Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS (Read 21756 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nonombre
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 334
Joined: Jun 18th, 2005
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #15 - Jun 27th, 2007 at 12:30am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe wrote on Jun 26th, 2007 at 4:35pm:
You and all your vile kind.  So, nonombre: bring it on.


You didn't talk nice to me and you are obviously NOT a very nice person.  Now if you want to talk to ME you gotta be nice.  Are you gonna apoligize?

Cry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #16 - Jun 27th, 2007 at 4:35am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
A predictable response.  Make it about me, not the question which you cannot answer.  Not just will not answer but cannot answer--under any circumstance.  I don't know whether or not you perceive fully the situation that you are in, nonombre.  The question (What is the purpose of the deception used by polygraphers if not to increase accuracy?) is a sticky tar baby and in dealing with it you have precious few options.  If you just leave now--and you should have never become mixed up in this to begin with--whether announced or unannounced, that'll be a tacit acknowledgment that you can't answer the question and we'll draw our conclusions accordingly.  That is, I think, the best outcome that you can hope for in this situation and the sooner you take it, the better it will be for you.  On the other hand, if you make further attempts at sophistry, obfuscation, and delay you will simply become more and more ensnared, more and more stuck.  There will be--and there is--only one thing that can rescue you from that mess.  The truth.  The truth will set you free, nonombre. 

But let us set aside the wisdom of that Jewish rabbi and use a more concrete argument.  You are an investigator so suppose you were a policeman investigating a murder.  And when you question the prime suspect and ask where he was at the time of the murder he provides no alibi, instead simply asserting again and again that he wasn't at the murder scene and could, when needed, supply an air tight alibi.  Would that or would that not make you suspect that he couldn't provide an alibi and was stalling for time, hoping that he would eventually be able to cobble some story that might pass together?  Unless you are a blithering idiot, his refusal to clear himself, as he claims he can do, would raise bright red flags in your mind.

The situation here is the same.  You claim to have an alibi--an explanation for the deception that doesn't involve it increasing accuracy.  Why do you not provide it?  We stand in readiness to receive it--try us!  What?  I'm not nice?  I tell you the truth, I'd be a hell of a lot nicer if your livelihood didn't screw over people like me.  You claim it doesn't, so just answer my question, I'll admit you're right, and I'll be much nicer to all of you and do just penance to atone for the error of my ways.

If my language seems bombastic, it is by design.  I'm handing you your excuse on a silver platter.  Eventually you will claim that I am simply unreasonable, won't accept any answer whatsoever (never mind that you won't have presented a single true answer), and that nothing further can be gained by continuing the discussion.  In the end, you will do that.  But of course, your knowledge of my prediction introduces a new variable, one that likely invalidates my prediction of your behavior and makes new calculations much more difficult.  So, perhaps you'll just decide to ignore me after all.

And the second reason for my language is that I am having an immense amount of fun.  I enjoy the classics, don't you?  Or have you never read Moby-Dick

    All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. He piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart's shell upon it.

The white whale took Ahab's leg; your kind has taken something equally valuable from me.  Maybe not you personally, but you'll do for a start.  You see, I hate you very, very deeply.  Yes, hate--it is not too strong a term for that which I feel towards you and your kind.  You have chosen to be that which you are, to remain such, and to pretend that you are otherwise.  Just admit it.  Just say

    "Yeah, Lethe, you did get screwed unfairly.  People who know how the polygraph works are indeed at a serious disadvantage when taking it and when you came to us with those concerns before hand we were forced to dismiss them and pretend that they were baseless.  I'm sorry, but the polygraph demands that certain people be sacrificed so that other advantages can be obtained, there is no way out of it.  I think, on balance, the cost-benefits analysis comes out in favor of using the polygraph and I hope that eventually some lie-detector can be found that won't screw over smart people like yourself.

If you could do that, you would atone for all the sins of your profession, from Adam on down.  Maybe you really do feel bad for those who must be sacrificed; maybe a part of you even wants to apologize. But here's the real crime of the polygraph: you can't.  You are not your own master, you are a slave to the polygraph.    Nonombre, those who would detect liars should look to it they themselves do not become liars. You have gazed long into the abyss, and the abyss has gazed also into you.

