- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by koban4max
- Jan 16, 2007, 03:28 AMQuote from: polysuck on Dec 16, 2006, 01:58 PMWell, where do I start....after many police departments turned me down due to arrests and drug experimentation when I was 16/17 (I'm now "over 30"), I found a larger department that I really thought I had a chance with. They looked past all the crap in my earlier years after a very successful military career, including just returning from Iraq with multiple awards. Had the interview/polygraph last week and I was amazed. The polygrapher said that I was trying to beat the test...I was spiking all over the place. When I told him, "I was slowing my breathing down" and he asked "Why?" I told him the truth, "because my heart felt like it was going to blow out of my chest and that's the first thing you do with someone having an adrenaline rush, slow their breathing down so they maintain control" He asked me if I ever researched how to beat a polygraph. Over and over and over...my answer still remains the same, "NO, NEVER" Well, here I am today, now researching it LOL to find out WTH he was talking about"stick to ya guns and ya be okay.
"Well, my machine is telling me you're trying to beat the test"
"Sir, I'm not"
"Well, it's either that or you have something BIG you're not telling me, causing you to spike across the whole test"
We hashed over the questions, even letting me read the sheet, showing which ones were designed to catch lies and the control questions....over and over again, he was "trying to help" me for an hour.
It came down to, "Well Sir, it appears that unless I change my answer and tell you that I have researched how to beat the polygraph, I won't be 'passed' and move on to the next stage."
"I'm not saying that, I just want the truth"
"I am telling you the truth and although it might help me to say I have researched it, THAT would be a lie and I have too much integrity to do that"
Well, that ended the test and I had to see my background investigator. He had me "sign off" for a few months, and I can start the process again.
I have more integrity than 99% of the cops I know, and have worked side-by-side with, including those in combat....so this crap really confuses the hell out of me and I'm totally frustrated. They said there is no appeal process, etc. and although I've been told by countless friends, that are totally amazed I didn't breeze through (because unfortunately I'm one of the most honest people you'll ever meet), to get a lawyer and fight it...why? So I can be blacklisted for life? No thanks.....
One last thing....i know that a background investigation takes up a lot of resources, but i would think this would be the perfect opportunity for them to use the background to find out that i really am a great candidate...maybe i'm just confused...who knows....but surely frustrated.
Posted by polysuck
- Dec 16, 2006, 01:58 PMWell, where do I start....after many police departments turned me down due to arrests and drug experimentation when I was 16/17 (I'm now "over 30"), I found a larger department that I really thought I had a chance with. They looked past all the crap in my earlier years after a very successful military career, including just returning from Iraq with multiple awards. Had the interview/polygraph last week and I was amazed. The polygrapher said that I was trying to beat the test...I was spiking all over the place. When I told him, "I was slowing my breathing down" and he asked "Why?" I told him the truth, "because my heart felt like it was going to blow out of my chest and that's the first thing you do with someone having an adrenaline rush, slow their breathing down so they maintain control" He asked me if I ever researched how to beat a polygraph. Over and over and over...my answer still remains the same, "NO, NEVER" Well, here I am today, now researching it LOL to find out WTH he was talking about"
"Well, my machine is telling me you're trying to beat the test"
"Sir, I'm not"
"Well, it's either that or you have something BIG you're not telling me, causing you to spike across the whole test"
We hashed over the questions, even letting me read the sheet, showing which ones were designed to catch lies and the control questions....over and over again, he was "trying to help" me for an hour.
It came down to, "Well Sir, it appears that unless I change my answer and tell you that I have researched how to beat the polygraph, I won't be 'passed' and move on to the next stage."
"I'm not saying that, I just want the truth"
"I am telling you the truth and although it might help me to say I have researched it, THAT would be a lie and I have too much integrity to do that"
Well, that ended the test and I had to see my background investigator. He had me "sign off" for a few months, and I can start the process again.
I have more integrity than 99% of the cops I know, and have worked side-by-side with, including those in combat....so this crap really confuses the hell out of me and I'm totally frustrated. They said there is no appeal process, etc. and although I've been told by countless friends, that are totally amazed I didn't breeze through (because unfortunately I'm one of the most honest people you'll ever meet), to get a lawyer and fight it...why? So I can be blacklisted for life? No thanks.....
