|
Author
|
Topic: Another Doggie Post
|
Ted Todd
Member
|
posted 02-18-2006 06:38 AM
 
We seem to have a lot of animal lovers jumping out of the closet lately. There is another new post about the same type of incident.I wonder if these are just some of the Anti-Boys attempting to bait us?? Ted
IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 02-21-2006 01:27 PM
For those who don't check out Georges site it appears our fireman lied on one question (I am sure it was about fido!) and was found deceptive on another... He thinks it is rape of a girl..I am sure the question was about illegal sexual activity - and the examiner threw out a bone to him(ha)about possible rape... Too bad his examiner doesn't read this site.IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-21-2006 03:59 PM
What do you mean by lied on one and found deceptive on another?We need to remember the polygraph sensitivity / specificity problem. A person can react to R1 (even thouhg he's truthful) but not react to R3 to which he's lying. IP: Logged |
Bill2E
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 10:41 AM
Barry, Direct me to that research project. I am aware that you can react to one question when deceptive and block reaction to another lesser important question in your mind. I am behind on the portion where you react to a question you are truthful to and don't react to one you are deceptive on. Guess I'm a little confused and not up to par on this subject. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 11:14 AM
There is no one research project. The TES research, which is unclassified, showed that, and the Utah researchers found that to be the case as well. I can't think of the study off the top of my head, but it was done for DoDPI. Additionally, Phil Crewson's study (also for DoDPI) discusses it to some extent.IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 12:09 PM
I'd like to have a discussion about this.It seems to me that this is related to the old anti-climax dampening effect (terrible name - who names these things anyway) in which a subject fails to respond to a relevant question that is less threatening to his safety and well being than a more intense issue to which he is lying. The lack of response does not indicate truthfulness. This suggests, however that a person may react to a question other than the one to which they were lying. I've heard this discussed by PCSOT examiners in the past - as in someone might react to the most intest question in an set (reoffending) while lying to a less intense question. This seems troublesome to me, and I attempt to present questions of similar intensity in all tests. A recent example was a case, in which I did not conduct the exam, where the subject failed a question about using alcohol, and was found by his probation officer to be engaging in unauthorized sexual contact with a neighbor. The subject didn't fail the question about sexual contact and boasted about that after being arrested and detained. One could argue that the test seemed to work perfectly, as it drew attention to a non-compliant offender who was removed from the community before actually reoffending. The real problem with this effect is that we cannot explain it, and we do not know why it would occur only between relevant test questions. We should make sense out of this. Someone will eventually ask us... if a subject can react in a significant way to a relevant questions other than the one to which he is lying, could he also react significantly to a comparison question while lying to the relevant question. (Its always helpful to anticipate challenges and have the answers in advance of a problem.) I, for one, want to read the studies. If anyone could .pdf them and email them that would be great. I'll look for what I have. IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 01:12 PM
Barry, my post was directly from his response on the anti site. He said he lied to one and was found deceptive on another. He didn't relate which questions were used other than he expected a comparison exam and believes he was administered an R&I. Since he couldn't determine the comparisons, he controlled his breathing..... At the end of the exam the examiner said he was deceptive and then asked him about a possible rape and the wannabe Fireman took it from there. If you get a chance, check out Georges site for all his details. (this post is just my recollection from yesterdays viewing) End result - he didn't take OUR advice.I too would be interested in reading the study. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 01:21 PM
I'll look through my stuff.This is the reason many polygraph examiners oppose PCSOT or any screening exam. (When we had the PCSOT battle up here, examiners testified on both sides.) We don't know why people respond to CQs over RQs and vice versa. We just know the truthful do, and the liars don't (generally). You ask an interesting question, and even though we don't know the why when it comes to RQs, we have enough research to show your hypothetical is not a problem. Of course, one could argue that is what is taking place with false positives and negatives (but typically it's the scorer - not the test itself). We know our tests are sensitive to deception, but they lack specificty. That is, we don't know which of the RQs the liar is lying to. We just know - with some confidence - it is at least one of the RQs that is the problem. (Actually, in a screening exam, there's about a 20-30% chance error, which could be the reason for ANY reactions.) IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 01:22 PM
Thanks Taylor. We were posting at the same time. Do you have the exact site? I hate to have to read too much of that dribble.IP: Logged |
Taylor
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 02:55 PM
Barry, just so you don't have to muddle through that site - here it is...
Polygraph and CVSA Forums / Share Your Polygraph or CVSA Experience / I passed a ques. I lied on, and missed 1 i didnt Feb 20th, 2006, 2:55am
Started by Pissedofffireman | Last post by Pissedofffireman
I took a test for a County Fire Department in GA on Friday. The test was administered By a County police officer, and from what I read from this site, I was fairly certain it would be a Control question test.
However, The test consited only Irrelivent and relivent Questions, asked to me in different order, 4 times in seperate sections. Is there really any way to use countermeasures on this kind of test? I still decided to try and beat it.
I just tried to control my breathing and not think when I answered. There was only 1 question that I was lying on, and I passed that one with no reactions at all. The question that he said I was lying on however, was completley random, and I told the absolute truth. He acted like he was so dissapointed with me, and told me He was positive i was thinking about somthing during that question, and that I had to tell him what it was.
He then offered suggestions to things I may not be telling him, one of which was rape a girl. I was highly offended. I couldnt think of anything I had ever done that would even apply to this question.
I have learned First hand That this test is completely bogus and a Fraud. I would like to hear some opinions on the format used and ways to combat it though.
[This message has been edited by Taylor (edited 02-22-2006).] IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 03:17 PM
Thanks.And there's the lesson: Don't pick a question - interrogate on everything. [This message has been edited by Barry C (edited 02-22-2006).] IP: Logged |
Bill2E
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 04:08 PM
I of course would like to look up the research on this topic. The incident of having unauthorized sex with a neighbor and drinking alcohol is typical in PCSOT exams, you will be revoked for consuming alcohol, sex with a neighbor of age is less likely to result in revocaion, intensity of the question is more significant to the subject. And posting of the "Fireman" on the anti site does not interest me at all. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 02-22-2006 06:00 PM
Were it not for the fireman, we wouldn't be having this discussion, and his posts prove the point - a point we should all take into consideration when running the tests. His story lines up with the literature on the subject, literature many in the polygraph profession either ignore or don't know exists. (Not to mention, he gives a confession alongside the examiner's opinion, so it has some value to us.)I've forwarded one study to Ray, which he's agreed to post on his site for those interested to download. The TES study (or two) is available on a government web site. I'll see if I can find the link(s) for you all. If not, I have at least one of them. There's a third I'm trying to get my hands on. If I get it, I'll let you know. IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 02-23-2006 06:17 AM
You can find it here.
http://www.raymondnelson.us/c/DoDPI_The_Detection_of_Deception_for_Multiple_Issues.pdf
r
[This message has been edited by rnelson (edited 02-23-2006).] IP: Logged |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
