posted 11-12-2004 09:56 AM            

If, during the conduct of a private examination you observe, I mean actually SEE the examinee trying to employ counter-measures (not just in the charts), do you report this information either verbally or in the written report, or both? If so, how do you word it?

How are the results explained when influenced by the CM attempt?

I'm curious of how others are doing it.

posted 11-12-2004 02:08 PM         

Yes to both, verbally and in writing, and I'll respond to your quesion in two ways. First, before the advent of CM movement detection devices, I reported the Test Data Analysis as being Inconclusive or No Opinion. I would also provide a brief statement ‘why' when an examinee engages in CM's that can "demonstrated"- hence supported- to the referral source (such as those that can be seen on the video tape itself- or on the chart in the way very slow respiration, e.i. +/- 8 bpm, or BP cuff muscular distortions ). The phrasing of the analysis would be variations of :

"After careful qualitative-quantitative analysis and numerical computation of the psychophysiological data, it is the professional opinion of the examiner Mr. ***** polygrams are inconclusive and No Opinion can be rendered to the matter under inquiry. In the opinion of the examiner, Mr**** was engaging in behaviors of purposeful non-cooperation. His respiratory rate was unusually slow and variable between 7-9 breaths per minute; therefore, indicative of being under conscious voluntary control in the absence of any other specific causes. Normal respiratory rates for an adult are generally reported in the literature as 12-20 breaths per minute. Examinees who engage in countermeasure efforts are attempting to manipulate and /or control their physiological responses in an effort to affect the test data outcome and examiner decision."

Second, with the use of CM detection devices (movement sensors- voice response times), my phrasing became something like this:

"After careful qualitative-quantitative analysis and numerical computation of the psychophysiological data, it is the professional opinion of the examiner that Mr. **** polygrams did not contain consistent specific, or significant responses to relevant questions being posed. However, a computerized algorithm designed to detect the presence of mental and/ or physical countermeasures is indicating Mr **** was engaging in a countermeasure effort. Therefore contrary to and despite the qualitative-quantitative analysis of the psychophysiological data, the examiner can render No Opinion regarding the truthfulness of Mr *****'s verbal responses. Examinees who engage in countermeasure efforts are attempting to manipulate and /or control their physiological responses in an effort to affect the test data outcome and examiner decision. Prior to the administration of the examination, as indicated above, the examiner discussed with Mr ***** the various forms of physical and mental countermeasures and he was forewarned not to engage in such behavior."

Like your self, I'm interested in what others are using as well.

posted 11-12-2004 02:22 PM            

Thanks for that info..that's a very good, descriptive way to get the CM message across. I'll be using that the next time I encounter them. Thanks.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
http://www.polygraphplace.com

posted 11-13-2004 07:55 AM            

I like it! Tastefully polite, yet to the point.