posted 02-21-2008 04:41 PM            

page 2

r

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

posted 02-21-2008 06:53 PM            

This searching POT was a demo while training a group of PO for the state court administrators office.

I had a volunteer hide a picture of her son in the room, while I left the room for coffee.

She named potential location first, then we discussed and reviewed them and ran the test later, before lunch.

Those sneaky POs conspired to hide the picture in a location that was not discussed.

You can see the kegel exercise at :50 seconds and other occasional movements at other times.

Following the test, I told her that if a sex offender gave us data like this he'd be in a bit of trouble for attempting to manipulate the test data.

Another close call.

r

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

posted 02-21-2008 09:50 PM            

quote:

---

On the searching POT (SPOT), the last question should always be "Regarding the picture, is it somewhere that I haven't asked you about?"

---

posted 02-21-2008 11:48 PM         

Gordon

posted 02-22-2008 12:36 AM         

That’s an interesting story. It brought to mind a similar experience. When I returned to the university after graduating from the polygraph school, I wanted to demonstrate the polygraph to my colleagues in graduate school. My office mate, Patricia, agreed that on the next day she would either hide some marijuana in our office building – or she wouldn’t. If she did, I’d have to run a searching POT to find where it was.

The next day I ran an Army MGQT (this was 1970, alright?). She was DI when she denied hiding any marijuana that morning (that was a no-brainer), so I ran a 3 chart searching POT which included a “somewhere I haven’t mentioned” question. The buffers were “on the roof” and “in the entrance,” as I figured these were highly unlikely places. The critical items included “in the john” and “in this room,” among several others.

I was expecting a peak. There was none. Instead, there were specific reactions to three questions on all three charts: in this room, somewhere else, and in the john.. I asked her why she reacted to all three questions. Her reply?

“Well, I swallowed a bit this morning before leaving for here. So it was “in this room,” and because it’s inside my body, it’s “somewhere else.” And when we took a break after the MGQT I took a pee, and thought, “Gee, I wonder if it’s going in the toilet?”

What I thought was a POT test was actually an R/I test. That experience, fresh out of polygraph school, really imprinted on me. I’m still constantly impressed with how reactive the body is to what’s going on in the mind.

Keep on showing us charts. It’s a great experience.

posted 02-22-2008 08:20 AM            

According to Nakayama's chapter in Kleiner, the Japanese use the SPOT when appropriate critical items are not available for the CIT. He stated there, "Some examiners include a catchall question such as 'another place than those mentioned' at the end of the sequence. This is very different from the other questions and the reaction to the question is not meaningful."

posted 02-22-2008 02:06 PM            

quote:

---

What I thought was a POT test was actually an R/I test.

---

Then what do you think if this one?

quote:

---

Peak of Tension Test Question Wording

Do you have any reason to be concerned about an investigation into:

1. Your having any physical ailment or injury?

2. Your use or experimentation with illegal drugs?

3. Your ever having sold drugs?

4. Your ever having committed any criminal offense?

5. Your ever having committed an illegal sexual act?

6. Your ever having been a member or associate of a gang, terrorist group, or subversive organization?

7. Your having been involved in any other illegal conduct that I haven't asked?

---

That is supposed to be some type of follow-up exam (when it's unclear where the issue on the R/I is, I guess) to our screening R/I here in Maine. I say it's a seven-question R (not R/I) test. I'm told that's what they teach in Canada, but that may not be current. (Regardless, some here think it is.)

posted 02-22-2008 02:33 PM            

One a sidenote... I read Kleiner's book prior to going to polygraph school. Therefore, I went to polygraph school pretty much as a non-beleiver.

The book really tears into a CQT. Some of the data has very high error rates for all techniques.

The book seemed to put somewhat of a positive spin on a DR test. My school doesn't like that test.

posted 02-22-2008 07:27 PM            

I've heard of examiners using a POT as a "clearing chart" for police pre-employment tests.

This didn't make sense to me at the time, but begins to make more sense now.

Its not really a clearing chart.

What would be the difference between a POT and R/I without the I?

r

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

posted 02-22-2008 08:04 PM            

Schools are going to some day have to outgrow what they "like" and emphasize what we know from actual study.

.02

r

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

posted 02-22-2008 08:06 PM            

quote:

---

What would be the difference between a POT and R/I without the I?

---

posted 02-23-2008 01:04 AM         

When properly constructed, a POT test has only one question that the guilty person can lie to. On a known-solution POT (POT-A in Keeler terminology), the key is placed at or near the middle of the sequence, and the subject knows the sequence in advance. Thus, there is an increase in arousal as the critical item approaches, a literal "peak of tension" when the critical item is presented, followed by a decrease in arousal afterwards. Chart analysis is based primarily on tonic changes in cardio & EDA baselines & lability at the critical item.

Searching POTs (or POT-B) are designed in the same manner. You want the guilty person to be lying to one and only one question.

In RI tests, the guilty person may be lying to any or all of the relevant questions. Chart analysis depends primarily on the presence or absence of significant reactions that occur consistently to the same question(s).

Bill Yankee (a Keeler grad and former DoDPI director) kind of liked an RI test without irrelevants (other than the initial question). He referred to it as an R-R test.

Barry, I'm with you. When a POT test is used as a clearing test, it is a POT in name only. It's actually an RI or RR test.

We can label a test anything we want, but it's the underlying principles that determine what the test really is. The same can be said for comparison and relevant questions. Just because we label a question "comparison" or "relevant" doesn't necessarily make it one.

Peace.

Gordon

posted 02-23-2008 02:32 PM            

quote:

---

Bill Yankee (a Keeler grad and former DoDPI director) kind of liked an RI test without irrelevants (other than the initial question). He referred to it as an R-R test.

---

That's why I love this site (and all you folks). I learn something new all the time.

quote:

---

We can label a test anything we want, but it's the underlying principles that determine what the test really is. The same can be said for comparison and relevant questions. Just because we label a question "comparison" or "relevant" doesn't necessarily make it one.

---

Amen.