posted 04-08-2010 07:39 AM            

from: Yahoo answers.com
The inaccuracy of the Polygraph test?
In my college physiology class, we were introduced to a polygraph machine, and had the opportunity to take the test. Our professor was measuring the pros and cons of the polygraph, and testing it's reliability. When our polygrapher came in, he explained exactly how it works, and explained it's more trickery and mind games. It's obviously not a "lie detector".

He also explained the three types of questions; irrelevant, relevant, and control. He explained that the "test" determines if you're "lying" by measuring your heart rate, blood pressure, breathing and sweat. He also mentioned that if your vitals measure higher on your relevant questions vs your control questions, then it considers it being a "deceptive" answer. He then explained how to read higher on your control questions vs your relevant questions in order to pass the test.

He provided the class with basic counter measures to increase vital stimuli on the control questions, and then eventually had several volunteers from the class take the test.

The special on the polygraph lasted for about a week.

He had the volunteers take the test first, without telling them how it works, and then after explaining how it works, and how to pass it.

Everyone who took the test after his introduction to it, passed.

If it's that easy to pass, how reliable is it for Law Enforcement agencies to use this test on their applicants, if it's such a walk in the park to pass given you have the knowledge?

------------------
"Truth Seekers"

posted 04-08-2010 10:07 AM            

Worse yet, there seems to be nothing we can do to prevent or stop it. We as a professional couldn't even stop the promulgation, promotion and acceptance of CVSA and associated B.S. from infiltrating our countries law enforcement agencies and court systems.

posted 04-08-2010 12:48 PM         

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't agree that "we as a profession" have put up a very good fight against CVSA or the polygraph pundits. Sure, AAPP and APA put out an opinion paper and a nifty brochure on CVSA. I'll bet there are boxes of those brochures sitting in an office somewhere.

The bottom line, is that the CVSA folks have done a superior job of marketing their product. Quite frankly, they have been kicking our ass for a long time while "we as a profession" sit back and watch it happen.

Have you ever noticed that AAPP, APA, and NPA do not have a public relations chairman or a media relations position? Why?

How many times have you sat and watched the Chief of Police speak at a press conference telling the public what a great job his agency did in solving this high profile homicide. Funny how the Chief never makes any mention of the fact that a well conducted polygraph exam is really what solved the case!

Unless "we as a profession" form a united front (APA,AAPP,NPA, DACA and the state associations) and start informing the general public and legal community about the value of polygraph, we will continue to suffer the frequent beat downs that we are presently enjoying.

posted 04-08-2010 03:53 PM            

We set up a web site that has all the research and court cases on CVSA which I set up and host. We have the brochure you mentioned and the video and CD for any polygraph examiner anywhere that wants to use it to make our case to his local Chief or Sheriff to make them smart on CVSA.

Hell, when I was President of the APA, my local county Sheriff bought a CVSA even after I made him smart about CVSA. He said it got confessions and was cheaper than polygraph!

CVSA has spent a ton of money, they have hired retired generals and have hired lobbyist to further their products. The APA and the AAPP don't have enought money to pay for the gas CVSA uses in their helicopter and jet much less match them in media and advertisement purchases.

Those brochures are in a box at the APA national office and they are available to any member to hand out and use. We also mailed them to virtually every law enforcement agency in the country at considerable cost. To Lafayette's credit, they paid for the printing and storage of the brochures.

Fighting CVSA and promoting polygraph has to be done by polygraph examiners. Over half of your APA dues goes toward publishing the magazine and Journal and paying for the basic operation of the organization.

posted 04-08-2010 04:43 PM         

I agree and we should do something more especially at the examiner level. Our efforts have fallen short and that is why I feel we need an organized industry effort. I do remember the heat you guys took over the media firm. I am not suggesting we hire another one either. We have a lot of local talent in our ranks and we should take advantage of it.

I know damn good and well that hundreds of polygraphs are being completed everyday with great success. We just need to find a way to channel this information into the public eye and the media as well.

I plan to brainstorm this concept with my state association. I would suggest that all state associations do the same. Once we have some good ideas, we should present them to the national associations and get something up and running.

