Normal Topic Have people tried this question? (Read 1851 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Disappointed
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 7
Location: Utah
Joined: Mar 7th, 2009
Gender: Male
Have people tried this question?
Mar 13th, 2009 at 5:31pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
The idea I am presenting is so easy and obvious you old-timers will probably tell me all about it.

I wonder if the lie detector can detect its own lie?--

Let's say we have a false positive outcome on a CQT.  Of course the examiner doesn't know that, only that the subject failed.  Have polygraphers explored a follow-up test, asking the new relevant question, "did you lie during your examination?"

It seems to me that for a truthful (but failed) subject, this is a less threatening question because it doesn't refer to a crime.  If the second test is failed, that should increse reliability.  It would seem that if the subject is passed on this second question, it would negate the first result and at least stop the damage of a false positive.

If the follow-up test is given before the subject knows he has failed, it would have the greatest reliability because the subject is not under additional stress--my guess.

What do you think?  Has this been done before?
  
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: 6122
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Have people tried this question?
Reply #1 - Mar 13th, 2009 at 5:58pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Remember that by the logic of the CQT, even those who pass will lie when asked the so-called "control" questions. So from the polygraph operator's point of view, the question "Did you lie during your examination?" would make a very poor relevant question. Note that sometimes this question (or, more commonly, at the beginning of the question series, "Do you intend to answer all questions truthfully?") is used as a "sacrifice relevant" question and is not scored.
  

George W. Maschke
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 Disappointed
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 7
Location: Utah
Joined: Mar 7th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Have people tried this question?
Reply #2 - Mar 15th, 2009 at 4:29am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Thanks for taking the time to lead me through this, George.

I can't see anything wrong with asking "did you lie" as a follow-up relevant question to check on the previous test question.  If a person passes the follow-up question, then that flags a previous "deception indicated" as a false positive.

I am thinking about putting my idea to William Iacono at the University of Minnesota to see his reaction.  But, I thought before I look like a fool, I would see if anybody here had heard of this approach before.

A big problem with the CQT is the overly-honest person.  If he tells the truth on the "probable-lie" control questions, then he sets their reference level so low that it condemns him to failing the relevant question.  But, I'm not so sure my "did you lie" question solves the problem.  I am still looking for a better idea.


George W. Maschke wrote on Mar 13th, 2009 at 5:58pm:
Remember that by the logic of the CQT, even those who pass will lie when asked the so-called "control" questions. So from the polygraph operator's point of view, the question "Did you lie during your examination?" would make a very poor relevant question. Note that sometimes this question (or, more commonly, at the beginning of the question series, "Do you intend to answer all questions truthfully?") is used as a "sacrifice relevant" question and is not scored.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Have people tried this question?

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