Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector (Read 40956 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #15 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 11:32am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
pailryder wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 11:10am:
Sergeant 1107

I did not say that accuracy is unimportant or that our troops should be uninformed about expected accuracy rates, certainly undue reliance could be dangerous.  My point is only that as a pragmatic matter, increasing assessment accuracy from 50% to 60% may save some young lives.


Do you have any data to indicate that current assessments are accurate at a rate of only 50%?  If not, then you cannot argue that introducing the PCASS will increase accuracy from 50 to 60%.  Obviously.

I thought that lots of polygraphers came from the ranks of interrogators?  If so, they should know that there are ways to determine at levels better than chance whether a person is lying or not, even in the sorts of situations where the PCASS is to be used.

You're making obviously bad arguments.  Have you even thought about what you're saying?
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box pailryder
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 439
Joined: Jun 5th, 2006
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #16 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:18pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Lethe,

Yes, all of the government polygraph examiners are skilled investigators, but not all of the troops required to assess credibility are poly guys.  Also, curtural and language barriers make traditional assement techniques much harder to employ.  If PCASS increases their odds at all, it could save young lives.  Pragmatic usefulness can exceed scientific accuracy.

Jacob, I have significant disagreements with Skip Webb over polygraph policies and proceedures, but he is not an idiot, and he is absolutely not evil.  Didn't the first century rabbi you often quote warn us about that sort of judgement?    Why not turn the other cheek?
  

No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers.   David Thoreson Lykken
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #17 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 7:13pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
pailryder wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:18pm:
Lethe,

Yes, all of the government polygraph examiners are skilled investigators, but not all of the troops required to assess credibility are poly guys.  Also, curtural and language barriers make traditional assement techniques much harder to employ.  If PCASS increases their odds at all, it could save young lives.  Pragmatic usefulness can exceed scientific accuracy.

Jacob, I have significant disagreements with Skip Webb over polygraph policies and proceedures, but he is not an idiot, and he is absolutely not evil.  Didn't the first century rabbi you often quote warn us about that sort of judgement?    Why not turn the other cheek?


Why don't you make an argument demonstrating how his behavior doesn't qualify as either evil or stupid instead of just claiming it?

Furthermore, I make no judgments about what will happen to Mr. Webb when the books are opened at the end of days; I merely point out that he wants men and women in harm's way to rely on a device for which there is no reason to suppose it will be useful.  That's either foolish or immoral.

I don't expect you to understand the argument; you're a polygrapher and your critical thinking abilities have atrophied.  Indeed, polygraphers are as much victims of the box as anyone else.  Look at the way you guys disdain people who disagree with you, how you don't care about the honest people that you screw over, how you wish to infantilize everyone.

Your response is what I expect.  I put forth an argument demonstrating proposition P.  Instead of critiquing my argument to demonstrate that it is unsound and thus cannot be used to establish the validity of proposition P, and instead of devising an argument that would demonstrate not P, you simply claim not P to be the case and assume the matter is settled after getting in a few digs at me (what Skip might incorrectly call "ad hominid attacks").

Anyway, as a member of the Church of the Polygraph you reject Jesus Christ too, so why bring him up?
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
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: 6157
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #18 - Apr 29th, 2008 at 7:09am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
One point of particular concern regarding the PCASS is that a red light on this "traffic light of truth" should not be taken as a green light for torture "enhanced interrogation techniques."
  

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 George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6157
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #19 - May 6th, 2008 at 2:45pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
The 24 April 2008 issue of the Fort Jackson Leader, the post newspaper at the home of the Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment, includes an article on the fielding of PCASS in Afghanistan, for which destination DACA instructor James Waller departed on Sunday, 20 April. The full issue of the Leader is attached to this post as a 12.3 mb PDF file. A transcription, along with commentary, has been posted to the blog. See The Port-A-Poly Goes to Afghanistan.
  

Fort_Jackson_Leader_24-04-2008.pdf ( 12626 KB | Downloads )

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: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #20 - May 7th, 2008 at 4:19pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Hey Guys!  I have an idea.  

Take PCASS off the field.  Let's have the soldiers in harms way simply ask their detainees if they're linked or related to Al Queda.  If they say yes, because we know they'll be honest with us, then arrest them.  If they say no, just give them their weapons back and send them along their merry way.

Sounds like a plan, huh?!

Sackett

P.S.  Lethe and all you other human "rights" lemmings out there...  stop salivating!  It's not gunna happen!  

But had ya going there for a minute!!!   Grin
  
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: 6157
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #21 - May 7th, 2008 at 5:17pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Jim,

One needn't be a "human 'rights' lemming" (whatever that may mean) to recognize the stupidity of relying on a lie detector that doesn't work, or the immorality of passing off such emperor's-new-clothes technology on our troops in harm's way (as Don Krapohl & Co. at DACA have done).
  

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: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #22 - May 7th, 2008 at 6:50pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
You George, as always, have once again MISSED THE POINT!

What is your alternative suggestion to the problem; in the field?  You do not have one!  That is MY point!  I'd rather rely on something that works 80% of the time, than nothing that works none of the time...


Sackett
  
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: 6157
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #23 - May 7th, 2008 at 7:10pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Jim,

The PCASS has not been shown to work 80% of the time. It has not been shown to reliably detect deception at better-than-chance levels of accuracy under field conditions. Worse still, this simplistic test can easily be passed through the use of simple countermeasures. Our troops are better off using their best judgment when questioning individuals, giving due consideration to available evidence and information, and reaching considered conclusions.
  

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 Sergeant1107
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 730
Location: Connecticut, USA
Joined: May 21st, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #24 - May 8th, 2008 at 10:28am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on May 7th, 2008 at 6:50pm:
You George, as always, have once again MISSED THE POINT!

