candy wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 1:17pm:

Not so Candy.
The stim test is used for the following reasons.
1. To familiarize the examinee with the sometimes nerve-racking"feel" of having the components attached to the examinee. Very important.
2. To familiarize the examinee with the tone of voice of questioning (monotone) versus the more articulate conversational tone of the pre-test. 
3. The concept known as "Individual Subject Specificity" is held during the pretest----in that say, an elderly person might have diminished galvanic reactions, so mental notes can be taken. I once tested a professional painter whose lungs were so damaged that his breathing looked like that of a dolphin's. Purely unscorable data noise. Additionally, some examinees have higher or lower threshholds for arousal, so the instrument sensetivity settings are done during the stim test---in order to extinguish "data noise" or to turn up those features which may appear on the screen as being too small---typically because a component is on looser than say, the last test ran. Keep in mind that all arousals are relative to each other, regardless of the individual's own homeostasis (balance.) 
4. To demonstrate to the examinee that the instrument can differentiate between stress and memory. I always showed the examinee their stim test---and they were often suprised that despite their nervousness, their charts were quite placid. People, even George himself, seem to be fixated on the notion that mere nervousness is what makes for "heavy ink." 
5. To familiarize the examinee and examiner the ability of the examinee to listen and follow instructions. We cannot give IQ tests per se, but the stim test can often times be a revealer of an examinee's mental awareness.
6. And lastly, the stim test is to help get the examiner mentally and logistically ready for the test. Many times during the stim test, I have noticed that I placed a component on the examinee too loose, crooked, or too tight. The stim test is like stretching for a runner. It is the closest to a warm up, or a dress rehearsal that we have. 


So, you are wrong in every respect about the stim test. Learn something---ignoring a veteran of the field for which you are researching is "gross stupidity." 

Candy:

Get ready for a stream of techno-babble coming your way.  

Quote:


for those of us who have made this conscious decision to avoid drugs in our lives, this sort of condescending assumption is very insulting and maddening. any cop who says this is just projecting the fact that he used to rock the ganja hard, or still is.

it is quite possible and very easy to not take illegal drugs.

Although this is not related to the original topic, the following does address some issues that have been raised within it.

First off, I would highly suggest that those commenting on polygraph and the CIT read some of the more recent published research.

http://users.ugent.be/~bvschuer/research.htm

A startle response, as what is George described, is not necessarily that which is seen, and quite possibly is not.  

The orienting reflex is more plausible, but there still needs to be further research and independent replication (which I have found to be a common cliché of researchers and should be, as no theory is ever absolute).  This, simply put, is that stimuli with relevance (e.g. memory based) create greater orienting responses than stimuli that have no relevance (e.g. novel, non-memory based).  

There would also appear to be initial evidence that habituation and dishabituation might play a role.

Although deceptive and knowledge based polygraph examinations do have differences, there are inherent similarities in both when compared to the aforementioned.

Also, I have yet to see any research that definitively proves that "jeopardy" need be present.

What I have seen in the research is that a polygraph examination, at the least, provides the greater boost in incremental validity than any other method in its given application (e.g. eyewitness accuracy at discerning suspects, raw human ability to ascertain veracity).

Twoblock wrote on Jan 16^th, 2008 at 3:24pm:


I have tried to motivate exactly that. He's just so relieved that the problem is solved. He really likes his job and his boss is genuinely traumatised as well by the bungle. He has made up for it in spades. They all learned something from the nightmare. 
I would like to crush the examiners....., but have to let it go.

candy wrote on Jan 16^th, 2008 at 2:02pm:


Candy, you are simply lying about being told by "vet examiners" regarding the reasons for using the stim test. I and other examiners are  implicitly taught what the stim test is used for (there are listed reasons, and I stated those precise reasons on my post.) Care to reveal the indentities of those examiners which allegedly told you that the stim test is only used to convince the examinee of the accuracy of the test? Can you walk the walk Candy? 

Girlie, I am calling your bluff.

p.s. I will look for my DOD description of the reasons for the stim/acq test. Regardless of what George's bootleg paper says, my manual from 2000 (?) is very much to the contrary.

Has anyone ever failed poly at LVMPD and still got hired??

Yes, I have, but I was hired by a different agency rather than the one whose polygraph I failed.  Still got my TS clearance with other additional special access, without the stupid polygraph.