- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Mar 25, 2005, 10:36 AMTheNoLieGuy4U
Inasmuch as you appear to be the site-resident pro-polygraph person (polygrapher?) for the month perhaps you might like to comment on the aforementioned quoted material. Specifically, do you believe as I do that for all practical purposes the jig is up, it's time to close up shop, and time for every CQT polygrapher to change his/her ways or to seek meaningful employment? If not (oh shucks...and I thought you might admit to such on a message board...yeah, right....), would you deny that the aforementioned considerations as described and related conversation(s) occurred at DoDPI and that the concern attributed to a former DoDPI employee was so expressed? I will admit that I do not have first-hand knowledge of such, but in view of other recent contact I have had with concerned polygraphers, I find the aforementioned quite conceivable. Furthermore if you question the gist of this material, I suppose you would have no objection to me putting a video together premised on my stated opinion of such and demonstrating to all the world how easy it is to successfully manipulate this channel of information and that practicing doing so can be accomplished very easily, with little to no financial expense incurred and done so reliably in the absence of a polygraph and in the comfort of one's own home? Such video would also discuss the outcome of all this, i.e., as CQT polygraphy becomes even more of a bungle in the jungle (largely because more people recognize it to be so) than it already is, you (collectively), should you decide to continue this rather embarrassing con, are left with little option but to randomly and wildly accuse some high proportion of every examinee of using countermeasures. As we follow the strategy of this continuing game, we realize then that every examinee should (independent of whether he/she chooses to employ countermeasures and regardless of his/her perceived level of proficiency and performance) expect to be accused of countermeasure use and should equally well be prepared to deny to the grave any such use.
Quote
AntiPolygraph.org has received information indicating that the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI) has reduced the number of scorable breathing reactions from the twelve that were listed in the Test Data Analysis document released to AntiPolygraph.org in 2001 under the Freedom of Information Act to the following ten:
* Apnea/blocking
* Decrease in rate
* Inhalation/exhalation change
* Decrease in amplitude
* Progressive decrease in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Increase in amplitude
* Progressive increase in amplitude and return to homeostasis
* Progressive increase in amplitude followed by a decrease in amplitude
* Temporary change in baseline
Importantly, DoDPI does not consider all of these reactions to be of equal value for scoring polygraph charts. The first five reactions (highlighted above in green), and especially the first one, apnea/blocking (briefly holding one's breath after the completion of an exhalation cycle), are held by DoDPI to be "highly diagnostic." Anyone considering employing polygraph countermeasures would be well advised to choose one of these five rather than any of the other breathing countermeasures presented in Chapter 4 of the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. In that chapter, these five "highly diagnostic" reactions appear as numbers 12 (p. 149), 1 (p.145), 3 (p. 146), 5 (p. 146), and 8 (p. 147), respectively.
This information, while unclassified, is considered highly sensitive by DoDPI. A senior member of the federal polygraph community and former DoDPI instructor reportedly opined that if this information were to become public, it could "effectively neutralize" the respiration channel, and the polygraph community would be in "big trouble." Well, now it is public.
Also, in mid-2004, DoDPI was reportedly giving serious consideration to eliminating the following four scorable breathing reactions:
* Increase in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Progressive increase and decrease in amplitude
* Decrease in baseline
It is not known what decision, if any, has been taken in this regard.
