Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) A question I am curious about (Read 28664 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box triple x
Very Senior User
****
Offline


Fear what you cannot see...

Posts: 209
Location: USA
Joined: Oct 16th, 2002
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #15 - Feb 11th, 2008 at 11:24pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nomegusto,

Indeed you did, and I respect your opinion.


triple x
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Sergeant1107
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 730
Location: Connecticut, USA
Joined: May 21st, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #16 - Feb 12th, 2008 at 9:19am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on Feb 11th, 2008 at 5:55pm:
false positives do occur.  They do not occur at the frequency some would have you believe as justification for cheating on the test.  


What is the rate at which false positive occur?
  

Lorsque vous utilisez un argumentum ad hominem, tout le monde sait que vous êtes intellectuellement faillite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #17 - Feb 12th, 2008 at 4:13pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
I do not know, but according to this bulletin board, I would guess about 99%.   

As an examiner, I can say that I have never had a false positive which has been established through the presentation of any conclusive evidence, after the fact (test).

Sackett
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #18 - Feb 12th, 2008 at 6:47pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett wrote:   

"False positives do occur.  They do not occur at the frequency some would have you believe as justification for cheating on the test."

Thanks for admitting that "false positives" occur.

How exactly do you know, or could you know, the frequency in which they occur?  How can you really know you failed a person who was telling the truth?  Are agencies in the habit of doing follow-up investigations to see if the person they failed was actually telling the truth?

We are talking here about cases in which a person fails, even though he/she is telling the truth.  How do you actually know they were telling the truth?  Are you God, or a mind reader?

This reminds me of the polygrapher at the NSA, a Mr. Lingenfelter, who tried to tell me that the test was 98% accurate.  How the hell does he know that?

Is there any pseudo-scientific evidence to back up claims regarding the frequency of false positives?

Incidently, there is LOTS of evidence to to validate the existence of "false NEGATIVES".   Which is to say, spies caught who had passed their polygraph tests.   Smiley

Aldrich Ames, Leavenworth KS
  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #19 - Feb 12th, 2008 at 8:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett wrote:  

"False positives do occur.  They do not occur at the frequency some would have you believe as justification for cheating on the test."

Thanks for admitting that "false positives" occur.  

You are welcome.  Any diagnostic test has both false positives and negatives.

How exactly do you know, or could you know, the frequency in which they occur?  

I don't, I think I indicated my knowledge in a previous posting.

How can you really know you failed a person who was telling the truth?  

It's never been proven to me.

Are agencies in the habit of doing follow-up investigations to see if the person they failed was actually telling the truth?

I can't answer for "agencies", I don't know them all well enough...

We are talking here about cases in which a person fails, even though he/she is telling the truth.  How do you actually know they were telling the truth?  Are you God, or a mind reader?

No.  But I have been called one by some and worse by others.

This reminds me of the polygrapher at the NSA, a Mr. Lingenfelter, who tried to tell me that the test was 98% accurate.  How the hell does he know that?

Why are you asking me, I wasn't there...

Is there any pseudo-scientific evidence to back up claims regarding the frequency of false positives?

Do you have any evidence to prove the claims by the few on this board that they were "victimized" by false positives?

Incidently, there is LOTS of evidence to to validate the existence of "false NEGATIVES".   Which is to say, spies caught who had passed their polygraph tests.   Smiley

Really?!  Were they false negatives? Beaten examiners, or simply  disbelieved test results because of the nature of who they were testing...?  Do you really know or are you regurtitating information you're read here?



Aldrich Ames, Leavenworth KS

Uh - huh?!  You're in prison...  LOL who really won!???


Sackett

P.S.  Interesting you use a Traitor's name as your board moniker...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #20 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 7:46am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett:

"Do you have any evidence to prove the claims by the few on this board that they were "victimized" by false positives?

How do you prove a negative?

In the case of a "false positive", how do I prove I did not not tell the truth.  And in my case, it was a preemployment test.  There was no aspecific event they were testing for (i.e. did you kill your wife, steal the missing $10 grand...etc).  They were testing for the hypothetical.  Something which may or may not have happened.

So, to restate:

Provide evidence that I did not not tell the truth about an event which we don't even know for sure happened.

Example:  My wife asks me if I've ever cheated on her.   

Note:  She has been given NO reason to be suspicious of me at all.  No woman has claimed to have slept with me, and no one has told her anythng along that line.  No lipstick on the collar...etc.  She just decides that I can no longer sleep in her bed unless I prove I've never cheated.

I tell her in no uncertain terms that I have NEVER CHEATED ON HER.

She then claims, your body language tells me you are lying!  Besides, the lights flickered exactly when you claimed you have never cheated on me., and the tarot cards I just dealt tell me you are lying.  So, Tell me the truth.  HAVE YOU CHEATED ON ME!!

I continue to claim my innocence to an event she doesn't even know or have reason to believe has transpired.

This goes on for hours, and for the following three days.

Finally, sick and tired of this, I admit, well, okay.  There was a couple times when I wondered what it would be like to sleep with other women.  I had lust in my heart for the lady accross the street.  Maybe that is a form of cheating.

My wife then latches onto that like a fly on a cow pie.  She gets me to elaborate in detail about my dirty thoughts about the lady acrossed the street.   What sexual position I might have thought of using on her, would I have had oral sex with her...etc.  Like a fool, I play along with her stupid game.

In the end, I fail her stupid test even though I haven't really done anything!
  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #21 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 8:30am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett wrote:

P.S.  Interesting you use a Traitor's name as your board moniker...



