- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by polyscam
- Jul 11, 2005, 04:52 AMNonombre,
I would surmise that you don't work for a federal agency. Correct?
Also, as a polygraph examiner you should have been subjected to more than 20 as part of your training. Therefore it is not unheard of.
Please check yourself before referring to similarities between your profession and those of the medical profession. They are NOT the same and should not be compared as such. I regularly hear comparisons between the funeral industry and auto sales. Again not the same. The funeral industry would more fairly be compared against the hotel industry as service is what is provided. Find a more suitable comparison. You are not a doctor so do not portray yourself as such.
I would surmise that you don't work for a federal agency. Correct?
Also, as a polygraph examiner you should have been subjected to more than 20 as part of your training. Therefore it is not unheard of.
Please check yourself before referring to similarities between your profession and those of the medical profession. They are NOT the same and should not be compared as such. I regularly hear comparisons between the funeral industry and auto sales. Again not the same. The funeral industry would more fairly be compared against the hotel industry as service is what is provided. Find a more suitable comparison. You are not a doctor so do not portray yourself as such.
Posted by nonombre
- Jul 10, 2005, 03:03 PMQuote from: PailR on Jul 10, 2005, 02:47 PMWhy fear the poly?
Very few of the twenty or so polys I have taken were in the first two categories.
"Twenty or so polys..." That sure is a lot of polygraph exams. I mean, are you sure?! How is it you have taken that many? Isn't that like have twenty root canals?, or twenty open heart surgeries? I mean, Damn! that is more tests than I have ever heard of anyone having to take, even registered sex offenders.
Nonombre
Posted by PailR
- Jul 10, 2005, 02:47 PMWhy fear the poly?
Well... depends on how much is at stake when you are subject to taking one.
My experience over the past 10 years has been the following:
Lied -- Failed
Lied -- Passed
Truth -- Failed
Truth -- Passed
Very few of the twenty or so polys I have taken were in the first two categories. Most times I have told the truth. If I had not found one very hghly regarded polygrapher with whom I have no problem passing *sic*, then I would likely not be alive to write this post. Now you couldn't PAY me to see another polygrapher when I am forced to take one.
Even given that the polygraph is a load of hooey, who gives you the test makes a load of difference. The reason I say that is because there are some who are in it for the money. If they are aware that you may have to re-take a poly as a result of "failing" one, then that type of polygrapher will find your results to be of the non-passing variety and will also have a policy of charging you for each time you take the test. With the rest...well, let's just say it is a crap-shoot. "Ya pays yer money an' ya takes yer chances." As long as you are not guilty of anything (or ADMIT to any guilt (and for God's sake don't ACT guilty unless you want to get HUNG!)), maybe you will come out okay. Acting as though you have a guilty conscience will get you a 'deception indicated' every time, no matter whether you tell the truth or not.
Well... depends on how much is at stake when you are subject to taking one.
My experience over the past 10 years has been the following:
Lied -- Failed
Lied -- Passed
Truth -- Failed
Truth -- Passed
Very few of the twenty or so polys I have taken were in the first two categories. Most times I have told the truth. If I had not found one very hghly regarded polygrapher with whom I have no problem passing *sic*, then I would likely not be alive to write this post. Now you couldn't PAY me to see another polygrapher when I am forced to take one.
Even given that the polygraph is a load of hooey, who gives you the test makes a load of difference. The reason I say that is because there are some who are in it for the money. If they are aware that you may have to re-take a poly as a result of "failing" one, then that type of polygrapher will find your results to be of the non-passing variety and will also have a policy of charging you for each time you take the test. With the rest...well, let's just say it is a crap-shoot. "Ya pays yer money an' ya takes yer chances." As long as you are not guilty of anything (or ADMIT to any guilt (and for God's sake don't ACT guilty unless you want to get HUNG!)), maybe you will come out okay. Acting as though you have a guilty conscience will get you a 'deception indicated' every time, no matter whether you tell the truth or not.
Posted by gelb disliker
- Jun 28, 2005, 05:45 AM :-/ why in the first place would you allow yourself to be polygraphed anyway? if its for a job, then there are other jobs that you can go to. a polygraph is just some made up mumbo-jumbo to scare you into "telling the truth" the truth afterall is really relative to what you see and what you fear. its all on you, not what someone wants to sell you.
Posted by hwsternfan
- Jun 27, 2005, 05:13 PMJust never ADMIT to anything DURING the exam that you did not admit to in the pre screening or on your application. If you don't ADMIT they can still fail you but on what basis? Then they are opening themselves up to lawsuits. The problem is MOST people ADMIT to things during the exam when they are accused of lying or being deceptive.
Posted by Jeffery
- Jun 25, 2005, 11:00 PMQuote from: Marty on Jun 25, 2005, 06:04 PMI don't disagree with this. In what way would it hurt whatever accuracy the polygraph already has? Increasing the number of Inconclusives and to a lesser extent, False Positives?
The increased public knowledge of how the polygraph works may be more of a threat to whatever accuracy it has than the knowledge of specific countermeasure technique.
Posted by Marty
- Jun 25, 2005, 06:04 PMQuote from: Sergeant1107 on Jun 25, 2005, 01:48 PMIt's interesting to me that whenever someone reports that they were 100% honest and "passed" their polygraph, the pro-polygraph community often professes belief in and endorses their story.
Please understand why polygraphers often do this. Sure it is disingenuous, but polygraphers don't say this because they enjoy lying or otherwise messing with you, but to increase the accuracy. They don't expect you to not lie as a result of this admonition. What they are looking for is an increased response differential between control Q's and relevants. An examinee who is NDI on a relevant is expected to react less to the relevant by an increased belief that the polygraph will correctly detect he is not lying. That same examinee is expected to fear the control question more, believing (falsely) he may be disqualified if found deceptive on the control.
