Post reply

Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
Log in
Sign up

May 04, 2026, 01:09 PM

Main Menu

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board
► Polygraph and CVSA Forums
► Polygraph Policy
► Post reply ( Re: Dr. Phil Lie Detector Series, 6-7 Nov. 2006 )

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.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

[quote author=furedy link=msg=23502 date=1163145368]
ANSWER TO "TRUE DOUBLE BLIND STUDY" ISSUE

Polyg06nov

There is a logical answer to this question which is one that even lay people ask about pharmacological applications, but which psychologists and psychophysiologists fail to ask about purported applications of psychophysiology like biofeedback and the polygraph.

Ron Heslegrave and I wrote a rather technical account of the reason why the “specific effects” logic needs to be applied to the polygraph (and biofeedback) as it is applied to pharmacology (http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/~furedy/Papers/ld/some_elab.doc), but let me try to summarize this argument here in more lay terms.

First, the pharmacological example.  The claim for aspirin is that it reduces headaches.  The appropriate double-blind study is to contrast an aspirin with a placebo condition, where neither the subject nor the experimenter knows what condition the subject is in.  If the aspirin condition contains fewer and less severe headaches than the placebo condition (as has been found), then we can conclude that aspirin has a specific beneficial effect on headaches although we still don’t know the mechanisms through which aspirin produces this specific effect (it turns out that after many years of research, we still don’t know exactly how aspirin works).

The claim for biofeedback is that the provision of precise psychophysiological information about some physiological function not subject to voluntary control to the subject (e.g., second-by-second information about heart rate changes) will, in itself, produce an improvement in the subject’s ability to control those changes (e.g., producing heart-rate deceleration).  Usually biofeedback’s specific beneficial effects are medically relevant (e.g., decreasing blood pressure).  Therefore the double-blind evaluation of whether biofeedback does have such a specific (beneficial) effects is to a completely accurate information condition with one where the information is less than completely accurate (if it’s obviously inaccurate then the subject is no longer “blind”, and an improvement may be due to a placebo effect, i.e., the belief that biofeedback is beneficial).  Such a study has not only not been done in the clinic (where it may be difficult to do), it has not even been done in the lab with the outcome that shows that biofeedback is beneficial.  This, as I have argued (Furedy, J.J. (1987).  On some research-community contributions to the myth and symbol of biofeedback.  International Journal of Psychophysiology, 4, 293-7.), is a serious methodological failing of the psychophysiological research community.  Moreover, Diane Riley and I published an earlier study where we did use this proper reduced-accuracy-of-feedback control, and found no beneficial effect of biofeedback on the ability to produce heart-rate decelerations, although subjects did learn, through instructions to improve this ability  (Riley, D.M., and Furedy, J.J. (1981).  Effects of instructions and contingency of reinforcement on the operant conditioning of human phasic heart rate change.  Psychophysiology, 18, 75-81).  But that is simply the same as the old country doctor telling an older male not to have arguments with his wife, and therefore avoid accelerating his ailing heart.  For this instructional advice, no biofeedback or the software for expensive psychophysiological equipment for measuring second-by-second change in heart rate are necessary.  Rather, this equipment is placebo paraphanalea for peddling biofeedback as the shake oil of the 21st century.

Despite being called a “test”, the CQT polygraph is not a specifiable procedure like the giving of aspirin or the provision of precise psychophysiological information, but for the purpose of applying the logic of the double-blind evaluation (which is a necessary condition for establishing the benefits of any treatment), let’s assume that it is a test, especially as, in the laboratory version, it is more specifiable and standardizable than in the field version.  Granting this test-status assumption, the purported benefit of the polygraph is that, by providing precise psychophysiological information to the experimenter or examiner, the accuracy of the examiner or experimenter (i.e., in differentiating truthful and deceptive subjects, or innocent and guilty subjects) is enhanced.  The appropriate double-blind control in the lab, therefore, is to provide examiners in one condition with precise and completely accurate information about the examinee’s autonomic responses to various questions, while in the other condition, there the psychophysiological information is less accurate, but not so inaccurate that the examiner can tell which condition he is in.  While this may be a difficult study to conduct in the field, it is easy, in principle, to conduct in the lab.  Then, if the psychophysiological information is more than a mere interrogatory prop, the examiner under the completely accurate condition should be better at detecting deception or guilt than the examiner under the degraded accuracy condition.  Such a study, to my knowledge, has never been performed, or a least published in the refereed journal literature even in the lab, let alone the field.

