posted 02-10-2006 09:09 PM            

The husband denies any affair(s) during their 20-year marriage. I have very limited information at this time but it does appear the primary issue is whether or not there has been extramarital activity.

I was reviewing information shared in the recent threads involving "Beach 2" when comments about fidelity issues were shared.

The wife has not shared the name(s) of any person(s) up to this time during their sessions. I asked the husband to request the name(s) during their next session & to have his wife present a synopsis identifying why she suspects her husband of involvement in any affair.

With more (specific) information there may be enough for a CQT. If all we're dealing with is a suspicion relative to one person or another, what are your thoughts about the validity of any exam?

posted 02-11-2006 12:17 AM         

First, you might not know, but does the wife know that her husband is seeking an exam and if so, would he support you interviewing her in order to gain more information? She could then certainly provide you with more specific information. In the end, all she might have are suspicions. What does she consider to be extramarital sexual relations? What does she want to know? Is she not concerned about some types of sexual activity (kissing, fondling, etc?)

Although it would be ideal to narrow the relevant questions down to a certain person, I believe that you could run a valid exam even without specific names. Either he has been involved in extramarital sexual relations or he hasn't. It would be no different than conducting a specific issue exam concerning any illegal drug usage. You wouldn't need to name specific illegal drugs unless there were direct allegations of using a particular illegal drug.

During the pre-test interview, I would have the examinee define what he believes to be extramaritial sexual relations. Does he believe that fondling a woman's breast is extramarital sexual activity? Does he believe that extramarital sexual activity encompasses someone masturbating his penis? Is oral sex...sex? etc.

Perhaps a simple ZCT would do:

5) Since your marriage to ..., have you ever engaged in sexual intercourse with another woman? (with anyone else?)

7) Since your marriage to..., have you ever engaged in sexual intercourse with another woman even one time? (with anyone else even one time?)

10) Since the date of your marriage to ..., has any other woman (anyone else) ever fondled your penis?

The primary relevant questions would be ones involving vaginal intercourse (assuming he is not homo/bisexual.) Of course, you could also ask questions about touching another woman's vagina, breasts, etc or questions about engaging in oral sex. You could probably construct an MGQT:

3) Since (marriage date), has anyone else ever touched your penis for sexual gratification?

5) Since your marriage to..., have you ever engaged in sexual intercourse with anyone else? OR Since your marriage to..., have you ever put your penis in any other woman's vagina?

8) Since (marriage date), have you ever performed oral sex on any other woman? (person?)

9) Since (marriage date), have you ever received oral sex from any other woman? (person?) OR Since (marriage date), have you ever touched another woman's breast?

I would explain to the examinee what you mean by "oral sex" or you could perhaps get more specific in your questions.

I would use "lie about sex" comparison questions.

Be prepared to possibly get and handle admissions of kissing other women (persons), visits to strip clubs (lap dances), flirting, etc.

posted 02-11-2006 11:33 AM            

I think this is like a screening exam, given what you know, but I'll use the example I've used before. What's the difference between the following test issues (as far a validity goes)?

Specific-Issue: Did you set that house on fire?

Screening: Did you ever set a house on fire?

(Let's just pretend we'd ask the questions like that. I realize they're probably not optimal, but I'm only trying to make a point.)

Do you think one test would be much more superior to another? I would tend to doubt it (unless the second question was one of many).

You're in much the same boat with this test, and I don't think you are in muddy water if you approach it as outlined in the above Federal ZCT.

I would axe R10. I almost never use it as it makes the test a two-issue test. In polygraph school I was told never to use it because it is less than optimal. (Actually, the director used an expletive, but I'll keep this PG-13 or below). I'd just go with a Bi-Zone or a Utah / CPC three strong RQs and three good CQs.

I dislike the Army MGQT. There is a reason they called it the DI test in polygraph school, and the research supports that intuitive assessment. (The Army MGQT is a "valid" test, but then so is voice stress analysis - at a rate of about 36%. Just because it's a valid test doesn't mean it's a good one.)

First, you've got a more murky issue when you go fishing on this issue (i.e., it looks a lot like a screening exam, which really only results in tentative findings - not good for what she's looking for you to accomplish). Then, you've got only two CQs to four RQs, which means you have 50% less data to see where one's psych set is. (Remember, one of the golden rules of basic polygraph is to spend as much time on the CQs as the RQs, and there's no real way to balance that one here.) The scales are already tipped. Add to that the research that shows asking an RQ before a CQ results in lower scores for the truthful, leading to more INCs and false positives. (Then add to that the fact that most "errors" - even with the best examiners - are to make more false positives or INCs on the NDI.)

If you are going to "fish" - which I'd not suggest - then, I'd go with an AF MGQT or perhaps a Utah MGQT. Both have the advantage of having RQs surrounded by CQs, which gives the truthful a fighting chance.