The increased public knowledge of how the polygraph works may be more of a threat to whatever accuracy it has than the knowledge of specific countermeasure technique.
marty
Posted by Sergeant1107
- Jun 25, 2005, 01:48 PMIt's interesting to me that whenever someone reports that they were 100% honest and "passed" their polygraph, the pro-polygraph community often professes belief in and endorses their story. That person is assumed to be truthful and their story is then held up as an example of why the polygraph is such a useful tool.
However, whenever someone claims they were 100% honest and "failed" their polygraph, they are often accused of withholding information, or attempting countermeasures, or outright deception.
If one is trying to determine the value of something, it seems clear that you would have to consider all the available evidence in order to render a fair judgment. Selecting the evidence that agrees with your opinion and disregarding any evidence that doesn't is patently ridiculous.
Aside from variations of the "you must have had a bad/unprofessional examiner" response no one in the pro-polygraph community seems willing to even attempt to address the ever-growing amount of anecdotal evidence that examinees can be 100% truthful in every aspect and still "fail" their polygraph examination. Why is that?
Any response by a polygraph examiner would be appreciated.
However, whenever someone claims they were 100% honest and "failed" their polygraph, they are often accused of withholding information, or attempting countermeasures, or outright deception.
If one is trying to determine the value of something, it seems clear that you would have to consider all the available evidence in order to render a fair judgment. Selecting the evidence that agrees with your opinion and disregarding any evidence that doesn't is patently ridiculous.
Aside from variations of the "you must have had a bad/unprofessional examiner" response no one in the pro-polygraph community seems willing to even attempt to address the ever-growing amount of anecdotal evidence that examinees can be 100% truthful in every aspect and still "fail" their polygraph examination. Why is that?
Any response by a polygraph examiner would be appreciated.
Posted by ThePeaceMaker12
- May 23, 2005, 12:05 AMQuote from: thevet2 on Mar 29, 2005, 11:29 PMYou assume that I lucked out? How about I told the truth and passed. This forum seems somewhat skewed and not sure that is total truth. I do sympathize with those who have told the truth and then been accused of lying. I would be angry if that happened to me I am sure. To say that all polygraph examiners are liars and are out to get you would be false also. The examiners I have delt with are good men and have good morals. I do see them on occassion one on one and find them to be good men. Again, I am sure there are bad examiners and I have also encountered bad police officers. I would be out of my mind to suppose that all police officers are crooks because of a minority and I believe we are talking about a minority of polygraph examiners that are "Bad Apples".
So, if the polygraph is so good and so accurate, why is it inadmissable in a court of law? Surely, if the polygraph is as accurate and as good as you claim it to be, then a court of law would have no problems whatsoever in allowing the results of a polygraph exam as evidence in a court of law, would you think? Or is it because a court of law knows that the polygraph isn't as accurate and good as you claim it to be and because as such, makes polygraph results inadmissable as evidence.
Posted by polypasser1231
- May 17, 2005, 07:55 PMI would have to agree. I don't believe it's that fair, I was simply lucky that the machine found me to be honest. I didn't have anything to hide, but I'm sure if circumstances were changed only slightly (i.e. diff. examiner) it may have been different (that shouldn't be the case though).
-polypasser
-polypasser
Posted by Bill Crider
- May 16, 2005, 11:20 AMwell, poly, i was in the same boat as you and I failed 4 straight FBI exams. I am glad you passed but I think a lot of people are being incorrectly denied employment for which they qualify.
Posted by polypasser1231
- May 15, 2005, 01:36 AMNo, I was not asked whether I had researched the polygraph or not, simply whether I had been through one before.
Posted by Jeffery
- May 14, 2005, 11:29 PMQuote from: polypasser1231 on May 14, 2005, 05:57 PMI recently took a polygraph for employment with the FBI. I saw this site prior to taking the exam. I took my exam, and Passed. I was completely honest, and didn't have any problems answering the examiners questions. The questions were thoroughly explained, and each part of the exam was conducted in a professional manner. I am NOT an examiner, but after my experience with the polygraph, I must admit that it is not something to be worried about. I was extremely nervous about taking it as I had never done it before. Perhaps I was simply someone that the "good ole boys" that I've seen mentioned on this site wanted to join their organization, but to me, I believe honesty + a seasoned, professional examiner will result in success.
Polypasser
Were you asked if you researched the polygraph prior? Were you honest with that question?
Posted by polyfool
- May 14, 2005, 09:37 PMPolypasser:
I am glad that you did not have a bad experience with the polygraph unlike the countless others who have posted otherwise on this site. If I had sailed through my poly after telling the truth, I would still think they work, too. However, the truth is, they do not work.
I thought honesty was the best policy before I took an FBI polygraph. As far as "professional" examiners are concerned, I don't know about that as I've never encountered one.
I am glad that you did not have a bad experience with the polygraph unlike the countless others who have posted otherwise on this site. If I had sailed through my poly after telling the truth, I would still think they work, too. However, the truth is, they do not work.
I thought honesty was the best policy before I took an FBI polygraph. As far as "professional" examiners are concerned, I don't know about that as I've never encountered one.
Posted by anxietyguy
- May 14, 2005, 06:34 PM Unless your the other 50% (I find it hard to believe that 50% of people that take the poly for the FBI are being deceptive) that fail the poly for the FBI. Do a seach and read some of the horror stories. Yes honesty is the best policy, but guess what sometimes that is not enough.