One last thing....i know that a background investigation takes up a lot of resources, but i would think this would be the perfect opportunity for them to use the background to find out that i really am a great candidate...maybe i'm just confused...who knows....but surely frustrated.
"Well, my machine is telling me you're trying to beat the test"
"Sir, I'm not"
"Well, it's either that or you have something BIG you're not telling me, causing you to spike across the whole test"
We hashed over the questions, even letting me read the sheet, showing which ones were designed to catch lies and the control questions....over and over again, he was "trying to help" me for an hour.
It came down to, "Well Sir, it appears that unless I change my answer and tell you that I have researched how to beat the polygraph, I won't be 'passed' and move on to the next stage."
"I'm not saying that, I just want the truth"
"I am telling you the truth and although it might help me to say I have researched it, THAT would be a lie and I have too much integrity to do that"
Well, that ended the test and I had to see my background investigator. He had me "sign off" for a few months, and I can start the process again.
I have more integrity than 99% of the cops I know, and have worked side-by-side with, including those in combat....so this crap really confuses the hell out of me and I'm totally frustrated. They said there is no appeal process, etc. and although I've been told by countless friends, that are totally amazed I didn't breeze through (because unfortunately I'm one of the most honest people you'll ever meet), to get a lawyer and fight it...why? So I can be blacklisted for life? No thanks.....
One last thing....i know that a background investigation takes up a lot of resources, but i would think this would be the perfect opportunity for them to use the background to find out that i really am a great candidate...maybe i'm just confused...who knows....but surely frustrated.
Posted by LieBabyCryBaby
- Dec 13, 2006, 10:53 PMSergeant,
I am sincerely interested to know about your polygraph failure. You said the examiner accused you of using cocaine. Why did your relevant drug question specifically focus on cocaine? That is highly unusual unless there is a reason why cocaine use was suspected at the exclusion of other illegal drugs, especially since marijuana is unquestionably a much more commonly used illegal drug.
I am sincerely interested to know about your polygraph failure. You said the examiner accused you of using cocaine. Why did your relevant drug question specifically focus on cocaine? That is highly unusual unless there is a reason why cocaine use was suspected at the exclusion of other illegal drugs, especially since marijuana is unquestionably a much more commonly used illegal drug.
Posted by Sergeant1107
- Dec 13, 2006, 05:59 AMQuote from: Bill Crider on Dec 12, 2006, 06:42 PMIn short, Without a lot of knowledge and practice, CMs are a crapshoot if you are going in blind I think.I fully agree.
However, going in and telling the truth is a crapshoot too. In my experience it results in a passing score only 25% of the time. A smart player at the craps table has a better than 25% of winning.
Posted by LieBabyCryBaby
- Dec 12, 2006, 06:53 PMQuote from: Bill Crider on Dec 12, 2006, 06:42 PM
In short, Without a lot of knowledge and practice, CMs are a crapshoot if you are going in blind I think.
Couldn't have said it better myself, Bill.
Posted by Bill Crider
- Dec 12, 2006, 06:42 PMManus does not speak like "an anti-polygraphy" zealot. He speaks like someone trained to understand the scientific process. He understands what a scientific control is, he understands statistics and so on. The fact that you relate common knowledge held by any educated researcher at any level only to the "anti-polygraph" crowd only speaks to your level of ignorance, not anyone else's level of indoctrination.
I took the test 4 times, Manus, for the FBI. I was inconclusive on the first and failed the next 3. Each time I took the test I failed different questions than the time before.
Now that you know how the test works I advise you to completely divulge your level of knowledge to the polygrapher. Tell him the truth--that you were curious about the process found this site and read a bunch of literature and studies and you understand what a control question test is. If you fear a false positive because you understand that passing relies on simply 1 reaction to a question being higher than another, tell him so. You need to clear your mind to help your chances in my opinion. He may try to just lie to you and say this site is full of shit and run by folks who admitted to stuff. It isnt.
People may argue about the ethics of countermeasures and accuracy rates, but the info from the articles on this site is 100% accurate, the DODPi downloads and the Lie behind the Lie detector. I had a former FBI polygrapher spend 2 hours telling me how it worked and what he told me is exactly how it is described in the books on this site.
I would arso argue against "trying coutermeasures" unless you know the following....
