Ed Earl wrote on Mar 18
th, 2009 at 2:35am:
Sergeant, are you stating George's book does not endorse lying and cheating on polygraph examinations? Have you read it? How exactly would one conclude that a document could attempt to teach countermeasures without endorsing their use?
We already went over this when you were posting as Sancho. In light of the minimum of seven deceptions employed by the polygraph operator in every "test," I don't see an ethical problem with truthful persons employing countermeasures. As I told you before, it is an ethical breach on the level of deceptively telling a used car saleman that you found a better price elsewhere.
Quote:Are you denying that there is peer reviewed published polygraph research as well as the vast majority of anecdotal information from actual cases prove repeatedly that a polygraph examination can effectively discriminate lying from truth-telling or that every year more and more courts at federal and state level are accepting polygraph results as evidence?
Citations, please.
Quote:Cullen, are you stating that the NAS did not conclude that specific issue polygraph tests (Which is what pugs was being asked to take) ...
Quote:Pugs423: Well I finally just called an asked if I had to take the exam and the agent said "absolutly not"... He also said that they could not deny the claim because of my refusal to take the exam.
And the incentive for Pugs423 to submit to polygraphic interrogation is...?
Quote:Are either of you claiming that there is peer-reviewed published research that proves countermeasures taught in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector can be effectively implemented in a real life polygraph? Where is it? The NAS report didn't cite any. In fact they cast doubt on that likelihood.
Drew Richardson's challenge to the polygraph operators has gone
seven years without a single taker. As he says in the audio introduction, "What are the polygraph operators afraid of?"
Quote:The APA pre-employment protocol calls for exams to be recorded. Once recorded, they are available by subpoena. If they were any easier to obtain, the applicant and all their admissions would be featured on YOUTUBE. I don't think that would benefit anyone. Have you seen the one of George with the colander on his head? It isn't very flattering.
If the tapes were released to applicants themselves, control of them would be up to the individuals. With regard to George's YouTube video, it has a 4.5 star rating after over 11,000 views. Some people seem to like it.
Quote:What I really want to do here is fight against those who try to convince people they are better off lying and cheating than they are telling the truth. I don't really understand why encouraging people to be honest, honorable and truthful meets with such resistance.
Again, in light of the seven deceptions, you live in a glass house. Take it easy with the stones.
Quote:I believe for an applicant to consider countermeasures, suggests a willingness to engage in deceptive behavior considered by most as contraindicated in being a law enforcement officer or of occupying any position of trust in our government. Who knows what such a potential employee might fake, lie, or make up, right? I think most reasonable persons would agree to this as well. I also believe that anyone who endorses that behavior is squarely in the wrong.
See above.
Quote:Do any of you have a problem with encouraging people to be honest, honorable, and truthful?
If so I'd like to hear your arguments.
This should start with the polygraph operators.
Quote:If you are all right and I am wrong, perhaps you could explain why the last piece of major polygraph legislation was in 1988 (over 20 years ago) and why this oft cited NAS report hasn't resulted in any significant changes in the law and why every year more and more courts at federal and state level are accepting polygraph results as evidence?
Polygraphy was essentially abolished in the minds of a vast majority of Americans with the EPPA 20 years ago. The reason that further reform has been slow in coming is that there are too few people that remain subject to it.
Honestly, the best thing for our cause right now would be the complete repeal of the EPPA. If polygraphy was alive and well in the private sector like it was back in the day--where everyone from bank tellers to gas pump jockeys could be wired up--it would result in a lot more people being falsely accused and thus motivated to learn about polygraphy.
I'm confident that the resulting legislation would have no government loopholes.
If only the Web was around in 1986!