All the best, John
[/quote]

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.

Insert width (px):

Insert height (px):

(Clear attachments)

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Joe McCarthy

- Mar 07, 2017, 10:13 PM

That came out of nowhere, or did I miss something in the string?

Posted by Ex Member

- Mar 07, 2017, 08:16 PM

QuoteVile, Scum bag white trash pedo waste of oxygen

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Posted by Lorrplif

- Mar 07, 2017, 06:02 PM

TC and all the idiots against polygraph, when its over90% acurate and you still have the argument its flawed it makes you seem ignorant. Most of the men accused like Jeremy Park (aka convicted pedophile) if they have a inconclusive result will eventually end up caught and convicted. What goes on in the dark always comes out in the light. It just usuallyworksthatway. Unfortunately bc of people like you sometimes things like this do go on and on for years and meanwhile a baby gets raped over and over. He was sooo adament that he had never done anything like that, ha!! Then when convicted and sentenced he confessed, blaming meth!! Vile, Scum bag white trash pedo waste of oxygen

Posted by Jennporqua

- Mar 07, 2017, 05:54 PM

Quote from: MsLauraLynn on Nov 13, 2012, 01:59 PMIt would be in this websites interest to do a little MORE research in regard to this particular case. The polygraph test that Jeremy Park "passed" was checked by a different party. He did, in fact, FAIL! The poly that they said he 'passed' was given by a police dept employee that had an issue w the gma Bonnii. That employee deliberately LIED about Jeremy passing the poly. & whoever this "Paris" is that is showing a disgusting amount of compassion for this SCUMBAG PEDOPHILE, is no better than the pedophile herself. Some people are so gullible that can't see a blatant & obviously guilty person LYING through their teeth. It had nothing to do w DrPhils questioning. It had everything to do w microexpression & how to spot a LIAR. It's not a hard thing to do once you educate yourself & know what to look for. It was painfully obvious & anyone defending this trash thinking he's innocent...I hope to GOD they never have children!

Posted by Ex Member

- May 26, 2014, 09:50 PM

QuoteJeremy Park should rot in Hell for what he did to his daughter!

Worry about your own soul.

Posted by Teacher

- May 25, 2014, 07:55 PM

http://articles.southbendtribune.com/2011-04-05/news/29387024_1_kpep-kalamazoo-probation-enhancement-program-boot-camp

Time always tells. Read this and keep bashing Dr. Phil! Jeremy Park should rot in Hell for what he did to his daughter!

Posted by stefano

- Nov 13, 2012, 02:44 PM

QuoteThat employee deliberately LIED about Jeremy passing the poly. & whoever this "Paris" is that is showing a disgusting amount of compassion for this SCUMBAG PEDOPHILE, is no better than the pedophile herself. Some people are so gullible that can't see a blatant & obviously guilty person LYING through their teeth.

So you are able to divine when someone is lying? Sounds to me like you have some unresolved anger issues.

Posted by MsLauraLynn

- Nov 13, 2012, 01:59 PM

It would be in this websites interest to do a little MORE research in regard to this particular case. The polygraph test that Jeremy Park "passed" was checked by a different party. He did, in fact, FAIL! The poly that they said he 'passed' was given by a police dept employee that had an issue w the gma Bonnii. That employee deliberately LIED about Jeremy passing the poly. & whoever this "Paris" is that is showing a disgusting amount of compassion for this SCUMBAG PEDOPHILE, is no better than the pedophile herself. Some people are so gullible that can't see a blatant & obviously guilty person LYING through their teeth. It had nothing to do w DrPhils questioning. It had everything to do w microexpression & how to spot a LIAR. It's not a hard thing to do once you educate yourself & know what to look for. It was painfully obvious & anyone defending this trash thinking he's innocent...I hope to GOD they never have children!

Posted by stefano

- Dec 25, 2011, 06:50 PM

QuoteWhat the hell is the matter with you, with the court, with CPS?You're all talking about stupid BS and there is a BABY at stake here. What if it was yours?

It's because we are here to discuss the inequities of the polygraph, not try to save the children of the world. If such is your quest, I'd suggest starting in Africa where they are starving and dying from pestilence.

And, by the way, your post is 6 years late.

Posted by bh

- Dec 25, 2011, 02:38 PM

And have you idiots now seen that he was found with ABUSIVE child porn and convicted of the same? And have you seen his living conditions, as reported by his parole officer? Dr. Phil's supposed grandstanding aside, it was so OBVIOUS that his guy was a sick F*ck. My God. This a SEXUALLY ABUSED BABY. What the hell is the matter with you, with the court, with CPS? You're all talking about stupid BS and there is a BABY at stake here. What if it was yours?