Inasmuch as you appear to be the site-resident pro-polygraph person (polygrapher?) for the month perhaps you might like to comment on the aforementioned quoted material. Specifically, do you believe as I do that for all practical purposes the jig is up, it's time to close up shop, and time for every CQT polygrapher to change his/her ways or to seek meaningful employment? If not (oh shucks...and I thought you might admit to such on a message board...yeah, right....), would you deny that the aforementioned considerations as described and related conversation(s) occurred at DoDPI and that the concern attributed to a former DoDPI employee was so expressed? I will admit that I do not have first-hand knowledge of such, but in view of other recent contact I have had with concerned polygraphers, I find the aforementioned quite conceivable. Furthermore if you question the gist of this material, I suppose you would have no objection to me putting a video together premised on my stated opinion of such and demonstrating to all the world how easy it is to successfully manipulate this channel of information and that practicing doing so can be accomplished very easily, with little to no financial expense incurred and done so reliably in the absence of a polygraph and in the comfort of one's own home? Such video would also discuss the outcome of all this, i.e., as CQT polygraphy becomes even more of a bungle in the jungle (largely because more people recognize it to be so) than it already is, you (collectively), should you decide to continue this rather embarrassing con, are left with little option but to randomly and wildly accuse some high proportion of every examinee of using countermeasures. As we follow the strategy of this continuing game, we realize then that every examinee should (independent of whether he/she chooses to employ countermeasures and regardless of his/her perceived level of proficiency and performance) expect to be accused of countermeasure use and should equally well be prepared to deny to the grave any such use.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Mar 23, 2005, 07:28 PMQuote
AntiPolygraph.org has received information indicating that the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI) has reduced the number of scorable breathing reactions from the twelve that were listed in the Test Data Analysis document released to AntiPolygraph.org in 2001 under the Freedom of Information Act to the following ten:
* Apnea/blocking
* Decrease in rate
* Inhalation/exhalation change
* Decrease in amplitude
* Progressive decrease in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Increase in amplitude
* Progressive increase in amplitude and return to homeostasis
* Progressive increase in amplitude followed by a decrease in amplitude
* Temporary change in baseline
Importantly, DoDPI does not consider all of these reactions to be of equal value for scoring polygraph charts. The first five reactions (highlighted above in green), and especially the first one, apnea/blocking (briefly holding one's breath after the completion of an exhalation cycle), are held by DoDPI to be "highly diagnostic." Anyone considering employing polygraph countermeasures would be well advised to choose one of these five rather than any of the other breathing countermeasures presented in Chapter 4 of the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. In that chapter, these five "highly diagnostic" reactions appear as numbers 12 (p. 149), 1 (p.145), 3 (p. 146), 5 (p. 146), and 8 (p. 147), respectively.
This information, while unclassified, is considered highly sensitive by DoDPI. A senior member of the federal polygraph community and former DoDPI instructor reportedly opined that if this information were to become public, it could "effectively neutralize" the respiration channel, and the polygraph community would be in "big trouble." Well, now it is public.
Also, in mid-2004, DoDPI was reportedly giving serious consideration to eliminating the following four scorable breathing reactions:
* Increase in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Progressive increase and decrease in amplitude
* Decrease in baseline
It is not known what decision, if any, has been taken in this regard.
Clearever,
Your question about "yes" and "no" (although interesting) becomes moot for several reasons:
(1) Both being monosyllabic are said relatively instantaneously. The polygraph examiner is looking for reactions beginning roughly one-half second after the beginning of the asking of the question (perhaps even before the "yes" or "no" is said) and continuing for perhaps 3 to 4 seconds following the answer
(2) If it were an issue, both "yes" and "no" can be said with almost no respiratory excursion that would be picked up in the pneumo tubes and most importantly,
(3) the scoring of the responses to questions are intercomparisons between one relevant question and one control question. These are both answered with the same answer--typically a "no."
I should also point out that which you noted (if it were a problem) would not have to do with the subject of this thread, i.e., polygraph responses and countermeasures involving respiration, but would be a confound in the general prodedure in the absence of countermeasures. Although CQT polygraphy has many shortcomings, this is not one. (Never let it be said that I never said anything nice about a CQT polygraph exam).
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Mar 23, 2005, 12:42 PMQuote
AntiPolygraph.org has received information indicating that the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI) has reduced the number of scorable breathing reactions from the twelve that were listed in the Test Data Analysis document released to AntiPolygraph.org in 2001 under the Freedom of Information Act to the following ten:
* Apnea/blocking
* Decrease in rate
* Inhalation/exhalation change
* Decrease in amplitude
* Progressive decrease in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Increase in amplitude
* Progressive increase in amplitude and return to homeostasis
* Progressive increase in amplitude followed by a decrease in amplitude
* Temporary change in baseline
Importantly, DoDPI does not consider all of these reactions to be of equal value for scoring polygraph charts. The first five reactions (highlighted above in green), and especially the first one, apnea/blocking (briefly holding one's breath after the completion of an exhalation cycle), are held by DoDPI to be "highly diagnostic." Anyone considering employing polygraph countermeasures would be well advised to choose one of these five rather than any of the other breathing countermeasures presented in Chapter 4 of the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. In that chapter, these five "highly diagnostic" reactions appear as numbers 12 (p. 149), 1 (p.145), 3 (p. 146), 5 (p. 146), and 8 (p. 147), respectively.
