Interesting approach.
We HAVE brought this up before, mentioning the "green river" killer, and famous spies like Aldrich Ames that have ALL passed the polygraph. The "Pro" crowd's response has always been "Gee whiz, no test is perfect! Even X-rays have error rates! Blah, blah, blah!"
To my knowledge (and GM would know more), there are no statistics, or attempt to measure how many false negatives there are out there. Though, if you consider the pre-employment, periodic update type polygraph accuracy rate to be at around 50%, that leaves a lot of room for "bad guys" to slip through. To be fair though, just because you pass a polygraph doesn't mean something untoward about an individual won't come up during the BI. Also, it is probably a very small percentage of the population of persons poly tested for positions at NSA/FBI/CIA likely to be bad guys is probably very small to begin with. That fact can be just as easily used to question the near 50% failure rate of applicants (e.g. GM) trying to get hired at the FBI.
Quote:But to say that just because a person can't explain why they are reacting to a question eliminates them from consideration is not only stupid and lazy on the part of the department/agency, but also disrespectful of the person in general.
Most of all, it is NOT SCIENTIFIC. For one thing, the physiological data measured by the polygraph are produced by the autonomic nervous system which is controlled by the UNCONSCIOUS mind, and so a person really CAN'T explain the reason behind a reaction. Biology 101!
TC
P.S. The politicians and government bureaucrats aren't going to continue the polygraph, or discontinue it based on logic. They've made that pretty clear. They will base it on (SURPRISE!) political considerations and covering their pathetic pencil-neck geek butt holes! Most people don't care one way or the other because it doesn't effect them. Popular culture, and TV mythology is fine for them!