What is your alternative suggestion to the problem; in the field?  You do not have one!  That is MY point!  I'd rather rely on something that works 80% of the time, than nothing that works none of the time...


Sackett

There is no logical requirement that a person have an alternative to an inaccurate instrument before stating that the instrument is, in fact, inaccurate.

You would rather have troops use a flawed machine and rely on possibly erroneous results than to use nothing?
  

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: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #25 - May 8th, 2008 at 7:49pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sergeant1107 wrote on May 8th, 2008 at 10:28am:
sackett wrote on May 7th, 2008 at 6:50pm:
You George, as always, have once again MISSED THE POINT!

What is your alternative suggestion to the problem; in the field?  You do not have one!  That is MY point!  I'd rather rely on something that works 80% of the time, than nothing that works none of the time...


Sackett

There is no logical requirement that a person have an alternative to an inaccurate instrument before stating that the instrument is, in fact, inaccurate.

You would rather have troops use a flawed machine and rely on possibly erroneous results than to use nothing?


YES!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #26 - May 8th, 2008 at 8:51pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Sackett, how accurate must a device be before it can be used?  Suppose the PCASS is accurate only 55% of the time (I'm not saying that's the case, but just for instance) would that be accurate enough to warrant using it?  If so, what if it were only 51% accurate?  If not, how accurate would it need to be in order to be used?

Also, I'm not sure that current research has addressed the susceptibility of the PCASS to countermeasures.  Former APA President Skip Webb appears pretty concerned that it can be beaten easily with CM and has tacitly implied that this is the case.  Given the probability that the very people that we'd most want to detect in deception (members of Al Qaeda and similar groups) are the most likely to know how to use CM, isn't this an important point to address?

Also, I'm not sure that you can do lab experiments with Americans and assume that the same accuracy will be obtained when using the PCASS on someone whose country you have invaded and occupied and who has had you stick a gun in his face.  A lot of these people in Afghanistan and Iraq probably don't really like our country nor trust our service members.  Given the importance of the subject believing at least some of what the polygrapher/PCASSer says, isn't it possible that this could impact accuracy?  I think these are all points worth at least investigating before giving the PCASS the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Given all of the unaddressed problems with the device, I think it is reasonable to call into question just how accurate it is going to be.  You claim it will be accurate enough, but just how accurate is that?

Also, regardless of what the accuracy level is, should our troops be given accurate information about the accuracy level?  Or should they just get the "it's very, very accurate" line that polygraphers like to give?

Also, George, I think it'd be a good idea to encourage soldiers who have access to the PCASS to try it out on each other and see if they can beat it.  Since it is the machine--and not the operator--who makes the determinations on deception, these informal experiments should be very easy to conduct.  They can help illustrate either the ease or difficulty with which the machine can be beaten; if they find it easy to beat they can decrease the confidence they put in it, if it is hard to beat they can increase such confidence.  In either case, people in harm's way have more information about their tools, which is a good thing.  Also, if it turns out to be easy to beat, hopefully word of this will filter out.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
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: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #27 - May 9th, 2008 at 1:01am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
"Port-o-Poly" Pimps care more about money.

I wonder, do they have a strong lobby on Capitol Hill?

TC
  

"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 Lethe
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 233
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Re: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #28 - May 9th, 2008 at 7:25pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
T.M. Cullen wrote on May 9th, 2008 at 1:01am:
"Port-o-Poly" Pimps care more about money.

I wonder, do they have a strong lobby on Capitol Hill?

TC


TC, I'm no expert on that angle of the business, but I doubt it.  Most decisions to use the polygraph are made by department heads and police chiefs, not by legislators.  This decentralization is helpful to the polygraph-industrial complex, as it leaves fewer traces of the debate on it's usefulness and allows them to get a few individual people aside and convince them that they need to cover their ass, regardless of how reliable the polygraph may be.  It also makes it easier to strong arm people with bandwagon tactics: c'mon, everyone else is doin' it, just try it, it won't hurt you the first time. 

If done at the legislative level, there'd be more questions about reliability and the assumptions about the polygraph would be questioned more in depth.  These proceedings would also leave records, which polygraphers want to avoid.  So I doubt they have a big lobbying arm--it's not needed.  They want to avoid that venue, if at all possible.  Remember, the polygraph thrives on secrecy, it can only exist in the dark, not in the Light.
  

Is former APA President Skip Webb evil or just stupid?

Is former APA President Ed Gelb an idiot or does the polygraph just not work?

Did you know that polygrapher Sackett doesn't care about detecting deception to relevant questions?
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: Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector
Reply #29 - May 10th, 2008 at 9:49am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on May 8th, 2008 at 7:49pm:
YES!

When the troops use this device and it shows the detainee is being truthful, that means that the detainee is being truthful, that the machine's error rate of 10-50% (whatever you believe it to be) is causing an inaccurate reading, or that the detainee knows how to beat the port-a-poly.

If the device indicates that the detainee is being deceptive, that means the detainee is being deceptive, or they are being truthful but the device's 10-50% (whatever you believe it to be) error rate is causing an inaccurate reading, or that the detainee was trying to employ countermeasures and did such a poor job that it resulted in a "DI" score.

I don't see how that can possibly be an asset to the troops.  They don't know anything more after using the PCASS than they did before using it.  After using the PCASS they'll be taking a guess and putting their lives on the accuracy of that guess.

They could also be issued a silver dollar and flip it each time they question a suspected terrorist.  Sometimes the coin would be right, but would that make it better than nothing?  According to your stated logic, it would.  I disagree.
  

Lorsque vous utilisez un argumentum ad hominem, tout le monde sait que vous êtes intellectuellement faillite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System: U.S. Deploys Hand-Held Lie Detector

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
                       
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