I have taken two polygraphs in the past so my wife has assurance I am not having sex with anyone else.  The third one taken last week I failed.  I know I am innocent.  So I began searching the internet for polygraph accuracy and such.  Once I learned more about it, I realize now, the polygraph examiner set me up to fail.
 
During the interview process, the examiner told me that he is going to ask me some control questions such as, "have you ever told a lie, have you ever done anything embarrassing, and have you ever ___"  I don't remember the last one.  I was to answer no to all three.  Not  a problem.  I can follow directions. 
 
So, during the test, the control question comes up, have you ever told a lie, I say no (lie) and think no more about it.  It was the answer he wanted me to give.  Then he asks a question have you had sex with anyone other than your wife since your last polygraph, I say no (truth).  All the while, I am stressed that this guy has the fate of my marriage in his hands.  Is he going to read the question properly.  Plus, he read a question last time incorrectly.  So I already did not trust the guy. 
 
After going through the questions twice, he told me I failed all the questions but one.  Then he does the post test interview.  Did you do ___.   I said no.  Because I had not done so.  All the while trying to offer possible reasons why I would have failed the questions.  I was angry and now scared that my marriage is over.  I said thank you and I left.
 
In his exam report, he states:  "During the actual polygraph examination (2) charts utilizing the Backster Zone Exploratory Technique (Exploratory) were conducted.  After careful evaluation and numeric scoring of the physiological responses recorded on the charts administered during the examination, the final determination is Significant Reaction Indicated.  

So I wanted to request this numeric data.  Our email conversation is below:

Me: "We received your report.  Please send the detail including all measures recorded so I may have the validity evaluated."

Mr. Keith: "I do not understand what you are requesting."

Me:  "I assume the questions and answers were recorded as well as the measurements that lead you to believe deception was indicated.  Please send that information that shows the numeric variance.  We received your written report.  I would like the computerized report from which you discerned the results."

Mr. Keith: "You are requesting charts?"

Me:  "If you were going to read a polygraph that another examiner conducted to validate the real questions against the control questions and the filler questions.  To see what happened as if you actually cared about the results.  That is the data I want."

Mr. Keith: "Rudeness will not get you very far with me. Just FYI."

Me:  "If charts are all you have, I would appreciate those.  Thank you.  Will the questions also be labeled on the charts?"

I am still waiting for his response to my request.  


The wife and I decided before taking the polygraph that if the result was perceived to be incorrect, we would schedule another exam with a different examiner.  I did go to take a second polygraph yesterday.  After the interview process, the examiner asked me why I was so agitated and angry.  I explained that I did not trust the polygraph process.  I was burned and that I detest that a flawed test is going to determine the state of my marriage.  

After he spoke for a while, he told me he would not give me a test.  That if he were to test, I would fail due to my current state of mind.  He refused payment and sent me on my way with his business card that if I wish to have an exam in the future I can call.  

So now I guess I get to re-schedule and fake kindness.  I just want this nightmare to be over.  

I should add, I have not been a saint in my marriage.  I have had a history of infidelity and the polygraph was being used as a tool to promote trust and healing in our relationship.  So I truly understand why my spouse would not believe me.  Honestly, I wouldn't believe me either.  Except, I know the truth. It was just not reflected as such on the 'test'.  I will be interested in the charts if they are ever given.

tw wrote on Sep 18^th, 2015 at 6:33pm:


TW, he had the fate of your marriage in his hands because you put it there. It appears that he used a directed lie technique with a Backster Exploratory ZCT. I'm not so sure Cleve would have approved of that. Also, I wouldn't hold my breath expecting charts; it's not going to happen.

I think you've lost enough money. Just be honest with your wife and swear that you will always be loyal from here on out. If that's not good enough for her...well, there are plenty of fish in the sea friend.

Not with marital infidelity polygraphs.

My only polygraphs were federal Counterespionage Scope Polygraphs (CSP).

I hope the other polygraphers will chime in.  Maybe Dan Mangan, pailryder, quickfix, Joe McCarthy, Bill Brown, etc. will be willing to pressure your polygrapher to release the charts so that they can independently score them.

tw, you are indeed a victim of polygraph. Had you been aware of the risks, realities and limitations of the "test," you would have likely opted out of the process.

A bill of rights for polygraph test subjects -- similar in scope to what exists for patients in the medical and mental health fields -- would have clearly identified the pitfalls of the "test" and paved the way for a hassle-free release of the data and independent review after the fact. 

For the past few years I've been vigorously advocating for such a bill of rights, but the industry politicos want nothing to do with it. Why? It would be bad for business.

Now, get ready for some irony...

These same pro-polygraph propagandists liken accuracy of the polygraph "test" to that of certain medical exams, such as film mammography. (The comparison is absurd, I know, but let that go for now.)

The point is this: Can you imagine a doctor (or medical facility) refusing to release diagnostic materials -- such as x-rays -- for review by a patient-requested third party? Of course not.

In your case, it seems the polygraph operator is reluctant to release the raw data. The obvious question is "why"? If the operator stands by his work product, there should be no hesitation. 