We all have limitations placed upon us; here, you are a bigger slave than I, thus my allusion to our National Anthem's third verse.  And your chains severely constrict your freedom of action.  I've dealt with many like you before, nonombre, and I have a pretty good idea how you'll probably respond to this.  I'll not say what my prediction is, since that'd invalidate it, but I'll tell you afterwards if I was right.  Of course, you'll have to take my word for it. 

Now, I will try to be nice.  Let me start by apologizing for my hatred.  It goes against my most important moral principles to hate you; I should love even my enemies and do good to those who hurt me, groups into which you most certainly fall.  But I am weak and fall far short of that ideal and having that pointed out by the situation which you put me in, oddly, makes me hate you even more.  And you know, I trust, how Moby-Dick ends.  I am sorry that I have discomforted you with my strong language.  And that I am not the person that I wish I were.  And I will say no more on that at this place.

Nonombre, I would indeed be more appreciative if, in your expertise, you could enlighten us on a very, very important matter.  If the deception used in PLCQ exams is not used to increase the accuracy of the exam, what then is its purpose?  Can you answer that for us?  Please.  I would be most appreciative of either an answer, or a specific statement that the polygraph's workings do not permit you to give one.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #17 - Jun 27th, 2007 at 5:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

I have re-read Lethe’s original question and was unable to find where he specifically stated that he was referring to a “CQT”.  He in fact generalized the question by indicating he was speaking of “knowledge of the polygraph”, which to me indicates the instrument, and “conducting exams” (nonspecific).  Regardless, I have stated, as I have here before, that I am of the opinion that one’s knowledge of the examination process does not effect the examination and that deception is not required to conduct it.  Both of which I thought answered the question posed by Lethe by negating that which he thought was necessary.  The Concealed Information Test was offered by me as an example because it is an “exam” that is “conducted” utilizing the “polygraph” (as well as with other instrumentation).

If still need be answered, the only purpose I can think of for one’s continued use of deception, if used, would be to conform with the examination method as it was originally validated.  However, I am not convinced that this change in variable would cause a "significant deviation" as to invalidate the method.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nonombre
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 334
Joined: Jun 18th, 2005
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #18 - Jun 27th, 2007 at 10:31pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe wrote on Jun 27th, 2007 at 4:35am:
Nonombre, I would indeed be more appreciative if, in your expertise, you could enlighten us on a very, very important matter.  If the deception used in PLCQ exams is not used to increase the accuracy of the exam, what then is its purpose?  Can you answer that for us?  Please.  I would be most appreciative of either an answer, or a specific statement that the polygraph's workings do not permit you to give one.


Although I still detect a hint of sarcasm, I do very much appreciate your move to a more civil tone.  This enables us all to be more objective and thoughtful.  Now the answer I am going to provide to you may still be not exactly as you seek, but it is my immediate thought out answer on this very warm summer evening.  My response is designed to address not just the question posed above, but will address the original accusation (by many on this site) that because deception is sometimes part of some polygraph procedures, polygraph examiners are therefore all "frauds" and "liars.":

There are certain polygraph methodologies in which the true nature of the process and analysis is not to be shared with the examinee (the PLC formats for instance).  

First of all, as you may know, the entire structure of this much maligned (by APG.org)  PLC process (to include how the nature of the examination is presented to the examinee) is actually geared toward helping the innocent/truthful examinee successfully pass the test (a point quickly lost during all the "fraud" and "liar" accusations).

Next, I believe it important to point out that there are several procedures currently administered by psychologists and psychiatrists in which the true nature of the data pursued and the analysis of the data received is deliberately hidden from the examinee (take MMPI for instance).  In other psychological endeavors, the examinees are blatantly lied to and misled (certain psychological research comes to mind).  Does that mean the psychologists, psychiatrists, and practitioners in these cases are all "frauds" and "liars?"  If not, then why not?  After all, they are LIEING to the examinees are they not?

So, does a PLC examinee armed with information regarding the "true" nature of how a PLC examination is administered/analyzed, somehow cause the results of his examination to be less accurate?  I do believe that polygraph examiners are concerned that PLC procedural information provided by this and other "anti" polygraph sites as a  "public service" has in fact "served" to do nothing more than make it more difficult for innocent examinees to get through the test (I argue strongly this information has HURT a lot more folks than he has helped).