Posted by T.M. Cullen

- Nov 24, 2008, 04:27 PM

Barium Bob,

In the previous post, GM pointed out that this person plead guilty to the charge of possession of child porn. Also, that Mr. Park both PASSED and FAILED separate polygraphs (two coin flips, coming up "tails" once, and "heads" once). So you can't really base anything on the polygraph.

Whether or not he molested his daughter is another matter.

TC

Posted by Bob from Berrien

- Nov 24, 2008, 04:06 PM

Just to let you know that Jeremy Park was convicted of possession of child pornography (it was found on his personal computer). I'm happy that you're still arguing "possibilities" while this scumbag was getting his jollies by looking at naked children. Look it up if you don't believe me.

It's gratifying to know that even morons like you folks are allowed internet access.

Posted by George W. Maschke

- Nov 17, 2008, 11:43 PM

Quote from: David Lynch on Nov 17, 2008, 06:59 PMJeremy was arrested for possession of child pornography. You're a moron if you think he's innocent. You're also pretty dumb when it comes to lie detectors. Seems the only people complaining about lie detectors are lowlife child molesters like the dirtbags you support so firmly.

Hi, David, and welcome to the AntiPolygraph.org message board. Am I correct in inferring that you are the David Lynch who assisted with the HelpKaylee.com website? I appreciate your concern for Kaylee. But you're mistaken about lie detectors.

I don't know whether Jeremy Park sexually molested his daughter. But I do know that polygraph chart readings offer no answers in this regard. As you will recall (and has been discussed earlier in this message thread), while Park failed the polygraph administered by Dr. Phil's hired polygrapher, he passed one administered by the Michigan State Police.

As for being "pretty dumb about lie detectors," you should know that the consensus view among scientists is that polygraphy has no scientific basis. By contrast, virtually the only ones supporting the validity of polygraphy are those with vested interests in this pseudoscience. That would include Dr. Phil McGraw, who regularly uses the lie detector as a ratings gimmick. I think that which you should find outrageous is that McGraw, who with a Ph.D. in clinical psychology should know better, exploited Kaylee's plight by pretending that such quackery as polygraphy could resolve the serious question of whether she was sexually molested.

As you correctly note, Jeremy Park was arrested earlier this year (12 June 2008) and extradited from South Bend, Indiana to Berrien County, Michigan on charges of possession of child pornography. In a plea agreement, he pled guilty to two counts of "possession of child sexually abusive materials" and in August was sentenced to 270 days in jail and five years' probation:

Quotehttp://www.nilesstar.com/articles/2008/06/14/news/ndnews4.txt

Arrest made on child porn charge

Saturday, June 14, 2008 7:35 AM EDT

ST. JOSEPH - A South Bend man is expected to be extradited to Berrien County on a warrant for child pornography charges.

On Thursday, June 12, at approximately 11:45 a.m. officers from the South Bend Police Department and the Berrien Springs Oronoko Township Police Department arrested Jeremy A. Park, 28, at his apartment at Bonfield Place in South Bend, Ind.

He was charged with four counts of possession of child sexually abusive material and four counts use of computer for criminal act.

Park was arrested on a warrant issued by the Berrien County Trial Court earlier this month resulting from an investigation that begin March 18.

Park was lodged in the St. Joseph County Jail pending extradition to Berrien County.

On March 18, officers from the Berrien Springs Oronoko Township Police Department responded to a report of a domestic assault at 9064 Kephart Lane, Berrien Springs.

At that time, Park alleged he had been assaulted by his wife. Officers were not able to substantiate that an assault occurred and no arrests were made on that allegation; but, as a result of the living conditions in the apartment along with the incident officers were called to, officers took the Park's one-year-old child into protective custody. Child Protective Services was notified and the child was placed into foster care at that time.

During the investigation a laptop computer was turned over to officers along with information that it contained child pornography on it.

A search warrant was obtained for the computer and it was analyzed by Det. Sgt. Mike Danneffel, a forensic computer analyst with the Berrien County Sheriff's Department.

Pornographic images and movies were located on the computer during the examination. The images and movies were examined by a doctor qualified as an expert in determining a person's age from the recovered evidence. It was determined that two images and two movies containing pornographic material were of an underage female.

