Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory (Read 60683 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #45 - Apr 23rd, 2009 at 11:16pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
There should be no reason why a polygraph examiner would typically stop between question sets and "interrogate" the examinee. In fact, doing so before the data collection phase of the exam is finished would likely have the effect of sensitizing the examinee to the relevant questions, which any polygraph examiner worth his salt would know to avoid doing. The fact that you claim this occurred during every polygraph you have taken suggests a defect in the polygrapher's training or his own methods. There should be no interrogation during the data collection phase of a polygraph. Such practice reflects poorly on the individual examiner, not on the polygraph itself. I'm curious. Was your polygrapher at the federal or state level?

While Mr. Maschke (in his last post on this thread) claims that if the polygraph had a scientific basis there would be no need to interrogate a subject, this makes no sense at all. The other methods of evidence collecting DO often lead to interrogation of a subject because they point an investigator in the right direction and encourage the investigator that he/she is on the right track. Likewise, the polygraph, if you accept it as having a scientific basis, which many of you on this forum don't but which almost all polygraphers do, then it also points the investigator in the right direction. Feeling that he/she now has evidence against a subject, the polygrapher will, and should, go into interrogation mode.
  
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: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #46 - Apr 24th, 2009 at 2:02am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
While Mr. Maschke (in his last post on this thread) claims that if the polygraph had a scientific basis there would be no need to interrogate a subject, this makes no sense at all.


It makes no sense, because that is not what he posted.

He posted:

"If polygraphy were truly a scientific test for deception, then those administering that scientific test should have no role in interrogating those they test, any more than do those who conduct DNA, latent fingerprint, or ballistics tests."

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 LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #47 - Apr 24th, 2009 at 8:58pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Perhaps if you're talking about independent polygraphers, Mr. Cullen.  But not when you're talking about polygraphers who are part of a police department or federal agency, where they are often themselves investigators for their departments or agencies.

Now, before you talk about conflicts of interest, let me continue. One thing that the "Anti-" crowd on this forum never talks about--and perhaps doesn't realize--is that most good polygraphers go into every exam with an impartial viewpoint.  You have to not care one way or the other whether your examinee, even an accused defendant, passes or fails the exam. A good polygrapher will tell the investigators, the attorneys, and the examinee that the polygrapher is not there to pre-judge the examinee. In fact, prior to all such exams I've conducted, I've always told everyone, including the examinee, that I don't care one way or the other how the exam turns out. It is not the polygrapher's job--prior to the end of the data collection phase of the exam--to pass judgment or to even interrogate the examinee.

Now, once an examinee has clearly failed an exam, things will and should change, whether the polygrapher represents his/her department or agency, or the polygrapher is independent. At that point, unless there has been some kind of pre-exam agreement between attorneys, the polygrapher will definitely want to get to the bottom of the examinee's lies, and in fact will generally be expected to attempt to do so by all parties involved.  Just as the CSI investigators who work for departments or agencies, who conduct those other types of evidence collection are an extension of the investigative process, so are polygraphers, but only after an examinee has broken his/her promise to be truthful during the exam.
  
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: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #48 - Apr 24th, 2009 at 9:24pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
While Mr. Maschke (in his last post on this thread) claims that if the polygraph had a scientific basis there would be no need to interrogate a subject, this makes no sense at all.


So did George really make that claim or not?

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 T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #49 - Apr 24th, 2009 at 9:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Whoops, hit save by accident
  

"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: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #50 - Apr 24th, 2009 at 9:44pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 24th, 2009 at 9:24pm:
[quote]While Mr. Maschke (in his last post on this thread) claims that if the polygraph had a scientific basis there would be no need to interrogate a subject, this makes no sense at all.


So did George really make that claim or not?

Quote:
Now, once an examinee has clearly failed an exam, things will and should change, whether the polygrapher represents his/her department or agency, or the polygrapher is independent. At that point, unless there has been some kind of pre-exam agreement between attorneys, the polygrapher will definitely want to get to the bottom of the examinee's lies, and in fact will generally be expected to attempt to do so by all parties involved.


Examinee lies?  How do you know that the examinee actually lied?

Why would Sancho be against allowing one of his fellow polygrapher operators getting to the bottom of these ALLEGED lies?

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 LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #51 - Apr 25th, 2009 at 2:47am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Yes, he did make that claim. He said that polygraphers should have no role in interrogating those they test. Why do you keep asking the same question? I thought I was clear, but apparently not clear enough.

How do I "know" he lied? Well, if he's a subject in one of my polygraph exams and he failed, it's certainly possible that he's a false positive, but extremely unlikely.  And no, I don't want to once again get into a big discussion about this study and that study with one more person on this forum who has absolutely no experience as a polygraph examiner but who will open his smelly box of old, worn-out tennis shoes he borrowed from someone else who has no experience either, so please don't expect me to waste my time that way.