In my view, if the operator refuses to cooperate, he should give you a full refund and rescind his report.

About fidelity "tests" in general...

As I state on my web site www.polygraphman.com, fidelity polygraphs are usually a waste of time and money. I discourage them. That said, in some cases, they can be used as a launching pad to get a couple into counseling, which is where they should be. 

I invite you and/or your wife to call me for a fuller explanation. See the contact page on my web site www.polygraphman.com for details.

Should the examiner in your case agree to release the complete data file -- including video -- I would be happy to conduct a QA review at no charge.

Finally, absent an independent review of your polygraph "test," the results should be considered null and void.

Ark, there's an old joke in polygraph circles...

Question: What do you get when you put two polygraph examiners in the same room?

Answer: An argument.

Your point about going public with the data is well taken, and it illustrates the absurdity of likening the accuracy of a polygraph "test" to that of certain diagnostic medical procedures.

But here's the hell of it...

Today's nouveau "scientists" who are driving the polygraph-validity narrative that's currently in vogue -- mainly ex-cops or former counselors who subsequently donned (figuratively) their white lab coats --  are trying like hell to distance themselves from the hocus-pocus foundations of the "test." 

In fact, these polygraph-science hipsters have eschewed the time-honored clinical (expertise driven) model of polygraph administration and analysis, and have declared the "test" process to be a purely cause-and-effect analytical model that relies only minimally on the abilities of the polygraph operator.

So, which model is it? Clinical or analytical? 

That's a good question.

It seems to me that if the validity-preaching hipsters are right, there should be no problem with releasing the raw data carte blanche.

After all, what harm would there be in releasing the x-ray films, technical details and the scientific background of, say, film mammography to a patient seeking a second opinion?

None whatsoever.

But, if the "test" indeed relies on examiner expertise, proficiency and artfully applied technique, then those tortured machinations need to stay behind the curtain where they've been since the 1920s. 

God forbid the secret gets out.

I hope readers see the intellectual dichotomy.

Now, a note about the directed-lie "test"...

In my experience, about half of the test subjects "flatline" through the DLCQs. Why? My hunch is that since they've been instructed to lie, there's insufficient concern, conflict or consequence to spark the desired reactions. Thus, a false positive result is more likely to occur. Conversely, a DLCQ "test" is an open invitation for countermeasures.

As always, all of my comments are merely the opinion of one lowly polygraph operator.

Ark,

Quote:



I don't think cognitive load comes into play in any way in an examinee uttering a pre-agreed upon "no" to every question (relevant or comparison, truthfully on deceitfully answered) posed on a polygraph exam.  The substance of the truth or falsehood and the associated cognitive load is presented/contained within the examiner’s question and is not provided in the examinee’s answer.  If such a dialogue were presented during the examination of a witness in court, it would be properly objected to as leading the witness.

You are quite correct that there is cognitive load involved with mental countermeasures--whether it is quickly thinking of the square root of 23, the notion of being bitten by a poisonous snake, or the thought of being cheated upon by one's significant other.

Absent mental (or other) countermeasures as I have said before I believe the cognitive load relates (directly or indirectly) for both truthful and deceitful examinees to the consequences of being found deceptive to relevant question material (largely, although not entirely, of those yet-to-be-asked-about questions in a series of questions posed in unknown order).  The approximate 15 to 25 second of inter stimulus spacing (time between questions) is quite sufficient for this to occur...

I should add that I believe the latter explanation better accounts for the greater number of false positive vs false negative errors that occur with real life exams--a phenomenon which is fairly generally recognized (even by proponents of probable lie control question testing).

Concealed information testing to include David Lykken's ANS-based guilty knowledge test (GKT) clearly involves various cognitive processes, amongst others-memory encoding and retrieval.  

The fact that we can anatomically isolate where some of this occurs in the brain provides the ability with proper tools to selectively and figuratively see (different electrical potential responses as measured at specific points on the scalp with knowledgeable vs. non-knowledgeable examinees) what is going on in the brain of an examinee when the different types of stimuli are presented during a concealed information test.

Although more than a decade and a half after testifying before the United States Senate and my having called for its increased use within the FBI, I am happy to see the merits of concealed information testing being reported in an FBI-sponsored publication. If investigating agents are taught to collect, protect, and properly document privileged information from the scene of a crime, a terrorist event, etc., I think this format can be effectively and ethically applied in a wide range and high percentage of Bureau investigations. 

https://leb.fbi.gov/2014/august/the-concealed-information-test-an-alternative-to... (for the time being copy and paste the WHOLE link in your browser in order to view)

tw, it would depend a lot on what kind of releases you signed before the exam. I'm not sure refusing to turn over raw data would be viewed as a substantive ethics complaint, nor is giving a decision that you disagree with. Putting up a website alluding to possible misconduct could set you up for a possible libel suit. I stand by my previous comment that your focus should be on seeing if your marriage can be salvaged, seeking relationship counseling rather than going after the examiner. It's akin to denigrating a fortune teller whose divination failed to materialize.