I beleive the media would eat this stuff up! All we have to do is find a way to feed it to them.

Ted

posted 04-08-2010 07:05 PM            

Talk about perfect timing. At our last association meeting (missed you being there) we discussed what we could do to educate local law enforcement and the APA brochures were discussed. I'll get in touch with the National Office tomorrow and see if Robbie can send me about 1000 of the brochures so our state association can mail them out in North Carolina.

If anyone wants some recent studies on CVSA, Frank Horvath gave a great presentation at the last APA in Nashville. I put it out at our last state meeting. If you were in Nashville at the APA conference his presentation is on your thumb drive

[This message has been edited by rcgilford (edited 04-08-2010).]

posted 04-11-2010 10:02 AM            

I do think it would be wise to have a media position on the APA and AAPP Boards to publish articles, do promotions when we solve cases and keep up the fight against CVSA.

posted 04-11-2010 02:56 PM         

If Skip would post a link to his CVSA web site that would be great. I think that every examiner that has a web site should include the link on their site.

I wonder if Ralph could do the same on this site?

posted 04-12-2010 03:22 PM            

I tried to search for the thread but couldn't find it. At the time, I posted the same concern's of getting the word out and it appeared that it didn't garner much comment from the list.

If some one can find the thread then it may be worth re-posting.

posted 05-17-2010 05:24 PM            

Perhaps many of these suggestions are fine as second line measures as "Reactive". However, in being "Proactive" we need stern measures such as retained council (APA, AAPP, NPA, & State organizations) to file against the imposters and box boy clones who will be the ruin of this profession. Perhaps someone should speak with the insurance carriers that they might know of the increased risk from non-APA school imposters. I tried to get a working agreement amongst the instrument manufacturers, was somewhat rebuffed; and they then found JG doing a polygraph porno I later sent them as the result with an LX-4000. I offered copies of the video or still pics, for professional reasons only, to the appropriate heads of committees of various State organizations for their record of PEOA activity as it relates to their State licensing boards or other concerned bodies.

As for Maschke, it seems that not even translating the supposed polygraph countermeasures (whether in writing or verbally) into Persian or Arabic, and while on foreign soil (and wherein he has failed to deny the verbal aspect of it) has not motivated out allies in government to call him to answer for this.

What we are doing as Reactive is just not working, and we need more stern measures Proactively. It will boil down to lawyers and costs, but for protecting this profession from the internal parasites of the PEOA pretending to be in our profession, or the external skin cancer Maschke represents.

Those of us who trace our roots back to the Pre-EPPA days never dreamed of such a nightmare where we would have a former intelligence officer, now treasonous bastard (in my opinion), and a fifth column league of imposters; who would both infiltrate and impersonate the body polygraph.

posted 05-18-2010 08:38 AM         

We need National Accreditation for examiners. This is happening as we speak, check with DACA for more information. You would then have QC and inspections irrespective of standards imposed by your State. All testing would be standardized as well as scoring criteria. Only testing formats that have been approved by the accreditation system could be used for examinations. No more "well it works" formats would be allowed. I believe APA and AAPP should become involved and assist with this effort. If this occurs, we will truly have what we need to defend our actions.

posted 05-18-2010 02:49 PM            

There is little doubt that there are frauds, incompetent, unethical, and even criminal polygraph examiners. With some regularity on this site and others we hear of what the government should be doing, or what the national organizations should be doing, or what someone else should be doing to stop them. We read with dismay that this examiner does this unethical thing, or has besmirched the reputation of the rest of the profession, or uses that invalid methodology, and a host of other sins. The posting by thenolieguy4u is the most recent example, and this is not to single him out because there are countless others. If one takes the time to go back into the literature as far back as the 1940s you would find the same complaints: they have been with us for decades.

The only real solution, in my view, is state licensing. Not only can it set standards, but it can set enforceable standards, something beyond what any professional organization can do. These enforceable standards can lead to a loss of an examiner to practice, and in some cases lead to serious fines and even imprisonment. It could mean the end of frauds, incompetent, unethical, and criminal polygraph examiners. A lawsuit may stop one or two frauds, but no one has the resources to chase them one at a time.

