Like many here I just had a horrific experience with a polygraph while trying to gain employment at a police department.   

In this case I passed the test with no indications of deception, only to be told I was being kicked out because I was using countermeasures.  This was a lie.  I had made no attempts to manipulate the test and did not know how to do so, but the polygraph examiner insisted I was using countermeasures.

His evidence?  He told me the test had shown highly "irregular breathing".  In some cases I had been breathing too fast, while other parts I had been breathing too slow.  As a result he was not willing to accept any explanation other then one involving countermeasures.

At this point he went into "good cop" mode, explaining to me that he didn't think I was a liar, only that I had been "misled" by websites such as this one into believing that using countermeasures was the only way to pass the exam.  He went on to say that if I just confessed to using countermeasures, he would note that in his report and there was a chance I could still get hired.

Suffice to say I rejected his advice.  I told him I was not using countermeasures and there was no way I was going to confess to doing so when that was not the case.  I continued to insist that I was not using countermeasures and had made no attempt to control my breathing one way or the other.  I also pointed out I had nothing to gain by sticking with my story.  Obviously he was going to ruin my career prospects if I did, so from the standpoint of self-benefit, confessing to using countermeasures would be the best option.  He brushed this off, stating "the anti-poly websites tell you to never admit countermeasures, so that's why you won't."

It was like talking to a brick wall.  I realized that he was not going to accept anything short of a confession of countermeasures use, so I finally gave up.  I told him one last time that I was not using countermeasures and him accusing me of it didn't make it true.  I realized by that point he was intent on ruining my career prospects, but I wasn't about to let him destroy my dignity and integrity too.

Well I think you can all guess how the story ends.  I got kicked out for what they called "deliberate non-compliance".  My clean background, lack of any criminal record, 1,200 dollars in travel expense to take the test, 6 years of service in the active duty and reserve military and 2 years of college meant nothing against the report of the polygrapher and his machine.

What a nightmare!  How is it that a machine can falsely indicate countermeasures?  And just how accurate can a polygraph be if something as simple as "irregular breathing" can interfere with the results?

What really got to me was the fact that the examiner never mensioned my irregular breathing until after the test was over.  He just waited till the end and then told me I was "cheating".

What didn't he just assume my irregular breathing was inadvertant and tell me about it as soon as it was detected so I could try to correct it immediately?

It's especially ironic after he spent the first 20 minutes assuring me his job was to "help me pass".

Okay, listen to this one.  The last poly I took, the examiner first told me to relax, and then after a few questions, accused me of controlling my breathing, by virtue of rythemic breathing.  I laughed, and told him of course, if he wanted me to be calm, I needed to breath calmly.  We hit it off pretty well, and I ended up with a "pass" but no thanks to anything I did, except tell the truth.  It could have just as easily been a "fail" given what I have learned here.

Ohio, I know it sucks, but the good news is that you now are a whole lot wiser, and for the next time, take the advice given here and  you will likely pass.  Read some of Sarge1107 posts, he has been where you are at now.  He failed three, then passed the fourth.   

Polygraph is a  joke, and unfortunately, you were the brunt of that joke today.

Ohio9,

You're not by any means the only person to have "failed" a polygraph by virtue of a false accusation of countermeasure use. The same thing happened to me, and like you, not only was I telling the truth and not practicing countermeasures, at the time I had no idea what polygraph countermeasures even are. See my statement "Too Hot of a Potato: A Citizen-Soldier's Encounter With the Polygraph" for details.

Polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to reliably detect countermeasures. But that doesn't deter them from making accusations and badgering examinees for a confession.

T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 25^th, 2008 at 2:08am:


T. M., you don't seem to have read my initial post correctly.  I never admitted using countermeasures.  Not once.  And I still "failed" the test anyway.

T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 25^th, 2008 at 2:08am:


Sheesh now you're starting to sound like the polygrapher.  I already said I never admitted using countermeasures.  Not once.  Not even after he assured me that admitting countermeasures was the only way I would have a chance to get hired.

I have no regrets about my decition to stay honest and deny using countermeasures to the very end, but unfortunantly it wasn't enough to convince the polygrapher and I got kicked out all the same.

Ohio9,

regardless of what they say on this board, examiner's DO NOT care who gets hired.  They do not make the hiring decision and have no(for the most part) vested interest in who gets the job.  They are simply looking for those that can report information, like on the pre-employment process, then test for truthfulness.   