This information, while unclassified, is considered highly sensitive by DoDPI. A senior member of the federal polygraph community and former DoDPI instructor reportedly opined that if this information were to become public, it could "effectively neutralize" the respiration channel, and the polygraph community would be in "big trouble." Well, now it is public.
Also, in mid-2004, DoDPI was reportedly giving serious consideration to eliminating the following four scorable breathing reactions:
* Increase in amplitude
* Increase in rate
* Progressive increase and decrease in amplitude
* Decrease in baseline
It is not known what decision, if any, has been taken in this regard.
This is very useful, George, although a bit amusing (or scarey depending on one's viewpoint) to think that successful polygraph practice rests (even from a polygrapher's point of view) on such easily manipulated nonsense. I think it would be very easy using this information to put together a small streaming video that would demonstrate (eliminating unnecessary jargon and nomenclature) how an examinee could practice and perfect the performance of these breathing manipulations in the absence of an available polygraph. I think the necessary instructional tape would be no longer than 5 minutes in length and would allow for successful performance by almost anyone. The added and unsaid benefit/bonus of these manipulations is the unintended/unpracticed but yet useful impact of the respiratory manipulations on the electrodermal (sweating) channel. I can think of no more ready way to end this QUACKERY than to demonstrate to all how easily it (CQT polygraphy) can be manipulated in a manner that is undetectable and that would be readily scored (according to polygraph-community scoring rules) by the unsuspecting polygraph examiner.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 23, 2005, 09:30 AMAntiPolygraph.org has received information indicating that the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI) has reduced the number of scorable breathing reactions from the twelve that were listed in the Test Data Analysis document released to AntiPolygraph.org in 2001 under the Freedom of Information Act to the following ten:
Importantly, DoDPI does not consider all of these reactions to be of equal value for scoring polygraph charts. The first five reactions (highlighted above in green), and especially the first one, apnea/blocking (briefly holding one's breath after the completion of an exhalation cycle), are held by DoDPI to be "highly diagnostic." Anyone considering employing polygraph countermeasures would be well advised to choose one of these five rather than any of the other breathing countermeasures presented in Chapter 4 of the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. In that chapter, these five "highly diagnostic" reactions appear as numbers 12 (p. 149), 1 (p.145), 3 (p. 146), 5 (p. 146), and 8 (p. 147), respectively.
This information, while unclassified, is considered highly sensitive by DoDPI. A senior member of the federal polygraph community and former DoDPI instructor reportedly opined that if this information were to become public, it could "effectively neutralize" the respiration channel, and the polygraph community would be in "big trouble." Well, now it is public.
Also, in mid-2004, DoDPI was reportedly giving serious consideration to eliminating the following four scorable breathing reactions:
- Apnea/blocking
- Decrease in rate
- Inhalation/exhalation change
- Decrease in amplitude
- Progressive decrease in amplitude
- Increase in rate
- Increase in amplitude
- Progressive increase in amplitude and return to homeostasis
- Progressive increase in amplitude followed by a decrease in amplitude
- Temporary change in baseline
Importantly, DoDPI does not consider all of these reactions to be of equal value for scoring polygraph charts. The first five reactions (highlighted above in green), and especially the first one, apnea/blocking (briefly holding one's breath after the completion of an exhalation cycle), are held by DoDPI to be "highly diagnostic." Anyone considering employing polygraph countermeasures would be well advised to choose one of these five rather than any of the other breathing countermeasures presented in Chapter 4 of the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. In that chapter, these five "highly diagnostic" reactions appear as numbers 12 (p. 149), 1 (p.145), 3 (p. 146), 5 (p. 146), and 8 (p. 147), respectively.
This information, while unclassified, is considered highly sensitive by DoDPI. A senior member of the federal polygraph community and former DoDPI instructor reportedly opined that if this information were to become public, it could "effectively neutralize" the respiration channel, and the polygraph community would be in "big trouble." Well, now it is public.
Also, in mid-2004, DoDPI was reportedly giving serious consideration to eliminating the following four scorable breathing reactions:
- Increase in amplitude
- Increase in rate
- Progressive increase and decrease in amplitude
- Decrease in baseline