Police Pre-employment Testing (CQT): Need current info!

Thanks for stopping by our bulletin board.
Please take just a moment to register so you can post your own questions
and reply to topics. It is free and takes only a minute to register. Just click on the register link

Polygraph Place Bulletin Board

Professional Issues - Private Forum for Examiners ONLY

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Police Pre-employment Testing (CQT): Need current info!
Dan Mangan Member	posted 06-16-2012 09:53 AM I never got into pre-employment testing for local PDs. The market was all sewn up in my area, so I concentrated on other aspects of polygraph. But now, strangely enough, the phone is ringing. I'd like to review some current materials for CQT-based pre-employment testing: templates, targets, guidelines, whatever. (I do not see myself going the R/I route.) Anyone have anything? I'd really appreciate your insights, too. Thanks, Dan IP: Logged
Barry C Member	posted 06-16-2012 02:50 PM Out of curiosity, why wouldn't you go the R/I route? IP: Logged
Dan Mangan Member	posted 06-17-2012 08:39 AM Barry, Polygraph is, generally speaking, biased against the truthful -- and I'm speaking of CQTs. The I/R technique is even worse in that regard. It's a throwback that's now in vogue largely because of concerns about CMs. The I/R technique's specificity suffers, it would appear, because there are no controls for the truthful test-takers to react to. Isn't that why Reid invented the CQT? You make a convincing argument in your "I/R Techniques That Work" presentation, but I am more comfortable with the CQT format. (You know how I feel about collateral damage.) Dan IP: Logged
lwells Member	posted 06-17-2012 03:40 PM We use DLST. IP: Logged
Barry C Member	posted 06-17-2012 05:55 PM But Dan, that is the very why the R/I is used. A good program uses a test that has high sensitivity. We're not so concerned about specificity at the first stage. Pre-employment screening, when done correctly, is more than just a test. I don't know why anybody in the private world would want to do them. They take a long time, and they pay peanuts. Done correctly, people are not disqualified based on reactions alone at the first stage in pre-employment testing. I'm still ambivalent about CQTs (and the DLCQT) in screening process as the first hurdle. Without changing things up, I think all we do is "confirm" our errors. I can't take the time here, but this is worthy of discussion. If you think of pre-employment screening as nothing more than testing, you miss out on the big picture, which, in my opinion, is more important. The R/I, done as best as we know how, seems to do as well as the CQT in screening. It's not perfect, but nothing is. There are some benefits of the testing protocol that can be helpful to examinees. Maybe that puts the false negative problems back into play, but like I said, it's a good conversation to have - even better "live." IP: Logged
Dan Mangan Member	posted 06-17-2012 09:08 PM quote: but like I said, it's a good conversation to have - even better "live." OK, Barry. I'm there. My PCSOT gig at the NH State Prison ends on 28JUN -- they cut the funding, in spite of a projected twofold increase in tests (go figure) -- so I'll soon have plenty of time to drive to the Pine Tree State. Let's talk. I'll PM you. Thanks, Dan [This message has been edited by Dan Mangan (edited 06-17-2012).] IP: Logged
Dan Mangan Member	posted 06-19-2012 12:25 PM Re: Statement tests Clambrecht and Bill2E... Would one (or both) of you guys please post a sample statement used in conjunction with LEPET? I have some pre-employment tests lined up and I want to look at a few different options. Thanks, Dan IP: Logged

All times are PT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | The Polygraph Place