I'm on 2 years of probation for a misdemeanor and had a voluntary polygraph today. My polygrapher told me about this site afterwards, and I thought I'd post my experience and hope to get some feedback. Since the test, I've done my research and am baffled about the results of my test. 

After the exam, he showed me part of the graph where it was labeled "C", "R", "C"... I'm guessing, from the little bit of reading that I've just done that the parts of the graph referred to were control question, relevant question, control. 

After the polygraph, he said that there were 4 outcomes: 1) no deception, 2) deception detected, 3) inconclusive, AND 4) no opinion. He said it was not 1-3 but was indeed #4 because I reacted MORE to the control questions than I did to the relevant!? Also, he said I was "moving around in my seat", which he stated indicated that I was trying to trick the machine. I was intentionally still as a stone.

I was uneasy and uncomfortable about the control questions, because they were just so vague. I answered my relevant questions honestly, and there was no spike. From the little bit of research I've just done in the past 2 hours, I thought that if you responded more to control questions than to relevant that you would pass???

After informing me of the "NO OPINION" outcome, he repeatedly tried to get me to admit to something that I did not do... for 15 to 20 minutes or more. After that, he told me to call him in the next couple of days if I wanted to come clean and clear my conscience. 

Now, I'm out $500 for the voluntary polygraph and will get 6 months in jail for allegedly consuming alcohol. I have to prove that I did NOT drink alcohol in this instance. It's difficult to prove a negative!

Does anyone think it's possible that he is letting me agonize over this so that I do make an admission of guilt? I don't know their techniques or strategies. It will be at least a couple of days before my attorney gets the results. 

Here are the (paraphrased) questions that were asked (3 times) in different orders:

"The test is about to begin" 
1) Is your name XXXX?
2) Do you consider yourself an honest person? 
3) Have you ever been considered an untrustworthy person? 
4) Do you intend to answer all questions about alcohol use truthfully? 
5) Have you drank any alcohol since September 2013?
6) Have you consumed any alcoholic beverage since September 2013?
7) Other than related to alcohol, have you ever been involved in any crimes?

The voluntary poly was intended to help me exonerate myself. The results are protected by attorney-client privilege and cannot be used AGAINST me (even if I failed). However, this was the only tool I had in my defense, since there were no other realistic ways to prove that I DIDN'T engage in the activity that I'm accused of. Since this is probation and not a new charge, the burden of proof lies with me.

He didn't intentionally direct me here, but during the post-test interview he asked if I had been visiting "antipolygraph" or any other polygraph sites. 

He did say that there were 4 different possible outcomes, mentioning "no opinion" as a completely separate outcome as "inconclusive". He specifically said that it was not "inconclusive". 

Unfortunately, this happened in the most harsh county in Texas, where alcohol-related crimes are as bad as child molestation or illegal narcotics.

Ex Member wrote on May 20^th, 2014 at 4:42pm:



That is very good advice Arkhangelsk!  It is past time for those who are abused by these polygraph thugs to get proactive!  Stand up for yourselves and sue the bastards!

Thanks for your input, but I have never heard of this. 

A closer look at the Federal Polygraph Handbook reveals the following:

"The following opinions are those that may be rendered when sufficient test data is collected during a PDD examination: deception indicated (DI), significant responses (SR), no deception indicated (NDI), no significant responses (NSR), no opinion (NO)."

Notice that there is no "Inconclusive" and the "No Opinion" is used when there IS sufficient data, which conflicts with your post.

Further scrutiny shows:

"Administrative Opinions. These opinions reflect the results of a series or an examination that are not based upon physiological responses to the applied stimuli such as when the examinee terminates an examination or is practicing countermeasures. In such instances, administrative opinions such as inconclusive, purposeful non-cooperation, etc., are appropriate."

also:

"C8.5.4.3. No Opinion. If it is not DI or NDI, it is NO with the exception of administrative opinions."

So, has the rest of the polygraph community added their own definitions which are in conflict with the Feds? When did this happen? Who did it and where is it documented?

Ex Member wrote on May 21^st, 2014 at 3:28pm:


Yes, Angel, the polygraph community is neither monolithic nor static.  The feds get the most run because they control most (all) research funding and the APA, but the federal way is not the only way.  The discussions between Jim Matte and APA's Barry Cushman about Matte's technique have been heated and personal.  Cut scores vary in almost every technique.  The FBI still refuses to computer score.  Some techniques still employ symptomatic questions.

The feds are slow to change.  Private examiners have more freedom and greater incentive, avoiding lawsuits, to stay current with the latest research. 

quickfix wrote on May 21^st, 2014 at 7:05pm:


Well Fix, the private examiners don't control it.  LEA guys control the AAPP.  I guess the APA membership is in control and they are typically fed and retired fed.    

I don't know any federal examiners whose APA dues are paid for by their agency.  None of the agencies I have ever worked for ever paid membership dues.  I am no longer a member, since I got nothing of value for my $125.00 dues.  It's a good ol' boys club with the same officers elected every time, who give each other the same awards year after year at their annual seminar.  Any perceived affiliation with the federal gov't is simply because some federal examiners are members.   There is no "controlling interest" over the APA.

Quote:

Sorry CLS, you got brushed aside for a while. As pailryder noted, it appears that the polygraph community is splintering and adopting their own concepts on the fly. So, making you sweat a while could indeed be some strategy of the particular sect he happens to belong to. Please share with us what the ultimate result is.