- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Covert_1
- Dec 01, 2001, 12:15 AMGeorge,
Yes, I agree with the fact that the poly isn't worth a damn. However, if the tester and you agree on a term, and he decides to change it during the test....the test "by rule" is invalidated. So it is tossed.
I used that rule quite effectively when I on one of my many polys. Immediately after the poly, I instructed the polygrapher that they had violated the rule...I then notified my Security Officer. The test was tossed by Security and damn, the next available slot on the schedule was 6 months down the road.
Which never came...went another 2 1/2 years before I was scheduled for my regular test.
So they couldn't have had much faith in the test either.
Yes, I agree with the fact that the poly isn't worth a damn. However, if the tester and you agree on a term, and he decides to change it during the test....the test "by rule" is invalidated. So it is tossed.
I used that rule quite effectively when I on one of my many polys. Immediately after the poly, I instructed the polygrapher that they had violated the rule...I then notified my Security Officer. The test was tossed by Security and damn, the next available slot on the schedule was 6 months down the road.
Which never came...went another 2 1/2 years before I was scheduled for my regular test.
So they couldn't have had much faith in the test either.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 27, 2001, 06:22 PMCovert 1,
You wrote in part:
Note that although it is standard practice to review the questions to be asked during the "in-test" phase during the "pre-test" phase, whether or not the polygrapher conducts such a review, polygraph chart readings have no validity. For more on the scientific status of polygraphy, see Chapter 1 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector and the sources cited there. See also Professor William G. Iacono's recent article, "Forensic 'Lie Detection': Procedures Without Scientific Basis."
Orion,
As has been discussed elsewhere, a question about driving while under the influence of alcohol is almost certainly a probable-lie "control" question in the context of a pre-employment polygraph interrogation, although substantive admissions with regard to drunk driving might serve as grounds for disqualification.
You wrote in part:
QuoteBoth the tester and the testee should agree on the term, otherwise the test is invalid.
Note that although it is standard practice to review the questions to be asked during the "in-test" phase during the "pre-test" phase, whether or not the polygrapher conducts such a review, polygraph chart readings have no validity. For more on the scientific status of polygraphy, see Chapter 1 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector and the sources cited there. See also Professor William G. Iacono's recent article, "Forensic 'Lie Detection': Procedures Without Scientific Basis."
Orion,
As has been discussed elsewhere, a question about driving while under the influence of alcohol is almost certainly a probable-lie "control" question in the context of a pre-employment polygraph interrogation, although substantive admissions with regard to drunk driving might serve as grounds for disqualification.
Posted by Covert_1
- Nov 27, 2001, 01:36 AMany and all "terms" used in the test should be covered before the test. Both the tester and the testee should agree on the term, otherwise the test is invalid.
Posted by Orion
- Nov 22, 2001, 04:52 AMIS the question, have you ever driven impaired, a control or relevant question?
Impaired, if not defined, would be wide open to interpretation (some would even say you are impaired after one drink) and therefor, a control.... however if impaired was defined in the pretest, it would become relevant.
Anyone agree?
Impaired, if not defined, would be wide open to interpretation (some would even say you are impaired after one drink) and therefor, a control.... however if impaired was defined in the pretest, it would become relevant.
Anyone agree?