Hot Topic (More than 15 Replies) How to Pass the DoD CI-Scope Polygraph (Read 50881 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box orolan
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 363
Joined: Dec 25th, 2002
Re: How to Pass the DoD CI-Scope Polygraph
Reply #15 - Apr 26th, 2003 at 4:24am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Gotcha. Sorry about that Undecided
  

"Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." &&U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box The Shadow
User
**
Offline


Who knows what evil lurks
in the hearts of men?
 The Shadow knows

Posts: 29
Joined: Feb 27th, 2003
Re: How to Pass the DoD CI-Scope Polygraph
Reply #16 - Apr 26th, 2003 at 5:32am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George,

You wrote:
Quote:
In addition, the claim in the report that "7,688 showed no significant physiological response to the relevant questions (non-deceptive) and provided no substantive information" is simply not credible. The only way one obtains such a low false positive rate (0%) is by deeming reactions to relevant questions as "insignificant" if the examinee provides no "substantive information." Which is precisely what it appears the DoD is doing.


I am of the understanding that when a DoD TES test is determined to be NSR that indicates the three askings of the relevant questions were less significant than the DLC questions that bracketed each asking, ie.  the combined numeric score applied to the TES Test was a total of +4 or better for both questions.  A TES test that results in a determination of SR had a -3 or less at one question (total score from all three askings) or a total combined score of -3 or less for both questions (all three askings combined)  If the reactions are significant at the DLC questions it is a NSR test, if the reactions are significant at the relevant questions it is SR test.  If the reactions are middle of the road, it is a No Opinion and further testing is conducted.

The report claims that 7,688 showed no significant physiological response to the relevant questions (non-deceptive) and provided no substantive information.  Doesn’t that mean that those people passed the test and the other 202 individuals had greater responses to the relevant questions?

You may be correct in your explanation of how the term “and/or” is used in the real world; however, I just don’t think that is what the DoD report is trying to imply (purely my own opinion).  I wish to state that I'm not a big fan of the TES technique.  .  I feel that it is important not to put spin on the information.  The polygraph has enough flaws that no spin is needed to show its weaknesses and faults.  Report just the facts and let them speak loud and clear.
« Last Edit: Apr 26th, 2003 at 8:10am by The Shadow »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 6158
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: How to Pass the DoD CI-Scope Polygraph
Reply #17 - Apr 26th, 2003 at 4:56pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Shadow,

Quote:
The report claims that 7,688 showed no significant physiological response to the relevant questions (non-deceptive) and provided no substantive information.  Doesn't that mean that those people passed the test and the other 202 individuals had greater responses to the relevant questions?


If the (FY 2000) report is taken at face value, it would indeed mean that 7,688 showed no significant response to the relevant questions and provided no substantive information. However, because of the high false positive rates to be expected with CQT polygraphy, DoD's claim of a 0% false positive rate is highly suspect. Many of the 7,688 may have indeed shown no signifigant response and as a consequence have been spared a post-test interrogation and hence made no "substantive admissions." But it is hardly conceivable that such would be the case for all of them. Note that in the Department of Energy polygraph program, which, like DoD, uses the TES format, some 20% of examinees showed "significant responses" to the relevant questions, but were somehow "cleared" after additional polygraphic interrogation. (See Chapter 2 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector for documentation of this.)

The plain language of the report does not mean that the other 202 individuals all had greater responses to the relevant questions. Again, the other 202 showed "significant responses" and/or provided substantive information. I don't see any reason to suppose that "and/or" means anything other than what it means in common English usage. This chosen wording of the report would include such cases as where an examinee makes a "substantive admission" during the pre-test phase and the subsequent chart collections yield a "no significant response" outcome. The "and/or" formulation would also account for cases such as that of Daniel M. King, the U.S. Navy cryptologist who, following an "inconclusive" polygraph examination, was subjected to a coercive interrogation that included threats against his family and sleep deprivation, and ultimately made "substantive admissions." (This shameful episode was never mentioned in any of DoD's polygraph reports to Congress. You'll find it documented in Chapter 2 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.)  Note also that this "and/or" formulation appears in successive DoD polygraph program reports to Congress, and not just in the FY 2000 report.

I stand by my initial assessment that it appears that it is the presence or absence of "substantive admissions" that ultimately decides whether subjects pass or fail the DoD counterintelligence-scope polygraph.
« Last Edit: Apr 26th, 2003 at 7:19pm by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time.
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
Threema: A4PYDD5S
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
How to Pass the DoD CI-Scope Polygraph

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
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:
X