|
Author
|
Topic: Charts
|
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-29-2008 05:58 PM
  
What do you think?
I hope that worked! (Maybe the second time?)
[This message has been edited by Barry C (edited 08-29-2008).] IP: Logged |
Buster
Member
|
posted 08-29-2008 06:19 PM
Not bad...NDI too.Here are my instructions if anyone is interested. They are not as bad as they look at first. What method did you use? -------------------------------------------- -Make Icon for Paint. (just drag it out of the programs)
Open Paint Twice
Minimize Both
Open LX Software
Open PF
Select Chart Hit Print Screen Button
Go to first Paint (tabs on bottom of screen)
Go to Edit
Click Paste under edit
Center image if need be
Choose Select Icon (rectangle in upper left of screen)
Click and Drag Box to select section of chart
Put mouse inside chart
Right click
Select Cut Move to other (second) paint
Go to Edit
Click Paste
File
Save As
Create folder
Name folder
Hit Enter
Hit Enter
Name it
Save as type JPEG After save click file new
And repeat for other ms paint(click new)
Return to LX and select new section
Repeat until completed Open internet explorer
Click on favorites
Choose polygraph
Choose photobucket
Login
Upload images
Add title to each
Click save and continue
Open second internet tab
And go to bulletin board
Login
Create thread ------------------------------------------ [This message has been edited by Buster (edited 08-29-2008).] IP: Logged |
detector
Administrator
|
posted 08-29-2008 07:15 PM
Countermeasures on the Irrelevants?------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator Be sure to visit our new store for all things Polygraph Related
http://store.polygraphplace.com IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 10:33 AM
Ditto what Ralph said. On R2 he is having probs on the pnuemo...almost an 'oh crap' 3 seconds. Plus I would be curious as to what the CQs time bar said cuz he is doing a bit on those as well. GSR on CQ's is too good to be true compared to the other tracings that don't match up as well.IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 10:41 AM
R1, 2, and 3 are all the same questions with a different ending.If CMs, what is he doing? If the RQs are looked at like an R/I, are there SRs? I've got some CIT's I'll try to post later (same subject). He almost fell asleep at one point, and that's why you see movements at some points (muscle twitching). It was a long (long) day, and we were both tired. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 10:59 AM
I should add this caveat: CPS-II essentially assigns "real estate" to each channel, and it fills that area. What we see with any instrument is just a picture of the data. After charts are collected, CPS then re-displays it so it fills its space. It's designed so nothing overlaps and you see the full difference between reactions. What looks "big" is only relative.Think of it like you recorded with all your gains at 0 (a straight line - or even 10 so all you see are barely discernible bumps). Then, to review, you blow them up so that the largest reaction fill whatever area you choose, say three inches for each channel. If there's no reactivity to one question, then others may well look huge (which is why we compare ratios). You've never changed the real data: it was there all the time. Instead, you just "zoomed in" on it. IP: Logged |
ckieso
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 02:19 PM
Did you call him NDI? ------------------
"Truth Seekers" IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 07:09 PM
'He almost fell asleep at one point, and that's why you see movements at some points (muscle twitching). It was a long (long) day, and we were both tired.'
I would retest the subject.
IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-30-2008 08:19 PM
I haven't had a chance to post the CITs that followed. The "twitching" occurred at N3 in chart 3, so I was about done, and you can see he realized it and came to, so to speak.Maybe tomorrow I'll get the others up there too. I will likely have a chance for another test, but on another issue. This was on whether he exposed himself to two children. The other issue is a rape. He knew of the child case when he walked through the door; the rape he learned about from me - not the best conditions for testing. IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 01:38 PM
Can you send me the Kircher measurements?It would be great to put them into OSS-3. r ------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 02:25 PM
I'm holding on to them. I ran them through OSS2, OSS3 and the CPS-II's Probability Analysis. I'll see if I can get to the computer with all the good info later and post it all.IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 07:49 PM
Here are the CIT's I ran after the CQT:
Here it is again, detrended so you can see the small reactions blown up: 
And here's the third detrended: 
The rise at the end is when I told him the test was over and deflated the cuff. I recorded it so I could know the guy was capable of responding - and he was. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 07:56 PM
Here's the top portion of the OSS-3 Report. I can't find where I saved the original to get the rest, but I'm looking.
IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 08:05 PM
Okay, here's the rest for those who might be interested.OSS2 had a probability of its score being produced by a deceptive person at 0.04, and CPS-II's probabilty analysis had a probability of truthfulness of 95%. 
IP: Logged |
ebvan
Member
|
posted 08-31-2008 09:45 PM
I have looked at your charts several times over a few days trying to figure this out.
Only two things make sense to me.Either your firing off a shotgun at the same time you ask a neutral question or he has deduced the order of your questions and uses the N question as a signal to begin manufacturing his response to the following question. He may be counting backwards or engaging in some other mental processing activity. If he is and you want to bust him, You might try this. On the next test following the first chart where you see the neutral reactions, do a chart where you reverse the RQs and CQs so RQs follow your neutrals.
If he noticed you did this the chart should be interesting indeed. If he didn't notice the difference and he isn't screwing with you,and he's being truthful. I think he would still show reaction to the CQs. It's past my bedtime gnite all ------------------
Ex scientia veritas IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 09-01-2008 01:55 AM
I'm not convinced those CQ reactions are authentic.Look closely at C1 and C2 on chart 1, then at C2 on chart 2. More later. r ------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 09-01-2008 08:47 AM
I posted these because I'm somewhat suspicious, but I couldn't see that the guy was doing anything. The neutrals are time-barred. The CQs use "Not connected with this case involving...." If he's doing anything, it's on the neutrals. I didn't even ask about polygraph knowledge. The guy has a doctorate, so I presumed he read up. In the post test he did tell me he'd seen reports that said polygraph was not that accurate. He asked for polygraph because he knew he'd be charged without a means of showing his innocence.When I saw some of the CQs, I watched closely to see if he was doing anything I could see, and he wasn't. I was concerned of tongue-biting, but that didn't appear to be happening. I told him he had truthful charts (they are), and suggested we meet again for the remaining issues, to which he agreed. As a side note, the man probably admitted to a felony while discussing the CQs in the pre-test - a felony that could end his career if pursued. I found that odd too, especially if he knew what the questions really were. What do you think of the CITs? IP: Logged |
ebvan
Member
|
posted 09-01-2008 01:15 PM
OK, time bars on the neutrals that probably explains his reactions there.If you have charts strongly indicative of CM, and I think you do, and you can'r spot a physical technique, its probably mental. I have never been able to do much with math while attached to my instrument, but I have manufactured some pretty significant reactions with horrifying thoughts. For me an image of looking down from a high cliff or ledge will show reaction in all three channels. I hope I just haven't admitted to being the only examiner in the world who has tried to replicate CM charts using himself. ------------------
Ex scientia veritas IP: Logged |
Bill2E
Member
|
posted 09-01-2008 08:34 PM
Just a thought on mental countermeasures, have the subject repeat the key work of your question, both R & C, prior to answering. This tends to delay use of countermeasures. I have tried this in the past with good results when I thought countermeasures were being used. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 09-03-2008 04:31 PM
Take a look at something I only recently noticed. I was discussing these charts with somebody, and as I was looking them over I asked how I missed a couple things during the "live" run, and then I noticed I have an option to replay my "live" charts, so I did it. Here's a screen shot of what I saw while collecting the data:
This is from chart 1 above. You'll see that I printed and produced here (the first time) a zoomed or stretched version, which pronounced all the tracings. Interesting in that I'm seeing things I didn't "live," but the reactions look more "real" here. Those slow wave EDAs were troubling to me. It's still clear the guy was doing something on the neutrals, but I'm not as insane as I thought I was. I don't know if the print settings were default settings or I did it by accident. (I've never had to print charts with the CPS-II prior to APA this year.) IP: Logged |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
