Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Voice Stress and BOARDERS (Read 17938 times)
pailryder
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 437
Joined: Jun 5th, 2006
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #15 - May 21st, 2011 at 11:00am
Print Post  
stefano

Not to split hairs but I thought that was Toto.
  

No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers.   David Thoreson Lykken
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #16 - May 22nd, 2011 at 5:49am
Print Post  
pailryder wrote on May 21st, 2011 at 11:00am:
Not to split hairs but I thought that was Toto. 

Good catch.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #17 - May 23rd, 2011 at 2:38am
Print Post  
Dear pailryder,

The main concern about polygraph is as you say, "peer reviewed studies." All or most of the "peer reviewed studies" concerning polygraph are by parties that have an interest in furthering the use of polygraph.  It is like many drug companies that have sponsored "independent" studies to proclaim their drugs effective and safe. Only is it years or decades later that we find out the long term damage and the millions spent on a useless drug.

Again, any device that claims it can work to detect deception is as good as the polygraph because the polygraph is unproven except for anecdotal evidence and studies. In our present state of federal and state budgetary crisis, I see it being abandoned for the "next great thing." Unless polygraph operators can cut the cost, I see polygraph operations being cut-back. It is not even about evidence or argument, it is about money.  Polygraph is finally being found to be not economically feasible.

A computer with properly programmed parameters can come up with a fifty-fifty chance of detecting deception.  If I can convince you that it is effective, the odds go up. The polygraph is just a thinly veiled interrogation process that desperately depends on the subject's believe that it works.  Otherwise, it is ineffective. Computers are cheaper and their results are going to be the same.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
pailryder
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 437
Joined: Jun 5th, 2006
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #18 - May 23rd, 2011 at 12:10pm
Print Post  
Fair Chance wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 2:38am:
the polygraph is unproven except for anecdotal evidence and studies.


Fair Chance

Unproven, really?  After more than eighty years of use, anecdotal evidence, and studies, what other proof are you asking for?  What other proof would you accept?

Why don't the anti's pool their resources and produce a peer reviewed study of their own to debunk the polygraph myth once and for all?
« Last Edit: May 23rd, 2011 at 12:26pm by pailryder »  

No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers.   David Thoreson Lykken
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #19 - May 23rd, 2011 at 8:07pm
Print Post  
Fair Chance wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 2:38am:
The polygraph is just a thinly veiled interrogation process that desperately depends on the subject's believe that it works.Otherwise, it is ineffective. Computers are cheaper and their results are going to be the same.

Interesting....as long as they want a gimmick, let's give them one that costs less. I can actually see these knuckle-Draggers falling for it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #20 - May 23rd, 2011 at 8:27pm
Print Post  
pailryder wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 12:10pm:
Why don't the anti's pool their resources and produce a peer reviewed study of their own to debunk the polygraph myth once and for all? 

Your point is well taken. In all my postings, you will notice that I never said the polygraph is not accurate. The problem is there is no way to tell. As Fair Chance said, the people conducting the studies have an agenda and the resultant bias is unavoidable. In fairness, this bias would also be present should the other side choose to do their own studies. But, it's all futile as there is no way to tell because you cannot read someone's mind. Having a bunch of college students at Boise State saying "oh yeah, I was telling the truth" or conversely having a confession by some sociopath substantiate a DI polygraph report proves nothing. There is no theory from stimulus onset to the sympathetic reaction. They can say "over 80 years, we have observed this", but there is still no theory.

Polygraph accuracy cannot be determined; it's impossible. My stand is not from one of accuracy, but rather I don't want to live in an America where people are strapped to Orwellian machines with the goal of opening up their soul. If someone tries to do the guilt trip thing with me about how Sex Offenders are contained as a result of the polygraph, I counter that all these therapists get into a room and open up a big box of granola and think of some other way.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
pailryder
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 437
Joined: Jun 5th, 2006
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #21 - May 23rd, 2011 at 9:43pm
Print Post  
stefano

I do know some polygraph guys who hold  rather high opinions of themselves, but I have never heard them claim to have opened up anyone's soul.
  

No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers.   David Thoreson Lykken
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill_Brown
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 227
Joined: Apr 8th, 2011
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #22 - May 23rd, 2011 at 10:46pm
Print Post  
Stefano,

Please explain what you are stating regarding theory.  I am aware of the reason reactions occur on polygraph, from stimulus onset to sympathetic arousal.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #23 - May 24th, 2011 at 12:30am
Print Post  
Bill_Brown wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 10:46pm:
Stefano,

Please explain what you are stating regarding theory.  I am aware of the reason reactions occur on polygraph, from stimulus onset to sympathetic arousal. 

There is no theory which can link the precise neurological mechanisms to deception. Sympathetic arousal is indicative of fear, but extrapolation of fear to deception is pure conjecture.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #24 - May 24th, 2011 at 12:33am
Print Post  
pailryder wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 9:43pm:
but I have never heard them claim to have opened up anyone's soul. 

