come into play: -If a subject is not properly conditioned to produce the desired response to the stimulus, then the test will not be successful (from a strictly objective viewpoint; either a reading with no bearing on nor relation to reality will be made, or the examiner will have to deem the examination inconclusive). -If a subject produces the response in question to a stimulus or stimuli other than that which is relevent to the examination, then the test will not be successful. Also, it seems that the actual conditioning being discussed basically boils down to producing a measurable, if temporary, anxious or fearful state in a lier. Do advocates of polygraphy hold that this response is impossible to overcome? I find it difficult to believe that a subject could not forseeably counter-condition him or herself to not "fear the examination", or not allow him or herself to be conditioned as such. Secondly, is it not possible that other stimuli could produce this reaction as measured by the polygraph? These stimuli do not appear to be "controlled for" in any classically scientific sense (and yes, I am well-aware that there are questions called "control questions", but I am also well-aware that, per my education and training, these are not classic control variables in that the examiner does not have control over possible values -i.e. responses - nor the ability to keep their effect constant). In any case, after reading the information given on this site (amongst others), including that given by those who administer polygraphs, I am left to wonder what basis in science, if any, the polygraph could have. It seems, by polygraphers' own admission, that it is dependent on the ability of examiner to condition the subject correctly and confidently in the knowledge that no extraneous stimuli could also possibly cause the desired response. Unfortunately, the polygraph does not seem to measure the efficacy of any supposed conditioning, but simply the presence of the response. I, as of now, am not intellectually satisfied with the polygraphic procedure and feel that there's more "art" to it than should be present in a process that can be used to have summarily deleterious effects on individuals. Now it is left to me to decide how best to approach it so as to ensure a "passing" result. Time to put my education to good use! I'll keep you guys updated with how it goes.
|