1. what a "passing" chart looks like
2. The timing of the scorable reaction
3. What your attempts look like on a chart--in other words, how do you know your CM attempt produces a response that will look realistic--not too small, not too large, at the right time, with the correct amplitude, etc.
In short, Without a lot of knowledge and practice, CMs are a crapshoot if you are going in blind I think.
I took the test 4 times, Manus, for the FBI. I was inconclusive on the first and failed the next 3. Each time I took the test I failed different questions than the time before.
Now that you know how the test works I advise you to completely divulge your level of knowledge to the polygrapher. Tell him the truth--that you were curious about the process found this site and read a bunch of literature and studies and you understand what a control question test is. If you fear a false positive because you understand that passing relies on simply 1 reaction to a question being higher than another, tell him so. You need to clear your mind to help your chances in my opinion. He may try to just lie to you and say this site is full of shit and run by folks who admitted to stuff. It isnt.
People may argue about the ethics of countermeasures and accuracy rates, but the info from the articles on this site is 100% accurate, the DODPi downloads and the Lie behind the Lie detector. I had a former FBI polygrapher spend 2 hours telling me how it worked and what he told me is exactly how it is described in the books on this site.
I would arso argue against "trying coutermeasures" unless you know the following....
1. what a "passing" chart looks like
2. The timing of the scorable reaction
3. What your attempts look like on a chart--in other words, how do you know your CM attempt produces a response that will look realistic--not too small, not too large, at the right time, with the correct amplitude, etc.
In short, Without a lot of knowledge and practice, CMs are a crapshoot if you are going in blind I think.
Posted by Manus_Celer_Dei
- Dec 12, 2006, 05:48 AMIf you say that it is not terribly detrimental to know about the examination process, then I have no reason not to believe you. I'll keep it in mind. But if my understanding of it is correct, it is possible to not acquire the desired "nervousness", especially if one knows what's occurring. I take it your argument is basically that the biological response to lying is far too engrained in the vast majority of individuals, and therefore cannot be avoided or overcome?
And as to your other point, I cannot specifically answer, but I have never stated that I am seeking employment as an LEO, but simply that I am seeking employment at a federal agency. While this could translate as a position in law enforcement, it may just as easily mean a position that requires security clearance, such as with the State Dept. in the foreign service where cooperation with the CIA or NSA is called for, or DARPA as a individual contractor. I hope you understand why I may wish to be vague.
And as to your other point, I cannot specifically answer, but I have never stated that I am seeking employment as an LEO, but simply that I am seeking employment at a federal agency. While this could translate as a position in law enforcement, it may just as easily mean a position that requires security clearance, such as with the State Dept. in the foreign service where cooperation with the CIA or NSA is called for, or DARPA as a individual contractor. I hope you understand why I may wish to be vague.
Posted by LieBabyCryBaby
- Dec 11, 2006, 09:49 PMTwoblock,
I increasingly like you.
Actually, it's ok to know about the polygraph. I know all about it, and I know that it still works on me despite my knowledge. But that doesn't mean I would get all caught up in the process if I were you. The more you mess around during the exam, the less likely you will pass, and the more likely it is that you will be discovered by a good examiner.
I agree that if the polygrapher is abusive in the manner that Twoblock has described, it is unacceptable. Criminal interrogation is one thing; abusively getting in the face of an applicant and treating him or her like a criminal is another. If that happens, don't put up with it. However, if you truly have a criminal history and the polygraph reveals it to the examiner despite your lying, I have no sympathy for you, and then all bets are off.
My advice still stands: Just take the polygraph without trying any of the countermeasures crap touted on this website, and you should end up just fine as Zending did.
By the way, I'm still very doubtful about your story, Manus. You don't fit the profile of the average law enforcement job applicant, and something just doesn't smell quite right to my trained nose. If you come back here later and claim that you were a false positive--a rare outcome--then I won't be buying your oceanfront property in Arizona anymore.
I increasingly like you.
Actually, it's ok to know about the polygraph. I know all about it, and I know that it still works on me despite my knowledge. But that doesn't mean I would get all caught up in the process if I were you. The more you mess around during the exam, the less likely you will pass, and the more likely it is that you will be discovered by a good examiner.
