Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by George Maschke (Guest)
 - Jan 08, 2001, 02:09 PM
#nosmileys

American Polygraph Association (APA) president Skip Webb 
ultimately joined Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson in 
declining to explain how polygraphers are to handle subjects 
who admit to understanding the psychological manipulations on 
which polygraphy is theoretically dependent:

http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#informed-subjects

But American Polygraph Association member Scott Walters 
provides an answer in a 29 August 2000 article entitled, "The 
Rise in the Use of Countermeasures In Pre Employment and 
Specific Issue PDD Tests" and posted to the Florida Polygraph 
Association website. Admitting that polygraphy depends on the 
subject's ignorance of the true nature of the procedure, 
Walters laments:

    Today, there is a vast amount of reference materials 
    available on the subject of PDD testing 
    [psychophysiological detection of deception testing 
    -- a buzzphrase for "lie detector 'testing'"]. These 
    reference materials are being published in an effort 
    to improve the validity and accuracy of the 
    Polygraph Examination, and to improve standards 
    within the community of Polygraph Examiners as a 
    whole. Unfortunately, it is also providing 
    individuals with a greater knowledge of how the 
    examination is administered and how the results are 
    determined. How many times have you heard a subject 
    make reference to his/her understanding of what the 
    Comparison question is and why it is used. Thus, 
    rendering any attempt at a Zone Comparison Technique 
    (ZCT) all but useless as a means of determining the 
    truthfulness of that subject.
    
All but useless.

Mr. Walters' article may be read in its entirety at:

http://www.floridapolygraph.org/articles_posted.html

The Zone Comparison Technique (ZCT) to which Mr. Walters 
refers is one of the most commonly used varieties of the 
probable-lie "Control" Question "Test." Mr. Walters' 
observations with regard to the ZCT hold true for other 
polygraph formats, including the directed-lie "Test" for 
Espionage and Sabotage (TES) adopted by DoD and DOE for 
security screening.

For more on the TES see:

http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-002.shtml

For more on the ZCT see:

https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=9.msg38#msg38

Like it or not, those in the polygraph trade are going to have 
to confront the question of what to do with those who 
understand "the lie behind the lie detector."

George Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org






Last modification: George Maschke - 01/08/01 at 11:09:12