I also know that polygraph examiners who use the PLC test have lately taken great pains to design comparison questions that don't SOUND like comparison questions.  In fact, the ones I have been exposed to of late sound quite "relevant" indeed (and no, I am not going to give you any examples).  So therefore, no, I don't think that as a whole the PLC process has become any less accurate.  As I see it, in the end it has plainly become the responsibility of the polygraph community to help the people you thought you all were "helping," but actually hurt.  I know you will never accept that as fact, but that is how I view this question.  

Regards,

Nonombre Huh
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #19 - Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:56pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
That's not the response I was expecting, but it suits my purposes better than what I'd anticipated. 

J.B.'s newest comment is, like its predecessors, worthless.  When the question is basically "Why do some polygraph techniques use deception?" you cannot answer it by shrugging and saying "Well, some don't."  No further comment is necessary on his last post.

Now, nonombre, you ask if the fact that someone lied makes him a liar?  Well, yes.  By definition.  Case closed?  Nope, the discussion is just beginning at this point.  Most polygraphers seem under the impression that all people opposed to the polygraph do so on the grounds that it involves lies and, therefore, is ipso facto bad.  Maybe a few do, but most don't.  Be careful that you do not mischaracterize the arguments of your opponents; that's intellectually dishonest.

You have admitted that knowledge of how the polygraph works makes the results less accurate (at least for honest people and, I think it's safe to say it can't make it any more accurate for the dishonest subjects). 
  • "the entire structure of this much maligned (by APG.org)  PLC process (to include how the nature of the examination is presented to the examinee) is actually geared toward helping the innocent/truthful examinee successfully pass the test"
  • "polygraph examiners are concerned that PLC procedural information ... [does] nothing more than make it more difficult for innocent examinees to get through the test"
  • "I argue strongly this information [on how the PLCQ test works] has HURT a lot more folks than he has helped."

Your pre-emptive refusal to discuss the great new relevant-sounding control questions demonstrates what all of the above quotes demonstrate: knowledge of how the PLCQ exam works makes it less accurate, hurting honest examinees. 

And I'm glad that you alluded to "certain psychological research" because it provides us another avenue to demonstrate that knowledge of the exam makes the results inaccurate.  In all of the most interesting psychology experiments, the subject was totally unaware of what was actually being tested.  Consider the well-known Milgram experiment.  Had the subject known what was going on the results would have been worthless.  Or the Stanford prison experiment.  Had the participants been told "We want to see how sadistic you become," the results would have been worthless.  The same principle applies with the polygraph.  You can't lie if you're told to lie.  That doesn't involve the intent to deceive and the fear of discovery.

You polygraphers know all of this, of course.  But, the benefits of a lie detector being good, all else being equal, you then do whatever is necessary to preserve that detection device.  I've never seen any evidence that any of you stop to reconsider if the polygraph is still good once all the lies, propaganda, and reprogramming of people is added into the equation.  My position is that it's not.  The Romans made a desert and called it peace; you take away critical thinking and call it truth.

The fact of the matter, as you now admit, is that the polygraph is biased against people who know how it works.  And people who are curious, who take the initiative, and who think for themselves are all more likely to find out how it works than people who are not those things.  And aren't those precisely the people that we should, if they are honest, most want to pass the exam?  How perverse that they are those who are least likely to do so!  We need more people who think for themselves, not less.  Nazi Germany had plenty of people who were capable of "just following orders." 

This is a problem that polygraphers have not, to my knowledge, dealt with at all.  There is a large-scale, systematic bias in the polygraph against the sorts of people that are best qualified to be entrusted with power over others.  In the long-term, that's going to cause problems for us all.  No dictator could possibly hope for a better tool.

Now, tell me, had you ever considered that before, nonombre?  Be honest now.  And, if you have, I'd give a penny for your thoughts.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nonombre
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 334
Joined: Jun 18th, 2005
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #20 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 2:26am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe wrote on Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:56pm:
The fact of the matter, as you now admit, is that the polygraph is biased against people who know how it works.  And people who are curious, who take the initiative, and who think for themselves are all more likely to find out how it works than people who are not those things.  And aren't those precisely the people that we should, if they are honest, most want to pass the exam?  How perverse that they are those who are least likely to do so!  We need more people who think for themselves, not less.  Nazi Germany had plenty of people who were capable of "just following orders."


