American Polygraph Association elections will be held the week of July 5th. The office of president-elect is being sought by myself and Patrick O'Burke, director of The Polygraph Institute in San Antonio, TX.

Given antipolygraph.org's widespread popularity with APA members and others connected to the polygraph industry, I invite Mr. O'Burke to join me on this forum to debate the issues.

Meanwhile, I am posting my official 500-word APA candidate statement -- (length limited by the association's election rules) -- which has been submitted to the APA for publication.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
PRE-ELECTION STATEMENT OF DANIEL MANGAN, CANDIDATE FOR APA PRESIDENT-ELECT

The time has come for the polygraph profession to fully face reality. In 1997 the American Polygraph Association proffered a highly flattering report – The Validity and Reliability of Polygraph Testing – that spawned a lasting perception of near-perfect accuracy. 

Here's a key excerpt from that storied APA-endorsed document:

The American Polygraph Association has a compendium of research studies available on the validity and reliability of polygraph testing. The 80 research projects listed, published since 1980, involved 6,380 polygraph examinations or sets of charts from examinations. Researchers conducted 12 studies of the validity of field examinations, following 2,174 field examinations, providing an average accuracy of 98%.

The industry took that figure and ran with it.

Even after the highly critical NAS report was published in 2002, the APA doubled down on its claim of 98% accuracy, reiterating that assertion on its web site for yet another decade. 

When the APA published its meta-analytic survey in 2011 it moderated somewhat on polygraph accuracy, but even today many APA members – including industry notables who should clearly know better –  cling to that erstwhile claim of 98% accuracy.

Such hyperbole may be good for business, but is it's bad for the advancement of polygraph.

Beyond the misleading claims of astronomical accuracy, the polygraph profession continues to ignore a three-front crisis of ethics. Those issues are: victimization of innocent parties via false results; a lack of reality-based research on the effects of countermeasures; and, potentially harmful discrimination within the APA membership.

The APA's mission statement says in part, “...establish the highest standards of moral, ethical, and professional conduct in the polygraph field.” Further, the first of four separate goals that appear under the APA's stated mission is “Serving the cause of truth with integrity, objectivity and fairness to all persons.”

It seems the APA has lost sight of those prime objectives. Consequently, I am running for president-elect on this three-point platform:

• 1. A bill of rights for polygraph test subjects, similar in spirit to the checks and balances of EPPA,  to elevate informed consent to a higher level and avoid potential harms
   
  2. An ongoing countermeasure challenge series, integral to APA seminars, designed to better reveal polygraph's real-world accuracy and expose the troubling variations in examiner competence
   
  3. Equality for all APA members regarding access to educational materials presented at APA events currently restricted to select groups, eliminating the inequities of a de facto caste society

Polygraph is all too often simply about money. While there will always be opportunists in our field, the APA should continually lead by example. That means living up to the APA mission statement. Clearly, gaining respect from the scientific and legal communities requires more than merely attempting to impress those entities with gobbledygook and home-grown statistics.

It's time to eradicate the APA's self-made legacy of unrealistic expectations, and be forthright about the risks, realities and limitations of polygraph testing. 

As president-elect, I will work tirelessly to bring truth, honesty and accountability to the profession.




Daniel Mangan,  M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner
www.polygraphman.com

Earlier today I was informed by APA president Raymond Nelson that I have lost posting privileges on a private forum for examiners, www.polygraphforum.com.

That forum -- of which I've been a member for years -- is run by pro-polygraph establishment heavyweights Raymond Nelson, Mark Handler and Ben Blalock. 

The particular thread that seems to be offending some people centers on the upcoming APA elections and my candidacy for president-elect of that organization.

While my punishment is ostensibly linked to, as APA President Nelson informed me, "an unwillingness or unability [sic] to work nicely with others," I think the aforementioned polygraph establishment wonks are more interested in quashing my brutally honest campaign message, or otherwise marginalizing me as a candidate.

That's my theory, anyway.

Therefore, I'll say here what I can't say there...

If the APA membership wants another polite politician to keep a steady hand on the business-as-usual tiller, they should vote for my opponent.

But if the APA electorate is courageous enough to turn the final page of the polygraph fantasy storybook, face reality head on, and give the indu$try a much-needed swift kick in the ass, there's only one choice on the ballot.

It's time to end the polygraph hu$tle.

Wandersmann, from what I've seen, the polygraph indu$try is intellectually and scientifically in a world of its own.

In my humble opinion, some dutiful industry apologists are heavily influenced by the government's vested interested in polygraph -- although I could be mistaken. 

After all, Uncle Sugar is "all in" with the liebox.

Hey, it's just a personal observation that's based on 10+ years of experience in the polygraph trenches -- over five of them in a prison setting.

Maybe I'm wrong. 

But maybe I'm not.

In either case, I feel pretty good when I see myself in the mirror, and I sleep very well at night.

Why?

Because I'm dedicated to truth --  the truth about the "test."

Raymond,
Your input is always welcome. I hope you will become a permanent member of this discussion board. It has evolved considerably and we need more individuals like yourself to participate and contribute to a balanced discussion.

I know Pat to be a good man.  He has never done anything to harm me that I know of. I have broken bread with this man, have nothing but good things to say about him. He has been respectful to me and my wife, he will get the same back threefold from me until I know otherwise.   Dan, I wouldn't make this personal.  Keep it to the issues and to the facts.  That is my two cents.

Dan, you're my friend and I dig you, but, I'm out.

This has marks on it where it has been touched with a ten foot pole.

Ray, why do you oppose a bill of rights for polygraph test subjects designed to fully inform them about the risks, realities and limitations of the "test"? Are you a polygraph victimization denier?

While you're at it, Ray, please explain your opposition to a countermeasure challenge series -- ideally held at APA events using the same kind of mock-crime methods favored by NCCA -- pitting countermeasure-savvy test subjects against randomly chosen polygraph operators. Are you afraid the "test" would fail miserably?

As for my marketing methods, I invite interested parties to visit my website at www.polygraphman.com, read every page, explore the four links highlighted as "Recommended Reading," then decide for themselves if I am being misleading or disingenuous.

Finally, I find Ray's complaint of my alleged on-line social aggression laughable, especially in light of the antics often applied by polygraph operators during certain parts of the "test." Seems that some polygraph bullies are great at dishing it out, but just can't bear even the slightest needling themselves.

pailryder, I'm sick of dealing with on-line phantoms such as you, and getting the dodge from polygraph apologists such as Raymond Nelson.

I will respond to your inquiry after you have fully identified youself (and your identity has been independently verified), and APA president Nelson answers the questions I posed to him immediately prior to your post.

Fair enough?

Lets also remember Dan, if yes or no questions is the game he wants to play, than I say play it.   

I would sell my soul to the devil for a yes or no question session with them