Quote:Since I don't think you're really as naive as that question sounds, but that you are instead being facetious despite the glaring admission that you are in fact without experience, I'll answer your question for the benefit of other readers.
Sorry, but you are the one who said we are all inexperienced and couldn't possibly know what we are talking about when it comes to the Polygraph. But thanks for acknowledging that I am not naive.
Quote:If the conclusion, based on the data, is "Deception Indicated," I will of course want to know why.
By "data" I am assuming you are referring to the chart readings. But the chart data simply show physiological data, not whether a person is being deceptive or not. And I believe in a previous post, you admitted that the machine does not measure "deception". You're buddy Ed Van Arsdale claimed polygraphers do NOT use the phrase "deception indicated" to describe chart readings. I was accused of "overgeneralizing" for claiming polygraphers DO. Now, here you are USING THAT LABEL! Do if the machine does NOT measure deception, why do you use that term? Not just here, but during testing?
Quote:Nine times out of 10, there is a very good reason, and it comes out because the examinee realizes that he/she has been caught in a lie and doesn't want to leave those cards on the table, especially when he/she wants a job.
Okay, so here you are making a claim of 90% accuracy with NO SUBSTANTIATION, and despite the conclusion of the scientific community. Of course there will be always be a reason, or more accurately, an underlying cause, for a person's ANS to "react". But "deception" is only one possibility. For example, if you have "sensitized" the subject to a particular question (e.g. by looking at the chart after a reading, letting out a big sigh, then telling the subject "your having trub with the question on foreign contacts!")
Or course you claimed polygraphers do not do this (tell subjects they are "doing bad" on a given question in between chart readings). Go ask a sample of NSA polygraph subjects, they will tell you just the opposite.
Quote:The examinee may have failed the exam because he/she decided to take the poor advice of this or another website and screw around during the exam, even though he/she really had nothing to hide with regard to the relevant issues; or the examinee failed and knows why but won't talk about it; or the examinee is truly being truthful but is a "false positive."
And you have absolutely NO WAY, based on the charts of know which category they fall into.
Quote:What I won't concede, though, is the erroneous assumptions that you and others on this forum hold that false positives are common...
You claimed FPs to be "exceedingly rare" in a previous post, and, just as your 9 out of 10 claim above, is just an opinion, and not based on science.
My advice has always been to take the test, answer all question HONESTLY, but KNOW ahead of time the machine DOES NOT MEASURE TRUTH, and that what you are doing is walking into an INTERROGATION. IF/WHEN the the examiner tries to talk you into believing your must be lying, hiding something, or be bothered about your ANSWER, ignore him and realize it's just all PART OF THE GAME. As for the charts. They measure data which is produced and controlled primarily by the subconscious mind and you have no direct control over them, so don't worry about it. IOW, tell the truth and ignore the examiners lies.
TC