- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Fair Chance
- Jul 29, 2004, 10:57 AMDear NeutralObserver,
This one is tough. The complete honesty approach might work with a polygraph examnier who does not have a chip on his shoulder. On the other hand, there are so many applicants that the examiner would fail you just because of your knowledge of polygraphs. This knowledge could threaten his job and influence others in the FBI once you are hired. The "High Priest of Polygraph" do not want disbelievers hired because it would eventually call into question their value and prestige.
At the same time, anyone who is innocent of deception and failed will be upset and most probably try and research what went wrong. I think most examiners assume that second polygraph examinees have done some research.
Like I stated, tough choice.
Regards.
This one is tough. The complete honesty approach might work with a polygraph examnier who does not have a chip on his shoulder. On the other hand, there are so many applicants that the examiner would fail you just because of your knowledge of polygraphs. This knowledge could threaten his job and influence others in the FBI once you are hired. The "High Priest of Polygraph" do not want disbelievers hired because it would eventually call into question their value and prestige.
At the same time, anyone who is innocent of deception and failed will be upset and most probably try and research what went wrong. I think most examiners assume that second polygraph examinees have done some research.
Like I stated, tough choice.
Regards.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 28, 2004, 12:16 PMQuote from: Daysleeper on Jul 24, 2004, 03:32 PMGeorge:
I don't think the FBI Poly Agent's would think CM's were being used? I say this becuase you can refer to the applicant's first poly charts. That would tell if someone is not being truthful?
Daysleeper,
I'm not sure I understand what it is you're asking. Examination of polygraph charts does not reveal whether or not a person has been truthful. And the fact that the Bureau has previously polygraphed you is no guarantee that you won't be accused of attempted countermeasures this time around.
Posted by Daysleeper
- Jul 24, 2004, 03:32 PMGeorge:
I don't think the FBI Poly Agent's would think CM's were being used? I say this becuase you can refer to the applicant's first poly charts. That would tell if someone is not being truthful?
I don't think the FBI Poly Agent's would think CM's were being used? I say this becuase you can refer to the applicant's first poly charts. That would tell if someone is not being truthful?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 24, 2004, 02:50 AMDaysleeper,
I don't think it would be wise to try to tell you polygrapher how to do his job. It would only create an unnecessarily adversarial relationship that can only work to your detriment.
You may wish to adopt what we call in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector the "complete honesty" approach and to tell your polygrapher that you've researched polygraphy and are now familiar with the methodology. If you choose this option, it would be best to be polite and not to come across as gloating over having discovered the little man behind the curtain. Be aware, however, that even politely telling your polygrapher that you've learned about polygraph procedure entails a risk that you'll be arbitrarily accused of deception and/or countermeasures.
The other option is to play along to get along. Normally, having previously passed an FBI polygraph just a year ago ought to be helpful the second time around. However, FBI polygraphers also read this message board. It's likely that at least one has already seen your post and saved it for circulation to colleagues on Monday. As a result of the detail you included in your post, any person(s) now in the process of being re-hired who were polygraphed about a year ago and don't admit to having researched polygraphy will likely be at an increased risk of being accused of countermeasure use. Thus, the "complete honesty" approach might be your best option at this point.
It is to be hoped that the FBI polygraph unit would have the "fidelity, bravery, and integrity" not to retaliate against you for having learned the truth about polygraphs.
I don't think it would be wise to try to tell you polygrapher how to do his job. It would only create an unnecessarily adversarial relationship that can only work to your detriment.
You may wish to adopt what we call in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector the "complete honesty" approach and to tell your polygrapher that you've researched polygraphy and are now familiar with the methodology. If you choose this option, it would be best to be polite and not to come across as gloating over having discovered the little man behind the curtain. Be aware, however, that even politely telling your polygrapher that you've learned about polygraph procedure entails a risk that you'll be arbitrarily accused of deception and/or countermeasures.
The other option is to play along to get along. Normally, having previously passed an FBI polygraph just a year ago ought to be helpful the second time around. However, FBI polygraphers also read this message board. It's likely that at least one has already seen your post and saved it for circulation to colleagues on Monday. As a result of the detail you included in your post, any person(s) now in the process of being re-hired who were polygraphed about a year ago and don't admit to having researched polygraphy will likely be at an increased risk of being accused of countermeasure use. Thus, the "complete honesty" approach might be your best option at this point.
It is to be hoped that the FBI polygraph unit would have the "fidelity, bravery, and integrity" not to retaliate against you for having learned the truth about polygraphs.
Posted by I-SMELL-BS
- Jul 24, 2004, 01:37 AMQuote from: Daysleeper on Jul 24, 2004, 01:04 AMI never thought of that?? Would it be wise to inform the polygrapher that I do not wish to go through the BS (In a nice way) I went through before?
Shouldn't an updated poly be quicker then the first poly?? Thanks!
What makes you think you are in a position to "inform" the polygrapher what you want or don't want to do?
Posted by NeutralObserver
- Jul 24, 2004, 12:37 AMQuote from: Daysleeper on Jul 24, 2004, 12:21 AMI have been rehired by the FBI. I will need to do another polygraph. Knowing it's my second time around, will the polygrapher pull the same "BS" as the first time.
At the endof my first test, the polygrapher said my charts looked bad and I needed to come clean (Common BS). After going back/forth awhile he let me go. I did pass!!!
This second poly will be an update from my last. It will be a new polygrapher. Since he knows I did this before and passed (Just a year ago), will he still do the same BS!!! Thanks!
It could be worse this time. The polygrapher may want to engage in a little one upsmanship. He may want to show he is better than the first guy and that he can catch you when the other one couldn't.