Don't you believe it to be a bit of a stretch to compare taking or giving a polygraph examination to Nazi Germany?

A bit absurd, nonetheless, I do find myself interested in the details of your arguments...Hmmm.  And how do you address the statements by the NAS that specific issue polygraph (of the PLC variety) in fact detected deception at levels FAR above chance (albiet not perfect).  

Based on your position, we should throw the tool out anyway....Why?  Because the polygraph examiner chose not to give an detailed blow by blow description to the examinee of exactly what was going on during the testing process???  Or that a group of disgruntled former examinees decided to get on the internet and "let the poverbial cat out of the bag?"

So the polygraph community, learned, adjusted, and reloaded....  Accuracy and utility still in place (if ever actually in question), now more robust then ever...

You know the truth is that this website is the best thing that ever happened to polygraph.  You all have made us better, stronger.  I am not trying to taunt you here.  You all truly made us take a look at what we were doing, much like how even a borderline successful hack by a computer hacker forces a company take a closer look at it's own security and close the open ports...

Forensic polygraph version 2.0, now available at a police department or governmental agency near you... Smiley

Regards...

Nonombre
     
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #21 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 3:22am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe,

In your last post you indicated that I did not answer your question of, Quote:
Why do some polygraph techniques use deception?


I purport that the answer to this question was is in my last post with this, Quote:
...use of deception, if used, would be to conform with the examination method as it was originally validated.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #22 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 3:35am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Yes, it would be more than a bit much to draw close parallels between polygraphers and Nazis, and I don't think that I do that in the above post.  I try to follow this rule of thumb: If someone isn’t advocating the murder of millions of people in gas chambers and a global Reich for the White Man I don't assume he’s a Nazi because it’s pretty damn evil to call him one.

However, totalitarians do like to eliminate critical thought and get people to take things purely on their authority and "just follow orders" (the defense given by many concentration camp guards when tried at Nuremburg).  Polygraphers don't set out to do that, but that is an incidental side effect of what they do.  People who go out and get information, instead of just taking what is grudgingly given to them, and who then apply their own rationality to said data, instead of simply accepting the proffered explanations, are--as you admit--at a disadvantage on the polygraph.  Thus, we can expect to have fewer of those sorts of people at a polygraphing agency than we expect to find there if it were a nonpolygraphing agency.  I don't see how that conclusion can be escaped.  Do you find it valid?  If so, I'm guessing that you find it deplorable but you think the benefits still outweigh even that cost (which I think is pretty high).

Anyway, I don't have a problem with the NAS review, the executive summary of which says the polygraph detects deception "well above chance, though well below perfection."  I think that George and I differ a lot in that I believe that under ideal conditions it might be possible that the polygraph could obtain the 90% accuracy levels that polygraphers like to cite.  The ideal circumstance requires many things under the tester's control: environment of exam, well-trained polygrapher, good equipment, adequate background info, etc.  But it also includes one major element that cannot be easily controlled by the tester: the examinee's knowledge of the exam.  You will be right far less than 90 times if you put 100 people who know how the polygraph works and doubt its accuracy.  My guess would be that the accuracy in that circumstance--with examinees furthermore hostile to the examiners who have been lying to them and insulting their intelligence--will be little better than chance. 

The problem is not that examinees are not told how the test works.  The problem is that those examinees who find out how it works are at a huge disadvantage--and they're precisely the sorts of people that we most want in the sorts of jobs that we feel we have to polygraph for.

One solution is just to keep everyone ignorant.  If you can do that with total success, you can return to the 90% success rate.  But, if the method for keeping people ignorant has other negative drawbacks you need to run through the cost-benefits analysis again.  And how are you going to get people to think critically about everything except this one little thing that they can never question or look into?  I don't think it's possible; either everything is fair game for skeptical inquiry or you must muzzle critical thinking.  Otherwise, eventually it'll start asking "Why is it that this one thing we can never think about?  What is so special about it that we must never question it, even though we are told to think rationally about everything else?"  And at that point you must either banish the voice of reason or embrace it.  Woe to those who send it away.