Asking someone how many times they masturbate each week or coercing people to share fantasies about sex with their mothers comes pretty darn close Pailryder. There is a line that should not be crossed in a democratic society.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #25 - May 24th, 2011 at 2:42am
Print Post  
Dear pailryder,

There are some good discussion points going on and you brought up a few.  I would like an independent study by qualified scientists who have no horse in the race. These studies are impossible to come by. Everyone has a horse in this race and there are no independent peer-reviewed case studies.  In just about every study, a researcher can find a bias which can skew the research both pro and con.  A truly scientific procedure should easily display its repeatability and reliability. The polygraph examiners have placed too many variables, such as the experience and quality of examiner, type of questions, pre-screening application use or specific incident use as excuses why some results are not repeatable or justifying why passed examinees should have been failed after the fact.

When an EKG is taken according to manufacturer instructions, the technician follows a preset order of operations and procedures which can be exactly duplicated by another similarly qualified technician.  The polygraph does not have such repeatability.

I can use a telescope for eighty years and say the sun revolved around the earth.  Everyone agrees with my statement so it must be right.  Just because something has been done for eighty years does not mean it is scientific or accurate, it just means it was a practice or urban legend passed on from generation to generation based on belief, not science. I can give you anecdotal statements that back up my theory. If I do not provide evidence to back up my theory, it is just a statement, not fact.

I believe that the best way to prove something is to disprove the negative.  Let us assume that the polygraph exam is scientific, repeatable, and 99.99% accurate.  If a theory is correct, repeatability is essential and the data should show little or no variation from the expected mean. There should not have to be collateral damage with a scientifically tested and proven technique.  There should be no false positives unless they are attributed to error associated with the machine calibration error.  Automatic laboratory testing with computers is 99.9999% accurate unless the calibration of the equipment is out of range.  There are no other excuses.

I am stating that a computer can be programmed to analyze the same readings according to existing polygraph examiner protocols and the machine should be 99.999% effective unless the protocols are incorrect or the machine is out of calibration. Why do we need an operator, let's save money.  If you tell me a machine cannot be programmed to do what you do, I am stating that you are not performing a scientific, fact based, parameter limited, repeatable test.

If the polygraph exam is scientific, a computer should be able to repeat the exam on the subject with identical results every time.  The computer injects no bias except for the bias of the programmer. It follows protocols regardless of ethnicity, age, or nervousness of the subject.  I should be able to hit the retest button every time and get the same results.

When an examiner argues that a compute cannot do his job, I would use those exact arguments against them and state that their results are biased or flawed.  The results should be defined on preset, concrete, and repeatable parameters. Gee, it is starting to sound like an AED machine.  Read up on the research and programming that is involved in allowing a machine to make the judgment about whether a defibrillator should be used or not. They are programming a machine to perform a life or death decision .  Applying a shock when not needed will kill a living person. You cannot tell me that if you have a scientifically proven way of using polygraphs to detect deception, it is not capable of being programmed into a machine.  We should not need human operators to do the analysis or exam.  If we do need operators because the machine cannot be programmed to make the decision, then I doubt the parameters are correct or scientific.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill_Brown
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 227
Joined: Apr 8th, 2011
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #26 - May 24th, 2011 at 2:49pm
Print Post  
Quote:
Bill_Brown wrote on May 23rd, 2011 at 10:46pm:
Stefano,

 

There is no theory which can link the precise neurological mechanisms to deception. Sympathetic arousal is indicative of fear, but extrapolation of fear to deception is pure conjecture.


Stefano,

We are in agreement on this.  (Fight Flight to Deception is not 100% and there is a possibility of error)

The reason for an extended interview is to create a mind set that focuses on fear of detection.  Are we 100% sure we accomplished that task?  No we are not and we have an error rate.  There is a second argument regarding cognitive conflict causing reaction.  That will be for another days discussion. 

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
pailryder
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 437
Joined: Jun 5th, 2006
Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #27 - May 24th, 2011 at 7:25pm
Print Post  
stefano
Quote:
Asking someone how many times they masturbate each week or coercing people to share fantasies about sex with their mothers comes pretty darn close Pailryder. There is a line that should not be 


stefano

What agency allows an examiner to ask those questions?
  

No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers.   David Thoreson Lykken
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #28 - May 24th, 2011 at 8:42pm
Print Post  
pailryder wrote on May 24th, 2011 at 7:25pm:
What agency allows an examiner to ask those questions? 

Those are excerpts from PCSOT exams which I have critiqued.
« Last Edit: May 25th, 2011 at 3:15am by »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stefano
Ex Member


Re: Voice Stress and BOARDERS
Reply #29 - May 24th, 2011 at 8:46pm
Print Post  
Bill_Brown wrote on May 24th, 2011 at 2:49pm:
The reason for an extended interview is to create a mind set that focuses on fear of detection.Are we 100% sure we accomplished that task?No we are not and we have an error rate. 

This is the point where science departs the scene and shamanism takes over.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Send TopicPrint
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo