nopolycop wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 3:50pm:


That is absurd.

Polygraph testing is about stimulus and response, just like so many countless other tests.

Nobody, except perhaps yourself and Mr. Maschke, has suggested the polygraph can read minds.

nope'cop, you are overstepping the bounds of your expertise here, and  engaging in a silly straw-man argument.

It would be much more informative to yourself, and the other readers, if you would constrain your discussion of polygraph to an actual conversation about testing theory or item response theory. Unless for some reason you are not interested in an authentic discussion of the matter.



Peace,



r

raymond.nelson wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 5:16pm:


Correct me if I am wrong, but a poly exam is supposed to be able to tell if a person is lying or telling the truth correct?   

Assuming that is correct then, and the the obvious fact that unless a fact is confirmed by outside evidence, (such as the DNA evidence that Gary Ridgway left with  his victims after his "passed" polygraph) there is no real way to confirm if the polygraph results are in fact correct.  Even a confession by a testee, while likely to be accurate, really cannot be confirmed except by independant means.

Thus, unless a fact is confirmed by independant means, then one trusts the opinion of the polygrapher as to what the person is thinking after the question is asked, as it is what he is thinking that causes the physiological response such as increased breathing rate, increased sweating, higher pulse rate and increased blood pressure.

I am not naive as to what occurs in a polygraph exam, I have taken three of them in my lifetime.

Nopolycop,

You clearly have no idea what is involved in the polygraph process.   I have read some interesting comments on this child molester support web site before, but you are actually the first person that I have seen that purports the polygraph can read minds.  It can not, and you are the only person I have ever heard make such a claim. Wanna take a guess at what I'm thinking right now.....oh...that's right, I'm not hooked up to your polygraph.  No soup for you.....come back....one year! 

skip.webb wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 2:18pm:

When one takes a polygraph test, what is supposedly being tested is the subject's answers with regards to truth or deception.

If the subject answers the questions truthfully it shouldn't matter what he or she thinks about afterward.

To continue with your comparison to the hearing test, if the subject heard the tone, pressed the button, and then thought about something else, how would they be interfering with the test?  They have already done their part.  That is far more similar to what is being discussed with a polygraph exam, since I am not suggesting that when asked a question the subject should refuse to answer and instead think of something else.

For the vision test, if a person correctly read the eye chart and then thought about something else, how would they be interfering with the test?  Your comparison suggests that the person does not read the eye chart (as in not answering the polygraph examiner's questions), which is not at all what was originally suggested.  However, it is, as I am sure you are aware, a nice straw man argument to add to the debate.

skip.webb wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 2:18pm:


Comparing a polygraph test to hearing and eyesight tests is simply a childish rant. The 2 latter tests involve physical measurement of senses that the patient personally experiences, indisputably agrees with and gives feedback to the examiner.

When polygraph examiners ask a 'patient' if he is lying and he says "No" and the examiner accepts that feedback - that is the day that Mr Johnsons pink elephants fly over the APA HQ and dump fuel.

Mr Webb, aren't you supposed to be above such childish remarks ?

Candy, you disappoint. So, you are here because your brother failed a polygraph, for which he told you he told the truth, eh?  Perhaps you would have a teaspoon of credibility if it was YOU who took that test. 

nopolycop wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 7:46pm:



Well, strictly speaking, you are wrong. Unless you insist on having this conversation in vague and inaccurate colloquialisms. It is common when discussing complex or unfamiliar phenomena to borrow concepts and language from more familiar contexts, but it is both reductionistic and inaccurate to stop there. 

Polygraph, is casually referred to as a lie detector, but that term does not adequately define or describe the test. The term psychophysiological detection of deception, though chunky, is better better because it describes what is intended - the detection of deception through the measurement of physiological response to a stimulus. The stimulus is in the form of a question about involvement in a behavior or event.

In the language of testing, polygraph is simply intended to measure whether physiological reaction to the stimulus fits a model at some expected level of statistical significance. 

sergeant1107: Quote:


Not quite. What is being tested is the subject's reactions to the stimulus, and whether those reaction are a good or poor fit for a model.


r