Lethe wrote on Oct 2 nd, 2007 at 9:24pm: pailryder wrote on Oct 1 st, 2007 at 1:13pm: I may be trying your patience, but consider one more aspect of CQ development. You said, if I understood, that your concern on a poly would be for producing the correct response to the relevant. You posit that since you know tlbtldt that the CQ would have no pull on your emotions? But is that really the case? If, we could return to the drug dealing cousins example, what if you took that test? Would you not feel at least two seperate threats? First, the threat that you are a suspect in a murder and second, a threat to your business enterprise, upon which your income depends and which you desire to continue. Really, lethe, (you know if you put the l at the end you would have ethel,) how likely are you to admit to dealing drugs in a polygraph requested by the police. Would you by your own admission invite that level of police scrutny? And regardless of truth of your answer, might not police knowledge of that illegal activity on your part provide a greater threat to you than the murder, which after all you are answering truthfully about?
Excellent. Let us examine how the control question will appear to both an ignorant and to an informed subject. We'll continue to use the murder/drug dealing situation so that we have something concrete to talk about. Now, as you know, it is not just the question itself, in a vacuum, which is important vis-a-vis producing the correct response. The tone and circumstances in which it is asked, the polygrapher's body language, the consequences that the polygrapher attaches to both an affirmative and negative response, the rationale given to the question, both explicit and implied, and the reasonable inferences that the examinee can draw from these are all important factors. So, how will the control question, "did you ever deal drugs with your cousin?" appear to the ignorant examiner? I think basically like this: "Well, Sue, you are suspected of killing your cousin, Regina, and this exam will help tell whether or not you did and will be used by police and prosecutors as they decide how to handle the investigation and case. I will, of course, ask you if you killed Regina, but I'll also ask some less direct questions. Because, you see, we know that people who are involved in other crimes, like drug dealing, are much more likely to commit murder, especially against their partners. So, if you and Regina sold drugs together, Sue, we'll know that there is a very good chance that you killed her. If you did kill her, the best possible outcome for you, if you take a good plea deal and then get out on parole at the earliest date, will be about 20 years in prison. So, Sue, did you and Regina sell drugs together?" Again, the polygrapher wouldn't be asking precisely that question, but that is what the implications of the question would be. A yes answer will be tantamount to providing significant evidence against herself to a crime that would earn her decades in jail. That's a pretty big threat to a person. So, how would the question appear to a knowledgeable examinee? I think something like this: "Well, Sue, you say that you didn't kill Regina. I am here to determine if that claim is a lie or not. To tell if you are trying to deceive me with that claim or if you feel uncomfortable about it, I need you to attempt to deceive me on another question. Of course, we have, through our investigation, very good evidence that you and Regina sold drugs together. I need you to tell me that you two didn't sell drugs together, okay? Now, when you deny that you were drug dealers, I need you to feel uncomfortable about that answer. So, just think of how much more difficult it would be to deal drugs if the police were 100% certain that you used to deal drugs with her instead of only 80% certain of that. Your ability to sell drugs in the community has already been degraded as a result of this investigation, so just imagine that trend continuing. If you do that, your body will produce the natural response that we need. Sounds silly? Well, nevermind that and don't worry about your body producing the correct response on the relevant questions. Sure, if it doesn't, you'll produce a deceptive result which would carry consequences even greater than admitting that you dealt drugs together but trust me, I'm a professional." If these characterizations are broadly accurate, as I think they are, then it seems that the knowledgeable examinee will be much less threatened by the control question and a little bit more threatened by the relevant question when compared with the ignorant examinee. And, pretty much by definition, when you lower someone's response to the CTs and/or raise their response to the RQs, you make it more likely that they will produce a deceptive result. Thus, a knowledgeable examinee who is truthful is less likely to produce an accurate result than an ignorant and truthful examinee. Q.E.D. There are two main ways to attack this particular argument that immediately occur to me: (1) You can demonstrate that the ignorant and/or knowledgeable subjects will not understand the control question in question in the ways indicated; OR
(2) You can argue that the size of the threat to him- or herself that the subject perceives doesn't make any difference, the smallest threat is as useful as the largest threat; I look forward to your corrections and response. To my detractors, who flatter me by their number and attentions, your ad hominem attacks and insults will all be read but only the most clever will be responded to. Originality and wittiness will earn you bonus points and increase the likelihood of a response. If you wish to join the conversation, note that questioning a person's motivation for making a particular argument does not constitute a valid critique of that argument. Who is us----you? Who are you----not your identity---but your point of vantage? Are you a criminologist, a scientist, a caddy....what? Why do you want to examine polygraph....to what ends? It would be helpful in understanding the context of your question if you shed even a pinpoint light at just what you're attempting---other than your knowledge of test theory. You don't actually believe that you are having new and original thoughts and questions here, do you? We don't need your help in understanding CQ testing.
|
Pages: 
Calling out LieBabyCryBaby (Read 43427 times)
