|
Author
|
Topic: No Show/Refusal Rate
|
Buster
Member
|
posted 02-18-2008 06:29 PM
  
Is there any research on this? I had the detectives stop calling me after the event happened --usually because they interrogate. However, now noone shows up for the tests. My last 5 tests were no shows including a suspect in several car B+E's today. My guess would be that my refusal/no show rate is 65-70%. Does this sound right for it to be that high? Last five tests: B+E to residence---subject agreed to take test, then backed off, then confessed to detective when I got there. Accepting counterfeit money-- scheduled test, no call no show, then she called later and said her ride was not available. The "Russians I spoke about"--they went to get her at work and and she would not come back to station. B+E to several vehicles---They had a good suspect and interrogated him Friday and scheduled a polygraph for today@1000 hours, he agreed, then no call, no show this morning. No answer on his cell phone. Am I the only one with this problem? I know PCSOT and PE tests at least the examiner has some leverage. [This message has been edited by Buster (edited 02-18-2008).] IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 02-18-2008 07:24 PM
I think in polygraphs you are always going to have a no-show / cancellation issue. If your exams are LE – what can you do? Work with the investigators but the examinees can always lawyer up or find AP. In the private you can try to protect your time with pre-payment/agreements. I do not conduct fidelity/domestic issue exams without pre-payment and inform them if they no show or do not give 24 hour notice they forfeit their payment. Makes them think real hard before they send me money. I charge pre-employments at half price if the applicant pulls a no show. Sometimes parolees abscond when the heat is on but I haven’t had that big of a problem with them....maybe 3 no shows in a year. Regardless, if they don’t show up for the poly I know they are going to be arrested. It is too bad because it is a waste of our time - but without some type of contract/agreement and the readily available internet (AP and other sites) you cannot completely avoid these problems.
IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-18-2008 09:00 PM
Back in my time of domestic testing and lawyer risk assessment, I had an enormous no-show rate. At the risk of being negativistic, the private polygraph business is kind of crummy. Conversely, PCSOT saved my business, and it saved my soul----as in it made me amp-up my standards as the public stakes became yet even more serious (by my estimation anyway)than the who-smoked-how-much-pot, and who-is-cheating-on who "stuff."[This message has been edited by stat (edited 02-18-2008).] IP: Logged |
Ted Todd
Member
|
posted 02-18-2008 09:42 PM
Buster,I have found that when you ask a suspect to take a polygraph, most will say "sure" even if they have no intention of taking one. Once a suspect says "yes", you had better be prepared to do it now! If you give them any real time such as a day, to mull it over, they will become your next no show if they are guilty. I have found that most truthful subjects don't care if the poly is today, tomorrow or next week. They are eager to get it done and clear their name. Another problem is the investigators tend to heat the guy up pretty good and then expect you to do a polygraph. You need to train your investigators that if they want a poly, they can't interrogate the guy first. Ted IP: Logged |
Buster
Member
|
posted 02-19-2008 06:31 AM
Ted, thats my catch 22. If you give them a chance to think about it, they no show. But, most examiners like to schedule an exam and all detectives seem likely to interrogate first.This is what I learned from an examiner before I was trained. He said, "I tell them not to interrogate first, but they never listen" -- "Then, they call me." I think its natural that if you are a non-examiner and handling a case, you want to take a shot at the suspect yourself. I worked for several years before I was an examiner and I kind of understand/agree. I think in LE there is more pressure to get a confession then there is to just tell them the subject is truthful or deceptive. I said this before (obviously I would never mention this in public) it is unethical but sometimes its better to do the exam the night of the crime and try and get the subject through the test, then go for the confession. Because if it is a very serious crime, there is no chance they are coming back. IP: Logged |
Ted Todd
Member
|
posted 02-19-2008 09:48 AM
Buster,Give me some examples of when it would be unethical to conduct a poly right after the crime. Ted IP: Logged |
J.B. McCloughan
Administrator
|
posted 02-19-2008 11:10 AM
Buster,I have seen a rate of no-show and cancellations that range from 40-60%. The average is approximately 50% but some anecdotal evidence I have suggests that a shorter wait for an examination can reduce this to lower than average. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-19-2008 11:24 AM
Buster, you definitely have a real issue with people interrogating your examinees before testing them. The spoiling nature aside, I personally am very protective over my examinees (as you are too I imagine) and it would make for a difficult situation for you to demonstrate your abilities and gain even a teaspoon of repoirte.Once again, money alters the exam as it is in your business' interest to test these freshies, as if you wait, there'll be no test----hence no money. Don't you hate when personal interest$ interfere with professional interest? I do, and I feel for ya brother. 
