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:
Type the third word in this sentence: 'The quick brown fox jumps.' (answer in lowercase):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Sep 15, 2001, 12:30 PM

Quote from: 00 on Sep 11, 2001, 02:10 AM
Regarding the attachment of the electrodes / conductors for the GSR:

Does anyone have any experience with examiners checking or cleaning the fingers prior to attachment?

Have you ever heard of this?

Would they likely discover a chemical agent that supresses sweat gland activity (well beyond anti-perspirant)?

Would that do any good?


(:-)


naut x naut west


Polygrapher James Allen Matte writes at p. 383 of Forensic Psychophysiology Using the Polygraph (J.A.M. Publications, 1996):

QuoteA standard anti-countermeasure employed by this author is to routinely have the examinee wash his or her hands thoroughly with soap and water in the presence of the forensic psychophysiologist before commencement of the testing phase.

Note that effective polygraph countermeasures involve augmenting physiological responses to the so-called "control" questions rather than suppressing responses to relevant questions. See Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector and the sources cited there for further reading.
Posted by Wannabe
 - Sep 14, 2001, 04:44 AM
I would expect that if there were no GSR responces at all the examiner would suspect either that the polygraph equipment was not operating properly, or that the examinee were using some sort of chemical countermeasure. either way you'll lose.
I am not an expert, but common sense would tell me that something was wrong, (besides the fact that polygraph is hokey anyway), if there were no readings at all.
Posted by 00
 - Sep 14, 2001, 03:48 AM
Add:Testing with a biofeedback unit shows virtually no response change from sedate to excited states.


(:-)

naut x naut west
Posted by 00
 - Sep 14, 2001, 03:42 AM

Thank you.  The question is directed at the use of a certain chemical which locally supresses all sweat gland activity.  
Is the finger inspection strictly by inspection, is it by wiping the fingers to clean them, or possibly a swipe test for any chemical agent?

What would an examiner likely do or suspect if there is no GSR response?


(:-)

naut x naut west
Posted by Pseudo Relevant
 - Sep 12, 2001, 12:39 PM

Quote from: 00 on Sep 11, 2001, 02:10 AM

Does anyone have any experience with examiners checking or cleaning the fingers prior to attachment?

Polygraphers routinely check the examinee's fingertips for anything that may affect "good" contact with the skin. Mostly this would be superglue or other adhesive material that blocks the contact. As far as other "chemicals", I do not know what if anything a polygrapher would look for (as far as the GSR goes).
Posted by Wannabe
 - Sep 11, 2001, 02:29 AM
I would think, and this may be completely wrong, but I feel that if the examinee is comfortable with his or her knowledge of the polygraph and it's shortcomings the GSR would be less reactive? Confidence would have to have some affect I would think.

Anyone agree?
Posted by beech trees
 - Sep 11, 2001, 02:20 AM

Quote from: 00 on Sep 11, 2001, 02:10 AM
Regarding the attachment of the electrodes / conductors for the GSR:

Does anyone have any experience with examiners checking or cleaning the fingers prior to attachment?

Have you ever heard of this?

Would they likely discover a chemical agent that supresses sweat gland activity (well beyond anti-perspirant)?

Would that do any good?


Both 'The Lie Behind The Lie Detector' and 'How To Sting The Polygraph' suggest that such attempts do more harm than good, or are at least ineffective.

I too would like a good GSR discussion as it seems to be the one tracing in which the examinee has little or no control.
Posted by 00
 - Sep 11, 2001, 02:10 AM
Regarding the attachment of the electrodes / conductors for the GSR:

Does anyone have any experience with examiners checking or cleaning the fingers prior to attachment?

Have you ever heard of this?

Would they likely discover a chemical agent that supresses sweat gland activity (well beyond anti-perspirant)?

Would that do any good?


 (:-)


naut x naut west