AF MGQT structure:

N SR C R C R C R C R (and you can drop an R or two if you like)

Utah Multi-issue/facet:

Intro SR N C R R C R R C N (and you can drop R4 if you'd like)

The "Intro" is, "Do you understand I will only ask the questions we have discussed?" It is not a sypmtomatic, and it shouldn't be introduced like one.

I'd consider using lies, hurt/harm, immoral acts, or even guilt/shame CQs. If you're worried about deviating from tradition, then use the Utah or CPC A-Series as they would be appropriate there.

In the end, I'd stick to Ned's RQ 5 & 7, and then add a third strong RQ to stay with single-issue (which would work perfectly in a Utah or CPC single-issue ZCT). With that, you have a test now. Just make sure it will work for the client(s).

posted 02-11-2006 01:46 PM         

I should have clarified the "sexual gratification" aspect of the question, but it was late and past my bedtime.

In fact, I was thinking of the "physician" explanation when I added that element to question. I have had a few examinees bring this up during both pre-test and post-test phases of the exam. One could certainly wait to add it if the examinee brings it up or you could cover it during your question review during the pre-test interview.

I know this has been covered in a previous thread, but it would be similar to an examinee stating that they had touched their child's vagina in order to apply medication or when they say that they bathe a young child and wash their genitals.

posted 02-11-2006 04:32 PM            

Another examiner I know talks about all the instances he can - if possible - and asks, "Other than what you told me, have you...?" I see problems with that one too, but I throw it out to you as an option in perhaps one of your next hundred tests. (It also might confuse the CM gang, as it starts out just like they'd expect a CQ to start.)

posted 02-12-2006 01:13 AM            

I'm confident I can structure a solid exam with the information I've received. I'll have to wait to learn about the wife's concerns to know the best questions that will be available to me.

Barry - I was considering the ZCT (using) RQ10, a "secondary relevant" question. You indicate you would "axe 10 - less than optimal" but in your last paragraph you stated you'd "add a third strong RQ." Aren't we talking about the same Q position (10) with the third RQ?

How are scoring cut-off's changed if RQ10 is eliminated? Based on what I know up to this time I wasn't considering the MGQT as it doesn't appear there will be enough information to work with.

I should know after an interview with the wife if this/any exam will resolve her concerns. I would hope being referred by their counselor; and having exam questions that address her concerns will resolve this issue. If, after interviewing her there doesn't seem to be a solution I'll pass on the exam.

To use the best possible questions we're obligated to ensure the examinee knows what is meant by every word in every question. A word must be changed, especially in a RQ, if they don't accept/understand the word as is intended/needed for resolution of the issue.

Taylor, I agree with your explanation when asking a question regarding touching for sexual gratification. If the words are not reviewed and understood as intended there could be a problem. Everything being thoroughly explained during pre-test would hopefully, but unfortunately not always, eliminate the "rationalizations" and off-the-wall reasons for a DI. I've heard more unusual reasons for a DI in sex cases than in most other type exams.

posted 02-12-2006 08:33 AM            

I'd just make R10 a third strong-relevant (another form of 5&7). Off the top of my head, I don't think DoDPI allows that, but the same format is used by the Virginia School of Polygraph, and I think, they use a primary OR secondary relevant there. (They us a -7/+5 cut-off with no spot totals, last I knew.)

To avoid those technical "problems," I'd use the Ferderal Bi-Zone, or a Utah test to avoid anybody saying you didn't do it right.

Utah single-issue:

Intro (see above) SR N C R N C R N C R

The cut-offs are +/-6, ignoring spot totals.

posted 02-12-2006 10:55 AM            

If there was no involvement in a sex act o/s marriage it's not likely his genitals were touched for a sexual reason at R10. This is not an extension/form of R5&7 but not likely one can be done w/o the other.

Of course, there are many reasons this theory for R10 would not work and I will try to ID the problems during pre-test. If the examinee starts coming up with too many possibilities regarding how (sex w/o touching) can be performed I'll likely just drop it. I'll stay with involvement in a sex act w/anyone and not get concerned with (how) the act is completed.

END.....

posted 02-12-2006 06:34 PM            

The Utah scoring system hasn't changed since the Bell et al article published in POLYGRAPH's special scoring edition in 1999. They don't consider spot scores. I don't know if they used to or not, but they don't now (in single-issue tests, that is). If Lou is reading, maybe he can tell us.

You can use most any format you want and call it a Utah test as long as you stick to the principles supported in the Utah research. (I don't suggest you make your own, but my point is that there isn't "one" Utah test.) I'm not sure where Jim Matte's "Bartlett" and "Honts" versions come from. (I don't have his book in front of me, but I suspect they just happened to publish studies or make presentations using those formats.) Dr. Raskin told me they are all Utah tests - no names. Honts told me the "Honts version" in Jim's book is wrong in that it is a PLCQ or DLCQ test - not just a DLCQ test as he lists it.