posted 05-28-2013 12:56 PM            

We used to teach it that way, but had more problems with odd breathing artifacts when we over-processed and over scripted the introduction of the DLC.

1. introduce the topic and normalize it (this is something most if not everyone has done)
2. get the examinee's endorsement
3. advise the examinee that it is not necessary to admit or reveal anything that he or she is thinking (at this point the examinee will in fact be thinking about the thing they do not wish to reveal)
4. explain the need to answer "no"
5. practice

Lather.
Rinse.
Repeat.

After explaining all the DLCs you can explain a little more.

A. Explain the need to see how the person's body reacts and would react if the person lies during the exam.
B. Explain the need to know that the person can react - to avoid inconclusive results.
C. Explain that truthful people will not want an inconclusive result because it is not a passing result (B and C are intended to bind the truthful examinee's attention to the DLC - to help them resist the temptation to simply ignore them).
D. I have begun to also explain that it is not necessary to make one's body do anything, but that the body will do exactly what it is supposed to do if the person is paying attention to each and every test question.
E. If there is a need to further explain the psychophysiological basis of response (not FFF) then I still prefer to explain it in terms of cognitive dissonance - a type of response in the brain and body when people attempt to reconcile or maintain two different ideas or two different pieces of information that do not agree: 1) what they know about their past behavior, and 2) answering "no" to the questions during the test. (It's not a perfect application of the theory of cognitive dissonance, but it seems close enough for jazz.)

.02

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 05-30-2013 11:14 AM         

Something I learned: When people criticize the DLC for being an obvious invitation for some examinees to use CMs -that is a GOOD thing. Why? Because you will spot them easier. TexasDPS' cadre of examiners have noticed that DLC's seem to produce "cleaner" charts. The deceptive police applicant who has studied CMs will hammer the DLCs and they are quickly spotted- especially in the pneumos.

posted 05-30-2013 05:58 PM            

Can send you an APA membership application. Just send me a mailing address to editor@polgraph.org. The APA bulletin board doesn't have the traffic Ralph has had yet, but it does offer a platform for continuing exchanges.

Invitation to the APA site goes out to everyone here. The not-yet APA members need only send me a mailing address for the application.

Ralph: My final post here. Let me offer a heartfelt thanks for all you have done for our community.