AntiPolygraph.org Message Board - Are they even this objective?

(UTC)

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

News:

You can enhance your privacy when browsing and posting to this forum by using the free and open source Tor Browser and posting as a guest (using a fake e-mail address such as nobody@nowhere.com) or registering with a free, anonymous ProtonMail e-mail account. Registered users can exchange private messages with other registered users and receive notifications.

In addition, check out our live chat server.

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board › Polygraph and CVSA Forums › Polygraph Procedure › Are they even this objective?

(Moderator: Administrator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 [2]

Add Poll

Send Topic

Are they even this objective? (Read 9441 times)

lane99 New User Offline Posts: 11 Joined: Jan 21^st, 2005	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #15 - Aug 20^th, 2011 at 7:42am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Thanks for the interesting comments, guys. I might wonder if, in the certification process, the testees know, in advance, that 1/2 the charts are from deceptive subjects, and 1/2 are from truthful subjects? And, further, know that they won't be confronted with any charts that are considered inconclusive. If so, the certification process doesn't seem legitimately "blind". Rather it's bit rigged, it seems to me.


	IP Logged

Bill_Brown Very Senior User Offline Posts: 227 Joined: Apr 8^th, 2011	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #16 - Aug 20^th, 2011 at 4:08pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Examiners were not aware that 50% were deceptive and 50% were truthful. They did score Blind.


	IP Logged

lane99 New User Offline Posts: 11 Joined: Jan 21^st, 2005	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #17 - Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 5:19pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Bill_Brown wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 3:11pm: ...The Center certifies qualified examiners... Examiners applying for certification must blind-score 100 sets of charts generated in real-world examinations...fifty of which are from examinations where the subject was deceptive and the rest from examinations where the subject was non-deceptive... As I understand it, there is some "Center" which is granting some "certification" to some "examiners". And the examiners applying for certification have access to the information that is quoted above. If so, then surely the examiners know, in advance of the certification test, that, of the 100 charts they're shown, 50 need to be judged deceptive, and 50 non-deceptive.


	IP Logged

Bill_Brown Very Senior User Offline Posts: 227 Joined: Apr 8^th, 2011	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #18 - Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 5:19am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	lane99 You may assume what you will. I did not know how many were deceptive or truthful when I became certified under the Marin Protocol. I scored in the "blind" totally. Even with the that information available to an examiner how would the examiner be able to obtain a minimum of 86% to qualify. The "Center" is not a center it is ASTM. It has nothing to do specifically with polygraph other than establishing scientific standards for all industries. However, you may believe as you desire. I will not argue the point further.


	IP Logged

figs User Offline Posts: 32 Joined: Jan 20^th, 2011	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #19 - Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 2:29pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Anyone know if organizations certifying examiners under the Marin Protocol these days are using Evidentiary or Investigative Decision Rules? ASTM Standard E2324-04 doesn't say, so either the organizations themselves decide this little detail - or the examiners are using whatever decision rules they wish.


	IP Logged

lane99 New User Offline Posts: 11 Joined: Jan 21^st, 2005	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #20 - Aug 24^th, 2011 at 6:03pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Bill_Brown wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 5:19am: I did not know how many were deceptive or truthful when I became certified Fair enough. But it might have been better if you had confined your comments to that in the first place. Rather than making a very misleading sweeping generalization about what other examiners did or didn't know. Bill_Brown wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 5:19am: Even with...that information available to an examiner how would the examiner be able to obtain a minimum of 86% to qualify. Perhaps you misunderstand the significance of this. It's not that that information alone would ensure testees of an 86% score. The point is that that information alone does ensure that the test is not truly blind. But, rather, rigged in favour of producing a higher score than a legitimately blind test would.


	IP Logged

Drew Richardson Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 427 Joined: Sep 7^th, 2001	Re: Are they even this objective? Reply #21 - Aug 24^th, 2011 at 8:37pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Lane99, You say in part: Quote: "...Perhaps you misunderstand the significance of this. It's not that that information alone would ensure testees of an 86% score. The point is that that information alone does ensure that the test is not truly blind. But, rather, rigged in favour of producing a higher score than a legitimately blind test would...." Precisely. Another (of many) issue of concern would be the selection process for the 100 charts presented. Are they randomly selected from a sufficiently large pool? Or are they cherry picked to be "clear," i.e., what one former examiner use to call "Stevie Wonder" charts (even a blind man could read). If the latter were the case, obviously these would not represent "real world" charts and the accuracy involved in scoring same. Who selects these charts and what professional relationship does that person or persons have to those evaluating the charts. Is there a conflict of interest, e.g., having someone from the polygraph community (that tends to benefit from higher/inflated accuracy rates) select these charts, etc? Because ASTM (as far as I know) does not conduct polygraph exams, it might be rather easy to have such considerations glossed over.


	IP Logged

Pages: 1 [2]

Add Poll

Send Topic

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Are they even this objective?

Name:
E-mail:
Your Verification Code is:	Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Verification Code:
Preview

Message Icon:

Subject:

Message:
You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:

Text size: pt

More Smilies

View All Smilies

Collapse/Expand additional features

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:

Attachment 2:

Attachment 3:

Attachment 4:

Attachment 5:

Attachment 6:

Attachment 7:

Attachment 8:

Attachment 9:

Attachment 10:

Disable UBBC and Smilies:

Check this if you wish to disable parsing of ubbc tags and smilies.