posted 12-07-2011 09:25 PM            

Current method:

* Poly occurs at the end of the hiring process.

* Examinee has completed the standard personal history book and then later, completes another booklet in presence of background investigator. This book is focused on theft, drugs etc..Poly is scheduled for later date.

* Pre-Test: Review/correct booklets etc..Examinee writes about 10 sentences on a sheet of paper.This is the "Polygraph Certification Form"

Examples:
"I have stolen no more than ____ dollars"
"I have only used marijuana ____ times"
"I have not falsified my application/books"
Etc...

This form is signed and kept in their possession

You Phase

R5 Did you falsify your polygraph certification form?

R7 Did you falsify your polygraph certification form you completed today?

* Standard PLCs concern lying to avoid trouble, to loved ones etc...

* ESS scoring(+2 or more NDI; -4 or less DI)

posted 12-09-2011 12:14 AM            

you may be getting "NDI" results but non-deceptive to what? This seems to be typical bastardization of a specific issue technique. This was probably arm chair developed by a predecessor while drinking beer and watching CSI...

I am not a scientist or researcher, and I have used the statement test successfully; in very emotional specific issue protocols, but for a pre-employment test, it seems vague and more open endedly diverse than necessary. Like Barry suggested, where do you go with the post test if they show "deception." If you obtain a DI, is your HR simply DQ'ing them?

I could argue this is not a specific issue exam but an inappropriate multiple, multi-issue examination due to the number of issues; not just lying on this form.

My suggestion is to review several agencies' pre-employment test techniques, perhaps agencies suggested by your change resistent supervisors and develop a hybrid (within structured requirements) and let your bosses think the "new and improved" technique was their idea...

The problme with, "we've always done it this way and it works" is, that it resists change and presents a close minded attitude towards an ever changing profession. Hell, with attitudes like that, lets do away with movement sensors and numerical scoring; you'll know when they are lying, simply b/c you've been doing this for years... right?

Deceptive/Truthful/Indefinite...sound familiar?

posted 12-09-2011 04:22 PM            

quote:

---

lying on the statement IS a "specific issue"

---

I'm not so sure I agree. When we speak of a specific issue, we tend to mean there was a known event that occurred and we have reason to believe the person in front of us may well have done the naughty behavior. That is, there's reason to suspect the person did the issue under investigation. In those situations we ask, for example, "Did you steal any part of that missing money?" It's straight forward and unambiguous.

That's not the case with your question. You're asking vague screening questions, which you reduce to statements that are - if those are the real statements you listed - highly subjective. Then you ask, in essence, if the person lied to any of the polygraph questions, once removed by the statement. (I might have just confused myself.)

You're pushing my memory, but there were one or two "studies" in which statement tests were used. I think Stan Abrams did one, but it's been criticized as not being very good, and I think it was a small number of people.

Is there a lot of emotion tied to the memory of listing information on your polygraph form? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not. If we approach polygraph from a fear perspective, the test should work, but we know fear isn't necessary. When we talk about salience, the question is "Why is a question salient?"

When a memory is encoded, the emotions experienced at the time of the memory are part of whatever the memory is. So, when a bank robber robs a bank, his memory of doing so will include the adrenaline rush (or whatever you want to call it) he experienced at the time of the event. When he recalls the robbery, those emotions - and the related physiological arousal - will return with the memory. I suspect that's one reason that some questions are salient. (The encoding specificity principle is well established in the literature if you want to look into it more.)

If the person has lied in the process, lied on forms, lied to you, etc, is lying on that form going to cause whatever it is that causes a liar to respond? It may on occasion, but is it reliable? I don't know.

Why don't you try a little experiment? Create a second form and only list CQs on it, and then run a CQT on those and see what happens. You'll have to do several to have any meaningful results, but I suspect you'll begin to have some more thoughts on this issue in just a short time - when you don't end up with 100% INCs as you'd predict.

You're asking once removed RQs against direct CQs, and I have a lot of reservations about that since the RQs are all over the place and somehow supposedly represented by that one RQ. If it works, why not run all CQTs in the same fashion? Why limit it to screening exams?

It's possible to get a stretch of 14 examinees who are truthful, but I've never seen it. Why not run that test and a LEPET, DLCQT, etc, and do some comparisions? (You won't be able to pull of my above experiment all that easily in a real setting.)

posted 12-09-2011 08:57 PM            

you wrote, "What's the accuracy of a test in which you reduce 10 RQs to one single one?" That is exactly my point. A statement test is to reduce emotionality, and by indirectly asking the "did you do it" question, i.e. "Did you (do anything to) cause the death of your daughter?"

The pre-employment, as you aptly stated is conjoining 10 different issues, which I believe removes it from realistic application as a specific issue test, i.e. "are you lying on that form..."

I stand by my suggetsion previously stated. There are a lot of ignorant (non-examiner) supervisors who don't "get" polygraph. We all need to educate them the best we can.

posted 12-10-2011 09:37 AM         

I have used the statement test in the past with good results.....but only when the results are NDI. Example of a written statement:

On June 14,2011, I did not shoot John Williams. I never handled a gun that day and was never on his property".

With no SR it looks pretty good but with SR you are stuck on what caused the SR. When a statement test is requested, I always explaint the potential problems with a DI exam to the client. I have also never used the statement test in pre-employment exams because it just creates more work in the long run.

Good to see this board is back up and being used.

posted 12-12-2011 08:42 AM            

you make a point wihtout saying it directly. For those not familiar, statement tests are not generalized tests on a full suspect or victim statement.
These "special" statements are short and comprehensive to the issue without feelings, hypothesis or conjecture.

Many of us understand that not only do suspects lie, but victims lie too. If not to sound more credible they do so to cover other aspects of a crime, i.e. exmbarrassment, stupidity, etc.

This is the "trick" to a successfful statement test. Addressing the crime and no more. How this process works for 10 various preemployment test topics, I do not know.