Again, I can provisionally accept a 90% accuracy rate for the polygraph under ideal conditions, if inconclusive results are left out. But when an inconclusive conclusion is results in the same thing for the examinee as a failure it's dishonest to pretend the polygraph didn't fail when an honest person comes up inconclusive.  To honestly debate the widespread use of the polygraph, it seems to me, we need to know the following three things:
  • the accuracy rate with ignorant subjects;
  • the accuracy rate with knowledgeable subjects; and
  • what percentage of examinees are knowledgeable

If we don't have those three bits of information, I don't see how we can estimate what the real world accuracy rate is.  And that's what is important, not what rate some guy got in a laboratory.  It's not people who may or may not have stolen $5 out of a desk who are a danger to anyone.

It's like when you go to a car dealership and look at the stickers.  They don't just say "30 mpg."  They will indicate the car gets 30 mpg on the highway and 22 mpg in city driving.  Then you, the consumer, knowing that you do 80% of your driving in-town, can calculate what your real mileage will be (23.6 mpg, if my hasty math is correct).  Again, it is dishonest to cite the accuracy under ideal conditions if only 30% of the real world tests can be done under those conditions.

Anyway, this website is the best thing that ever happened to polygraph?  I don't think anyone should be surprised that the free exchange and competition of ideas leads to better ideas.  Personally, I'd like to see it practiced on an even wider scale.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #23 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 3:44am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B. I hardly know what to say.  I mean... this is the conversation we're having:

    Lethe: Why do some polygraphers deceive their subjects?
    J.B.: Some don't.
    Lethe: Alright.  But what about the ones that do?
    J.B.: They've always done it that way.
    Lethe: Uh... okay.  But why have they always done it that way?

There are two possibilities, J.B.  Either you think that you're providing valid answers or you don't.  If you do think that, you're a fool.  If you know that these answers are invalid and simply efforts in obfuscation, you're a deceiver.  And, I think, that furthermore makes you a fool anyway for thinking that I'll accept that line.  Maybe others do, but you need to know your audience. And I don't eat bullshit for breakfast.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #24 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 4:33am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Drew,

I would think that we can both agree that a lie is not necessarily what is measured or deception necessary in a procedure of testing for deception.  In fact, concealing information is in itself a form of deception.  Although I do believe that conditioning is a part of the procedure (e.g. orienting response is a form of conditioning), it needn’t be “contorted”.

I am not sure what it is that you were trying to accomplish with your last thought of the examiner and the critic but I personally have had many personal discussions with David Lykken, some with Bill Iacono, and some with John Furedy (some of the harshest opponents of CQT polygraph).  In fact, I corresponded with David up until a day or two before he passed away.  I neither agree nor subscribe to the ideology that one should isolate themselves from someone just because they do not agree with you or have different beliefs than you.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box J.B. McCloughan
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 115
Location: USA
Joined: Dec 7th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #25 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 4:56am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe,

I find no rationalization to continue to engage in discourse with you, as you appear to be pressed to make this into a flippant debate.  If you are indeed an educated audience rather than that which you latter purposed, the answer to your question lies within my answer and the research/reading you have yet to do.
  

Quam verum decipio nos
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #26 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 11:44am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
J.B. I stand by my analysis of your posts, which you've done nothing to refute.  When put into plain language, they really are that vacuous.  But, I know, the answer to all my questions is always in the next article or book.  Well, here's an article for you to read: Politics and the English Language, by George Orwell.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #27 - Jun 28th, 2007 at 4:59pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe,

First off let me say welcome and its good to have another highly trained mind on the board.  I have enjoyed the discourse !!

What your going to find from these two resident polygraphers (JB and Nonombre inparticular), is that they will on most occasions to the best of there ability answer your questions. I will caveat that with,  the information will not cross into the antipolygraph realm, as both are true believers in their chosen profession.  But from my experience over the last few years and even before I came to find this board. Which is a great amount of fun especially for debating, which I do cherish as a fun passtime. Is that  detailed/indepth polygraph knowlege does greatly effect the polygraphs outcome. I have tutored many in the last few years on the polygraph and its process. I direct them to this website and have them read everything they can get on the polygraph. Then we go to work on how to dissect the polygraphers process, and how to mentally counter each point in the process. Not one has had DI (Deception Indicated) or SR (Significant Response) since I began. All have either passed, or had Inconclusive. The reason for this, is that once the fear and anxiety levels are reduced significantly, the end result has to be the two latter outcomes. What I have done is simplify the requirements for a successful polygraph exam, (This is what the polygrapher must have in place to be successful), you alluded to them in your posts.