IP: Logged |
Buster
Member
|
posted 02-19-2008 11:57 AM
You guys answered Teds question. Unethical is to have me show up the night the suspect is brought in and do a test. 2 Reasons-- (1) He may be very tired (2) He may have been interrogated. I put a stop to that, thats when I get no shows. I hate to say this, but I used to do it (10-15 times) and it works. What I mean is that I get a confession. The guys signing my checks want confessions. I set written rules and the guys listened. When they interrogate, they let me schedule an exam a couple of days later. Here is the problem, if I was there that night maybe I get the guy to confess and there is an arrest. Now, they schedule an exam, he doesn't show, but there is also no confession. If the person is innocent, I guess they show, but they usually have a solid suspect that just didn't roll. A few of my tests they did want to know if the person did it or not and I did the test sucessfully, but most of the time they have a good idea who it is, so I confirm it and go for the confession. BTW, each of you made valid points. One other point worth mentioning is when I would go in the night of the crime and start setting up the instrument, some guys confess right there before I even start the exam. Sometimes they confess to the detective to avoid the test, sometimes during pretest review. I don't get credit for a test (which I need trying to crawl to that 200) but the bosses love it. IP: Logged |
chaz
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 09:54 AM
Our firm has a no show rate of only 2% probably because pre payment is required and they are told that if they no show on the day they will not get a refund.Private testing is here to stay so it would be nice if some people in the forum would give fidelity type testing more support. In our country there is no sex offender testing or pre employment testing. Infact testing of employees (private and government) in our state is banned by law.
Law enforcement or Government do not use Polygraph at all. So there is nothing left to do but private tests and most of it is fidelity. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 10:41 AM
Hi Chaz.
I recken you're referring to me (folks are come'n at me left and right lately)as I am definetly one of the critics.
Domestic testing is not here to stay----as a matter fact polygraph isn't here to stay, as nothing in the high-tech era is here to stay.
But to your point.
Publicly, I support domestic testing as a modality, but I do have some caveats----but you know, ALL testing has similar caveats. An example is that you don't administer a criminal specific test to someone who is just recovering from quad-bypass surgery. Does that condition mean that to agree with that, ya don't "support" criminal specific testing? Of course not. Polygraph is a sticky business----and if it weren't so, than polygraph would be all the rage down under throughout various municipalities. As I understand it, polygraph is a pariah in Australia, not because it hasn't succumb to "diffusion" into the local culture, but because it is shall we say, a "hair trigger test." We yanks aren't so cautious.
I support you Chaz, we support you chaz, and the industry itself supports you. I personally might be a little more gun-shy regarding that "hair trigger test" though.
------------------
One out of Four people in this country is Mentally Unbalanced.
Think of your 3 closest friends........
If they seem ok then you're the ONE......
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 02-20-2008).] IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 11:50 AM
I agree with stat, only time will tell whether polygraph is replaced by some new disruptive technology.A also agree that polygraph is sticky business. Chaz, your own experience should tell you that some form of regulation is in order for private examiners who do fidelity testing. Yours is not the first time, and probably not the last time, that some member of the media has snookered an examiner into looking bad in public. The problem is that it makes the whole profession look bad. Your argument that there is not enough other work is weak. Its the same argument for why youth get involved in organized crime/gang activity (such limited other opportunities). BS. Its the same argument for things like slavery in past millenia (how else we they get all the work done). These are no longer acceptable reasons for endorsing an activity. So, why not weigh in on the real argument... - How will it help polygraph the polygraph profession to continue to neglect to regulate ourselves (in this area)?
.02
r
------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 12:06 PM
Yeah Chaz------have any ideas for safe guards, do-able standards, and effective results weight?I am sure you have some ideas, right? One thing that comes to mind, is that families are broken apart due to what, failed polygraph tests, or infidelity--or both. Empirical studies suggest that 2 in every ten of your tests that are not inconclusive, are erronious. I both like those odds and hate them at the same time. How much weight are your clients giving your tests, and don't you feel a degree of pressure to assure your hiring consumers of a high accuracy rate?
It just goes back to us needing a good pamphlet written by a therapist examiner to explain some specific FAQ's about what to do with the results. I dunno.
 IP: Logged |
chaz
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 12:37 PM
I hear ya all and I do see your point of view.However, I cannot see the parallel in comparing fidelity testing vs. doing other testing and youths getting involved in crime for lack of alternatives/opportunities.
Likewise with the other example.
Why do you view fidelity testing as 'crossing over to the dark side/wrong side. Yes I agree we have more problems with a Di examinee in a fidelity case than we would with a di examinee in law enforcement referred poly. I also do not think that Polygraph will ever phase out. Technology will only enhance it. Let me ask you this:
What if sex offender and pre employment testing gets banned in the United States--just what if?
(I know that Stat will probably say he will find another calling).
IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 01:17 PM
Buster: quote:
You guys answered Teds question. Unethical is to have me show up the night the suspect is brought in and do a test. 2 Reasons-- (1) He may be very tired (2) He may have been interrogated. I put a stop to that, thats when I get no shows.I hate to say this, but I used to do it (10-15 times) and it works. What I mean is that I get a confession. The guys signing my checks want confessions.
Remember that ethics is about 1) what bad thing happens as a result of an action or decision, 2) whether or not an action is violation of some universal ethical principle, and 3) whether an action in contradictory to whatever is stated as necessary. It may not be as "unethical" to conduct those exams as you think. Not conducting them might be argued to result in more bad things (bad guys walk, you don't get paid, investigators don't make arrest, community at risk, etc.) than would happen if you conduct the exam (confession, arrest, $, removal of threat to community). There is no universal ethical principle at play here (unless you are some type of Kantian pacifist who worries about interrogation itself as a form of rights violation). Torture may be unethical. Interrogating people by approved means is not. Interrogating a developmentally delayed or mentally ill person may be a problem. Confrontation of non-psychotic criminals is not. If you don't get a confession, there is no arrest. So, there is no real argument about any lasting harm to the "AP false-positive whiner." As long as you didn't torture the person, any resilient person will fully recover from the inconvenience of the interrogation. They will not become PTSD, and you will not have fractured their self-concept, world-view, attachment, or lifestyle. So, examining a criminal suspect immediately would be "unethical" in a declarative sense, if we say it is unethical. Similarly, if we, as a profession, were to consider the matter and reach the best possible recommendation that though not ideal is still acceptable (all things considered), it would not be unethical, in a declarative sense. While it may not be "ideal," that concern may not need to rise to the level of an ethical concern. .02 r 
------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
J L Ogilvie
Moderator
|
posted 02-20-2008 06:23 PM
I haven't been reading much lately but this thread caught my attention so I thought I would pass this on.There is an examiner here who does fidelity tests and then does period tests to see if the person is staying faithful. Talk about job security. Thats it. Sorry I haven't been around much but I do check occassionaly. Jack ------------------
IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 07:27 PM
Who the hell would want to be in a relationship where you or your spouse would want to undergo regular polygraphs. That must be some relationship! Chaz stated: 'Private testing is here to stay so it would be nice if some people in the forum would give fidelity type testing more support.' From what I have read on this forum the only common element is those that have been around a while believe therapists should be involved. There are so many other deeper issues involved in fidelity tests which is why I will not conduct the exams w/o some outside therapeutic involvement. Taylor IP: Logged |
Martin E. Burke
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 08:56 PM
I have never heard of it called a period test. Once you have cleared the air with a pre paid fidelity test. It is time to collect a deposit for a future test. The insecurity factor takes hold the older one gets & the more disposable income one has thoughts & suspicion of what's next is primary in the brain Like the little blue pill do you take one or more.
Be prepared to conduct immediate evening tests, due to a cancelation, consider accepting Paypal for all polygraph tests.IP: Logged |
sackett
Moderator
|
posted 02-20-2008 10:30 PM
Jack,good to see you back... I guess that guy could start issuing his own credit cards and begin reporting credit responsibilities as well. If someone has a bankrupcy, he could then help people get their credit back... LOL Jim IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-20-2008 10:55 PM
FYI, taking credit cards isn't a slam dunk, as if your examinee doesn't like the results, they can and sometimes do a "charge back."On the topic of the subjecting of a spouse to periodic polygraphs, I run several charts with breakouts on my wife on our wedding anniversary every year. It makes our love strong. 
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 02-20-2008).] IP: Logged |
J L Ogilvie
Moderator
|
posted 02-21-2008 09:03 AM
I tried testing my wife one time but she broke the restraints. Now I am waiting for her to get old and weak so I can try again, assuming I am still alive.The funny thing about the guy doing periodic tests on follow up is that the couples they showed seemed to be happy that he was helping them. That is strange. Jack ------------------
IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 02-21-2008 09:21 AM
As Ray once said, "polygraph isn't for public consumption".....and I think a key example of that is the dreaded inconclusive. In fidelity testing, when a spouse recieves an inc, despite explanations to the contrary, they typically take the call to mean that their spouse "failed" the test---as in their minds, they hear "he didn't pass" versus "I couldn't make a solid call from the data." JL, nothing suprises me about what kinds of activities couples will claim is helpful to them. I have met offenders/examinees who swear by "swinging/swapping" as good vitamin for intimacy-----which the data shows to be a crock of steaming HS. 
------------------
One out of Four people in this country is Mentally Unbalanced.
Think of your 3 closest friends........
If they seem ok then you're the ONE......
IP: Logged | |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