People here make it seem that we take pleasure in keeping people out.  I am gleefully happy with those who are truthful and pass, rather than fail.  I want people to get the job they want, but they will have to be truthful to do so. (Now, be forwarned, my above  "I do not care" statement will again be taken out of context as if I "do not care"; period! Not accurately applied to the context in which I made the statement. But, ignorance does begat ignorance...)  "See Sackett doesn't care, Sackett doesn't care..."

Lethe has a bad habit of assuming he knows what examiners care about or feel; all, because it suits his warped observations of polygraph.  Truly a sadly misguided individual...

George will tell you that we, as examiner's have no proven ability to detect countermeasures, all the while not idetifiying any ability for the readers of his book to use them effectively, then when we are able to identify countermeasurse effectively has to modify his book to avoid those areas which may come back to haunt them.  How many readers have successfully employed countermeasures and "beat the examiner" to get what they want?  Don't know?  NO EXAMINEE HAS EVER PROVEN THE ABILITY TO USE OR EMPLOY COUNTERMEASURES SUCCESSFULLY, AS TAUGHT IN HIS BOOK.

Cullen, on the other hand is a simple minded angry man who has taken it upon himself to sarcastically attack polygraph whenever the opportunity presents itself.  His comments assist polygraph, more than hurt.

Ohio9, you are reading a very slanted board.  Take all information put here and consider it from the point of origin (to include mine), then make up you own mind.   

Many examiners are sensitive to countermeasures not for any other reason than that they interfere with the process and prevent us from doing our job accurately and for the examinee in the chair, at the time.  That job is simply to find the truth of the matter, nothing more. 


Sackett

(OK, anti folks, chum is in the water.... bring it on!)

sackett wrote on Apr 28^th, 2008 at 7:22pm:


Jim, what polygraphers evidently do not to care about is the plight of those whom they wrongly brand as liars, or whom they falsely accuse of using countermeasures. I don't think any polygraph examiner wants to make false accusations against innocent persons. But given polygraphy's lack of scientific underpinnings, it's inevitably going to happen--and more frequently than polygraphers care to acknowledge.

I think that if most polygraph examiners took a candid and critical look at what it is they are doing, they could not in good conscience continue in this line of work. So instead, they delude themselves about it: they dismiss the National Academy of Sciences as a bunch of know-nothing eggheads, they attribute bad motives to polygraph critics, and they avoid critical thinking and the asking of troubling questions about what it is they do for a living.

Quote:


Lethe exhibits a deeper understanding of polygraphy than any practitioner of this fraudulent profession.

Quote:


What you're referring to is the fact that we no longer suggest contraction of the anal sphincter muscle as a countermeasure, in view of the increasing use of pneumatic or, more commonly in recent years, piezo-electric seat pads used in an attempt to detect and deter such countermeasures. While there are no scientific studies regarding the effectiveness of any of such these devices for the detection of countermeasures, it seems plausible that they might work, and given the ready availability of other countermeasure techniques that clearly cannot be detected by such seat pads, it seems prudent to use them, instead.

Quote:


Not so. In peer-reviewed studies by Honts and others, half of test subjects were able to fool the polygraph after a maximum of only 30 minutes of instruction. The countermeasures taught (including tongue-biting and mentally counting backward by 7s timely with the asking of the control/comparison questions) were similar to those outlined in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Citations and abstracts for these studies are provided in the bibliography of TLBTLD.

Quote:


It should not surprise you that those who have been falsely accused of deception based on the pseudoscientific quackery that you practice for a living might respond with sarcasm when polygraphers pontificate about such matters as honesty and integrity.

Quote:


You say this is a "very slanted board?!" How about PolygraphPlace.com, where you serve as a moderator, and where polygraph critics such as myself are not permitted to post?!

Of course each individual should make up his or her own mind for him- or herself. And they should do so upon full consideration of the evidence. That's why the AntiPolygraph.org message board, unlike your one, is uncensored. We don't fear debate. We welcome it.

Quote:


It seems that some polygraphers are sensitive to countermeasures to the point of seeing them where they don't exist.

George
Is it Lethe's accusation that we are infantilizing our children that shows his deep understanding of our profession, or is it his suggestion that we should be put down like dogs?