It may only be part of the process, but if you get anything short of a "pass", you not likely to get hired. And if you get a "fail", which you can get without being deceptive, you sure as hell ain't getting hired.
Quote:unlike a specific issue test, and the research I have read on pre-employment screening is it is not as “good” as a specific issue examination.
Not as good? No it isn't. The specific issue test will provide results "well above chance, though
well below perfection", as for the preemployment test:
"
For each spy or terrorist that might be correctly identified as deceptive would be accompanied by at least hundreds of nondeceptive examinees mislabeled as deceptive"NAS Report
Doesn't sound like a very "valuable" test. I suppose I could eliminate all the weeds in my garden by dousing it with kerosene, but many of the flowers would die also! But hey, such a process would have SOME value.
Quote:When I have that occasional DI w/o a confession/admission, I will remind the adjudicator not to use the test results as the sole reason for denial of employment.
So then the best advice is DON'T make a confession or admission, no matter how small you think it is. It will be used against you, and you at least have some chance of being hired with a DI w/o c/o as it's hardly ever used as the sole criterion for hiring!
And "deception indicated" is a misnomer, as you really don't know if they are being deceptive, you may suspect it, but you really don't know.
Quote:But, as I have posted earlier, those are rare occurrences, however, they do occur.
You, a polygrapher who makes his living off the test, say false positives are a rare occasion.
Yet again, aprestigious body of scientific researchers reviewed findings on the subject and concluded there are hundreds of false positives for every spy or would be spy possibly caught.
Add to that my personal experience with the test, and my wife, and many other people I've talked to over the years.....think I disagree with your "rare occasion" estimate.
Quote:How many times must polygraph examiners keep telling the opponents of polygraph that it is not perfect. It never has been and never will be.
Your statement above is an understatement.
The NAS concluded the specific issue test is "...well below perfection"
IOW, it's not anywhere near perfection.
So significantly better than a coin flip, but far from perfect (in at it's BEST), yet likely to smear the reputation of hundreds of people for each would be spy or security violator it catches.
Quote:Rule #1: Life isn’t fair. Get used to it.
My favorite: "Living well is the best revenge."
But that is neither here nor there.
The purpose of this board, contrary to what polygraphers would have you believe, is to educate people WHO HAVE YET TO TAKE THE TEST. So they don't get scammed. That is a positive thing.
If a soon to be tested applicant reads GM's book, it will level the playing field a bit. Like educating oneself prior to visiting a used car lot or dealership.