These 3 requirements are strictly my perspective to the problem:

1. The subject must have and maintain a level of fear and anxiety: Accomplished with the early notification of the exam and enhanced with the pretest song and dance, finished off with the acquaintance test (stim test).

2. Subject must believe that the polygraph really can detect deception: Part 1 and polygraphers ability to get you to buy into the show. Also other ploys during the in-test phase about breathing and stopping the polygraph to get things off your chest. Its all a show.

3. Subject believes that there are consequences for failure: Loss of job, or not getting a job. This enhances the fear and anxiety level. But once they fully understand, they relax and this fear goes away too. The realization that not getting this job because of being subjected to this process may not be really worth it. those that think independently and have cognitive abilities actually see it for what it is. And some have walked away. Some of my folks basically just stopped the job process because they disliked being deceived by a potential employer.

Also with the addition in some cases of SA (Statement Analysis) & KA (Kinesic Analysis) also thrown into the mix, which is done without the subjects knowlege, it adds to the point that they (polygraphers)  believe they are unbeatable. The bottom line is that the great minds who take nothing at face value will always find away to get around totalitarian systems. But if the attempt is tried by someone not cognitively equipped, the polygrapher will always win. Bottom line is they like stupid, naive, and unread.

Any one of these requirements not met by the polygrapher, effects its outcome. Mostly to the inconclusive side of the decision. And if countermeasures are used, it heavily sways the decision to the subject.  

Our resident polygraphers will not respond to this as it would violate their rules and they must always defend their machine and process.
And them giving in would make this no fun at all !!

Again Welcome and Regards ....
« Last Edit: Jun 28th, 2007 at 7:52pm by EosJupiter »  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box 1904
Ex Member


Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #28 - Jun 29th, 2007 at 3:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
[quote author=nonombre link=1181580290/15#18 date=1182983500  I do believe that polygraph examiners are concerned that PLC procedural information provided by this and other "anti" polygraph sites as a  "public service" has in fact "served" to do nothing more than make it more difficult for innocent examinees to get through the test (I argue strongly this information has HURT a lot more folks than he has helped).

Regards,

Nonombre Huh [/quote]

Whew. That is the biggest crock of horse manure I have read in a long time.
If you sincerely believe that this site and TLBLD has actually made it more difficult
for innocent subjects to pass a p/g examination, then you are seriously deluded and
are definitely No Friend of anyone who visits here for advice.

Wow. The scary thing is that you may even believe this rubbish that you posted.

No. I dont think you believe your own ramblings. You're just stuck in a rut with no
alternative but to wallow in it long-term.

How sad. Just at a point where I thought you had some real life in you.
0/10 for the BS
But 10/10 for effort.

I will conjure up your image in my mind and send you peace and blessings.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS
Reply #29 - Jul 20th, 2007 at 12:34am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Palerider, polygraphers ... etc.

It does make it more difficult for you as the truth we post, your training academies provide. In reference:

American International Institute for Polygraph - Morrow, GA.  
Link: http://www.polygraphschool.com/catalog.htm

about 3/4's of the way down the page.

Quote:
Pre and Post Test Interviews: Student understanding of and ability to conduct proper pretest interviews to psychologically prepare the examinee for testing; and, student understanding of and ability to conduct appropriate post test interviews to resolve polygraph issues.


So what part of being able to reduce the fear and anxiety which learning and becoming versed in the polygraph procedure isn't understood ? If you can't get the adrenal levels high enough it doesn't work. It will be inconclusive everytime. Knowlege is power and the more the examinee has, the less pressure you can apply. And I don't give a damn about how much experience you may have with Reids or Honts techniques. So my 3 rules above apply and have proven validation thanks to this polygraph school. Its way too easy when your adversaries provide you with the ammunition.  And I know I got you cold !!!

Regards ....
  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
QUESTIONS FOR POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X