With such an easy fix, why do we not have a push for licensure? Excellent question. After all, the APA’s Strategic Plan calls for the support of one state each year to enact polygraph licensure. So, why has nothing happened?

Because, despite active solicitation from the APA Board to state organizations, no one has stood up to take on the responsibility, even with APA’s help, for pursuing licensure. No one. Not a single one. So, if no member is interested in helping in his own state, we should not be surprised when someone in our state masquerading as a polygraph examiner does unethical things with the polygraph.

Before I step off this soapbox, let me quote from a wise man who said: if you think the source of problem is out there, that is the problem. It is my sincere hope that somewhere in this readership there is someone who takes this message to heart, rolls up her (or his) sleeves and gets it done.

posted 05-18-2010 03:35 PM            

I can’t argue allot about what you said, except that a number a years ago I was working on that very project in North Carolina. In NC, private examiners are required to be licensed, but law enforcement examiners are not. In order to try and remedy that situation, I spent two years, at the request of and approval of our state association, working with the state DoJ to get something in place where law enforcement examiners would be required to be licensed/certified, etc. After two years of work, and without my knowledge, the DoJ received a letter from (name and state association position withheld) stating that the state association would not support such an action. The DoJ immediately dropped the whole project, and I did not blame them one bit. I wasted two years! There are, I am afraid, too many examiners that are going to resist efforts such as this because they do not want to be held to a standard.

[This message has been edited by rcgilford (edited 05-18-2010).]

posted 05-18-2010 03:54 PM            

Thank You for your wise and considered words on this. You would find few, if any in our field, who would be against licensing in their respective States that don't otherwise have it.

California has not been a licensed State for polygraph since 1989, as the Dems / Liberals in the legislature in the post EPPA era here equated licensing of our profession as equating to acceptance of it; which they are not of a mindset to do. Further, in that time frame of now over twenty years we have not seen a legistlature friendly to our profession showing a possibility for improvement or an openness toward moving forward.

If this were not enough, but if we ever did have such an interested law making body; We in the profession would not be in the driver's seat as to the composition of any actual governor's licensing board itself. Further, given the almost $20 Billion dollar deficit California is experiencing from said long term liberal spenders; they would first see such licensing as revenue enhancement and sell licenses to perhaps any and all takers which is what we don't want in legitimizing the clones. I further expect this might be true for other cash strapped States as well. Therefore, we ALREADY know the end result would only be the artificial legitimizing of imposter examiners who merely ordered a 50 pound box of older public domain DoDPI / DACA materials via the vendor's FOIA request.

Please Trust that concerned geographical Examiners here have not overlooked your suggestions at all, and rather found this as the researched reality to what you have suggested. Therefore, I would tend to favor national standards regardless of individual State licensing in place, which would protect the consumer in regard to obtaining a bona fide Examiner who has completed an APA school at a minimum. I would further suggest such organizations as the APA,AAPP, NPA, and associated State organizations make clear in writing their displeasure with the manufacturers and insurance providers about fostering the frauds who purchase their products; if in fact they did not already know.

posted 05-18-2010 04:32 PM         

Plan B anyone?

posted 05-19-2010 10:34 AM         

This is a response to the 2009 National Academy of Sciences report "Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward." The executive summary is available at http://www.nap.edu/nap-cgi/report.cgi?record_id=12589&type=pdfxsum.

Review the recommendations in the executive summary as they relate to polygraph and consider how polygraph will fall into the reform legislation.

posted 05-20-2010 12:14 AM         

I agree in part with your statements. National Accreditation would advance polygraph through standardization and inspection to insure quality and adherence to the acceptable format and scoring recognized by the top researchers we have. States will not regulate polygraph, we will have to regulate ourselves through accreditation on a national level. This would have to be on a voluntary basis by examiners willing to give up some time and effort to insure the accreditation process is in fact working and enforce the accreditation protocol. Once this was accomplished, every qualified examiner would want to participate. We could then approach our State Legislators and get regulation implemented. I have in my state, approached several legislators and presented solutions to the problem of no regulation, their main concern is cost for enforcing the regulations they might establish. In this state, you don't roll up your sleeves, you get a short sleeve shirt and go to work.