Interesting that this traitor was passing polygraph tests while spying for the soviets.

Have any spies at all been ferreted out via the polygraph?
  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6220
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #22 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 9:12am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
To my knowledge, the only spy credibly claimed to have been "caught" by the polygraph is former CIA secretary Sharon Scranage, who reportedly confessed to her polygrapher. While it has been suggested that Harold Nicholson was caught by the polygraph, the CIA director at the time did not endorse this notion, nor evidently did Edward Curran, a polygraph advocate who at the time headed CIA counterintelligence.
  

George W. Maschke
I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time.
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #23 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 4:37pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Aldridge; may I call you by your first name?

How does anyone prove a negative, you ask?  Well, I would present the same irony with the many statements posted here, in that, how many spies have been prevented from being successful by the presence or threat of the polygraph...?  How many spies have been caught?  

I do not know; but then again, neither does anyone on this board.  In any respect, do you actually expect the CIA/NSA, etc to report every employee or applicant who has in fact been caught spying (to any degree) just to disprove your assertion that either polygraph doesn't work or they have or have not caught any spies using it?  

Proving a negative, you ask?  I further find it interesting that there is no feedback on this board by the many readers who have attempted to utilize countermeasures and failed.  How do I prove to you they do not work? How do I prove the negative?  Moreover, how do I prove to you and the other readers here that myself and other examiners catch people using countermeasures on an almost daily basis?  Or how do you prove (not simply assert) the number of people reporting they have been successful in "beating" an examiner?

I do not know, but an empty challenge or assertion presents no real threat.  Conversely, polygraph testing apparently does present a threat to some who have things to hide.  Otherwise, this site would not "need" to exist.  As for countermeasures, theory and application are separated by a wide spanse...

From what I have seen, this is an open board with the freedom to post pretty much whatever you want regarding polygraph issues.  I have my opinions, you have yours.  OK, that's what makes the world go 'round.  Please keep posting, but do not expect proof of anything, from anyone, positve or negative, while pounding anonymous letters of victimization around the internet.  

Nice chatting with you,


Sackett
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #24 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 8:48pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
From what I have seen, this is an open board with the freedom to post pretty much whatever you want regarding polygraph issues.  I have my opinions, you have yours.  OK, that's what makes the world go 'round.

Good point.  Everyone has his/her opinion.  You make your living from the test, so one would expect you to be biased and pro-polygraph.  I took the test, told the truth yet failed.  So I have an anti-polygraph bias.

So let's look at what the scientific community, namely the NAS, has to say about the test, in particular, on the topic of "false positives":

[i]False Positives with “Suspicious” Thresholds Polygraph screening protocols that can identify a large fraction of serious security violators can be expected to incorrectly implicate at least hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of innocent employees for each spy or other serious security violator correctly identified. ......

And they conclude that reliance on the polygraph test can:

lead to unnecessary loss of competent or highly skilled individuals because of suspicions cast on them as a result of false positive polygraph exams

Like me, George, and many, many, many others who don't even know about this board.

The also conclude that funds currently being spend on pre-employment screening tests would be:

better expended on developing or implementing alternative security procedures.

How would that effect your career Mr. Sackett?
  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #25 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 9:30pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Al,

would that be the same National Academy of Science (NAS) who rather than reviewing ALL material regarding polygraph reliability and validity, simply selected "certain" research to conduct a meta-analysis which in and of itself seemed to be selected to prove their hypothesis?  Was this the same NAS study by "scientists" who themselves were being subjected to the very pre-employment and periodic security screening tests they were condemning?  The very same NAS members (not all of course) who when the DOE abated screening tests as a result of that report resulted in multiple security violations through laziness, misconduct and/or negligence to such a degree the program had to be reinstituted?  

A slight conflict of interest, I believe.  I (personally) see their report as I would fat people writing a report condemning McDonald's for selling fat filled products while they hold their convention at the local Burger King and receiving BK stock options in exchange... These minor details conveniently ommitted when citing their findings.

BTW, I am all for finding a better "mousetrap."  Some thought CVSA was it, it is not...  Got any suggestions? Then invent it!  But for now, polygraph is the best we have.

Sackett

P.S.  BTW, how's the food at Leavenworth?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box triple x
Very Senior User
****
Offline


Fear what you cannot see...

Posts: 209
Location: USA
Joined: Oct 16th, 2002
Gender: Male
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #26 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 10:04pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
HEY...!!!

I eat at Burger King... (no stock options) are you calling me fat..??

triple x
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Question Everything
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 6
Joined: Feb 13th, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #27 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 10:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on Feb 13th, 2008 at 9:30pm:
Al,

I (personally) see their report as I would fat people writing a report condemning McDonald's for selling fat filled products while they hold their convention at the local Burger King and receiving BK stock options in exchange



How does this relate?  The logic is flawed.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #28 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 10:55pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
triple x,

I see you have a sense of humor.  Outstanding! Grin

"Q.E.",   

apparently my analogy was beyond you.  I apologize... Wink


Sackett
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Question Everything
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 6
Joined: Feb 13th, 2008
Re: A question I am curious about
Reply #29 - Feb 13th, 2008 at 11:53pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett,

I understand your analogy, however, it just doesn't work.  You are attempting to discredit or disprove a report by carefully crafting Yes/No questions.  You are then comparing those "assumed" Yes/No questions to a "hypothetical" situation that you concocted.  You didn't disprove anything though.

If you feel that NAS is less than credible, please give facts or reasons.  You don't have to do the research yourself, rather cite a book or work that refutes the NAS's report.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
A question I am curious about

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
                       
Change Text Color
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