Following the investigation by the Berrien Springs Oronoko Township Police Department and the Berrien County Sheriff's Department with assistance from the FBI, Berrien County Prosecutor Art Cotter authorized a warrant for Jeremy Park as specified, which was then issued by the Berrien County Trial Court.

This case remains under investigation.

Quotehttp://www.sbtinfo.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20080812&Category=News01&ArtNo=808120390&SectionCat=News&Template=printart

Berrien Springs man sentenced in child-porn case
'Dr. Phil' show films session in Berrien court.
By DEBRA HAIGHT Tribune Correspondent

NILES -- It's not every day that a television crew from a nationally syndicated television show is filming inside a local courtroom, but that was the case Monday in Berrien County Trial Court here.

Jeremy Park, 28, of Berrien Springs, was sentenced for possession of child pornography.

He had appeared on the "Dr. Phil" show in late 2006 to defend himself against allegations that he has sexually abused his young daughter.

Krista Mehl, his ex-girlfriend and mother of his daughter, and her mother, Bonii Dyjasek, appeared on the show to make the allegations. No criminal charges have been filed as a result of the abuse allegations.

While the allegations made on the television show aren't connected with the pornography case, people from the "Dr. Phil" show were on hand to film Berrien County Trial Judge Scott Schofield's sentencing of Park. They plan to air the sentencing on their season opening show in early September.

In the criminal case, Park was sentenced on two counts of possession of child sexually abusive materials, which carry a maximum penalty of four years in prison.

He had originally been charged with two more counts of the child sexually abusive materials and four counts of use of a computer to possess child sexually abusive materials. Those six charges were dismissed as part of a plea agreement.

All eight charges stemmed from an investigation by the Berrien Springs/Oronoko Township Police Department in March. A laptop computer belonging to Park was turned over to police and pornographic images and videos were found on it.

Monday, Assistant Prosecutor Kelly Travis said she believes Park needs to be monitored, register as a sex offender and have no contact with minor children. For his part, Park said he was very regretful and ashamed of his actions and what it had done to himself and his family.

"It's nice you feel bad for yourself and your family, but the real victims are the children who were portrayed in the pornographic pictures," Schofield said. "They don't have the ability to consent.

"Their self-esteem and ability to form romantic relationships in the future are at terrible risk. There would be no reason for them to be forced into this activity if not for people like you willing to view and purchase it."

Park was placed on five years' probation and ordered to serve 270 days in jail with the first 90 in jail and the balance at the end of the probation term. He was given credit for 61 days already served and must also spend 180 days on tether after he's released from jail.

He must pay $2,120 in fines and costs and restitution of $1,255.74 to a leasing company he bought the computer from. He must register as a sex offender, not own a computer or camera and have no contact with children age 17 or younger. After the sentencing, Dyjasek, her family attorney James Boardman and Berrien Springs Police Chief Milt Agay spoke on camera to the "Dr. Phil" crew.

Agay said he is continuing to look at the child abuse allegations involving Park to see if charges can be brought in connection with that case. The initial investigation was closed in 2007 with no charges filed.

Boardman said he's looking to formally terminate Park's parental rights through proceedings in the Berrien County Trial Court's Family Division.

Dyjasek said she still blames Child Protective Services for not doing its job in protecting her granddaughter.

"CPS didn't do their job," she said. "Hopefully they'll not fail the next child calling out for help the way they failed. ... Not only does Jeremy have a lot to answer for, but also CPS has a lot to answer for." She said she and her daughter will continue to pursue justice for the young girl.

"We are going to pursue this case so there is justice for (the girl), this case is far from over. Krista said today that justice is only halfway served."

Posted by T.M. Cullen

- Nov 17, 2008, 09:03 PM

QuoteJeremy was arrested for possession of child pornography. You're a moron if you think he's innocent. You're also pretty dumb when it comes to lie detectors. Seems the only people complaining about lie detectors are lowlife child molesters like the dirtbags you support so firmly.

Good post! Very edifying, and timely too.

He was arrested for possession of child porn? Well, he must be guilty then. That is quite obvious. If it was on Dr. Phil it must be true, though one should probably wait for verification from the Enquirer!

Pardon the sarcasm

TC, idiot moron

Posted by David Lynch

- Nov 17, 2008, 06:59 PM

Jeremy was arrested for possession of child pornography. You're a moron if you think he's innocent. You're also pretty dumb when it comes to lie detectors. Seems the only people complaining about lie detectors are lowlife child molesters like the dirtbags you support so firmly.