Sorry, Mr. Cullen. I don't hang around this forum all the time, so I have no idea who "Sancho" is, nor do I care. Am I supposed to back him up? Did you misunderstand him too?
  
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: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #52 - Apr 25th, 2009 at 6:47pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
How do I "know" he lied? Well, if he's a subject in one of my polygraph exams and he failed, it's certainly possible that he's a false positive, but extremely unlikely.


How do you know it is "extremely unlikely" for a person to be a false positive?

The fact is, you don't know whether a person has lied or told the truth based on the results of a polygraph. †

Quote:
And no, I don't want to once again get into a big discussion about this study and that study with one more person on this forum who has absolutely no experience as a polygraph examiner but who will open his smelly box of old, worn-out tennis shoes he borrowed from someone else who has no experience either, so please don't expect me to waste my time that way.


In other words, you make †a very weak argument that falls to dust after being asked to answer some simple questions to back up your claims. ††Namely, that false positives are "extremely unlikely", and that a person who fails a polygraph (which only measures some rudimentary physiological data) is lying and must be interrogated to "get to the bottom of those lies".

But we woldn't †want to waste your precious time. †

Quote:
Sorry, Mr. Cullen. I don't hang around this forum all the time, so I have no idea who "Sancho" is, nor do I care. Am I supposed to back him up? Did you misunderstand him too?


You were the one who brought up the topic of his banning. †But you don't know who he is, nor care?  Ah, okay.  That makes as much sense as anything else you've posted here.

TC
« Last Edit: Apr 25th, 2009 at 7:10pm by T.M. Cullen »  

"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 LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #53 - Apr 27th, 2009 at 11:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
We could go round and round on this, Mr. Cullen. I could point out studies that show what I believe, and you could point out studies that show what you believe. None of the studies would be conclusive, and there are definite problems with trying to correlate lab studies with real-life. I've argued studies before, and it's like two people from different religions trying to convince each other that theirs is right.

But I ask potential polygraph examinees this question: Who do you think is more credible--someone who can point out questionable studies but who has absolutely no experience in conducting polygraph exams, or someone who can also point out questionable studies, but who has the experience of having conducted a very large number of polygraphs?

And about "Sancho." I asked why Ed Earl was banned. I've never read anything posted by "Sancho." Are they one and the same? One thing's for sure, though: Mr. Earl (if indeed that's his real name) had you running in circles like a dog chasing its tail. Very impressive, banned or not.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe G
Guest


Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #54 - Nov 21st, 2019 at 4:03am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
@ Ed Earl

Ed Earl,

You are a complete idiot with that example of police using a field sobriety test. Field sobriety test can be denied by the person and then given a test of a breathalyzer that IS scientific to determine their intoxication level. When you take a poly, you are fully at the control of the examiner and there is no disagreement allowed and no way to take something SCIENTIFIC to verify the results of the poly. I would assume you are/were a polygrapher, and I just want to say it is a joke profession that ruins many good applicants from working great jobs. You should or should have gotten a real job rather than making subjective opinions about examinees based on pseudoscience.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Doug Williams
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 271
Joined: Feb 15th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory
Reply #55 - Nov 21st, 2019 at 5:00pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
@ Ed Earl

Ed Earl,

You are a complete idiot with that example of police using a field sobriety test. Field sobriety test can be denied by the person and then given a test of a breathalyzer that IS scientific to determine their intoxication level. When you take a poly, you are fully at the control of the examiner and there is no disagreement allowed and no way to take something SCIENTIFIC to verify the results of the poly. I would assume you are/were a polygrapher, and I just want to say it is a joke profession that ruins many good applicants from working great jobs. You should or should have gotten a real job rather than making subjective opinions about examinees based on pseudoscience.


You are quite correct, a polygraph is based entirely on pseudo science Ė in short, itís nothing but a fraud. Itís a massive, evil fraud which is perpetrated by thugs and charlatans who donít give a damn how many people they hurt as long as they can continue to unjustly enrich themselves. But there may be a time coming when they will be held accountable. Iíve got the beginnings of an idea about a class action lawsuit on behalf of all the hundreds of thousands of people who have been denied employment or falsely accused of deception based on this pseudo-scientific test. Check this out and let me know if thereís anything you can help me with by way of suggestion. Anyone is welcome to chime in. https://polygraph.com/sue-the-bastards.html
  

I have been fighting the thugs and charlatans in the polygraph industry for forty years.† I tell about my crusade against the insidious Orwellian polygraph industry in my book FALSE CONFESSIONS - THE TRUE STORY OF DOUG WILLIAMS' CRUSADE AGAINST THE ORWELLIAN POLYGRAPH INDUSTRY.† Please visit my website POLYGRAPH.COM and follow me on TWITTER @DougWilliams_PG


Doug Williams
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
An example of why pre-employment polygraphs should be mandatory

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 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