I agree that if the polygrapher is abusive in the manner that Twoblock has described, it is unacceptable. Criminal interrogation is one thing; abusively getting in the face of an applicant and treating him or her like a criminal is another. If that happens, don't put up with it. However, if you truly have a criminal history and the polygraph reveals it to the examiner despite your lying, I have no sympathy for you, and then all bets are off.
My advice still stands: Just take the polygraph without trying any of the countermeasures crap touted on this website, and you should end up just fine as Zending did.
By the way, I'm still very doubtful about your story, Manus. You don't fit the profile of the average law enforcement job applicant, and something just doesn't smell quite right to my trained nose. If you come back here later and claim that you were a false positive--a rare outcome--then I won't be buying your oceanfront property in Arizona anymore.
Posted by Twoblock
- Dec 11, 2006, 09:16 PMManus
It appears that you are getting there. I would think that the more you know about the polygraph, the reason for the stim test, etc., the more likely you are to pass by telling the truth. If you are unfortunate enough to draw a punitive polygrapher and he gets in your face with loud accusations and cursing, just tell him to unhook you and you will return when he has joined the human race and will treat you like a man. He has no right to do this. This type of behavior is nothing but a ploy to jack you up and , hopefully, extract some kind of confession. If you have the ability to do so, just remain calm and answer the questions calm. As others on this board have said, "knowledge is power".
LBCB may not agree with what I have said even though he doesn't appear to be the punitive type. He believes he is good enough, and maybe he is, that he doesn't have to resort to that stuff.
It appears that you are getting there. I would think that the more you know about the polygraph, the reason for the stim test, etc., the more likely you are to pass by telling the truth. If you are unfortunate enough to draw a punitive polygrapher and he gets in your face with loud accusations and cursing, just tell him to unhook you and you will return when he has joined the human race and will treat you like a man. He has no right to do this. This type of behavior is nothing but a ploy to jack you up and , hopefully, extract some kind of confession. If you have the ability to do so, just remain calm and answer the questions calm. As others on this board have said, "knowledge is power".
LBCB may not agree with what I have said even though he doesn't appear to be the punitive type. He believes he is good enough, and maybe he is, that he doesn't have to resort to that stuff.
Posted by Manus_Celer_Dei
- Dec 11, 2006, 08:03 PMContinuing, since it seems the server is having problems with my long posts:
-Polygraphy appears to be a form of interrogation, very much dependent on examiner skill to create a certain psychological atmosphere and the susceptiblity of the examinee. As such, skilled examiners are either very talented, or very well-trained. But this also means that the results of the test can be influenced by an examinee, either consciously or unconsciously, to be inconclusive or to veer away from reality.
-Since I now likely know too much about the process to be the ideal examinee, I need to decide whether actively or passively subverting any possible psychological conditioning is a good idea. I am positive I have it well within my means to do the latter, at the very least.
-I appreciate and have taken into consideration your and Zending's advice. I feel it is by no means bad advice.
-If I am misinformed about any points I have made, please tell me. I'm here to learn, prepare, and react - not to tear a practice down from its foundations.
-Polygraphy appears to be a form of interrogation, very much dependent on examiner skill to create a certain psychological atmosphere and the susceptiblity of the examinee. As such, skilled examiners are either very talented, or very well-trained. But this also means that the results of the test can be influenced by an examinee, either consciously or unconsciously, to be inconclusive or to veer away from reality.
-Since I now likely know too much about the process to be the ideal examinee, I need to decide whether actively or passively subverting any possible psychological conditioning is a good idea. I am positive I have it well within my means to do the latter, at the very least.
-I appreciate and have taken into consideration your and Zending's advice. I feel it is by no means bad advice.
-If I am misinformed about any points I have made, please tell me. I'm here to learn, prepare, and react - not to tear a practice down from its foundations.
Posted by LieBabyCryBaby
- Dec 11, 2006, 08:02 PMManus,
If what you say is true, I stand corrected, despite my continued suspicions. Your education is apparent, and if you are indeed simply a law enforcement recruit who just began researching the polygraph, then your command of the anti-polygraph jargon makes you something of an enigma. Carry on then.
If what you say is true, I stand corrected, despite my continued suspicions. Your education is apparent, and if you are indeed simply a law enforcement recruit who just began researching the polygraph, then your command of the anti-polygraph jargon makes you something of an enigma. Carry on then.
Posted by Manus_Celer_Dei
- Dec 11, 2006, 07:54 PMQuote from: LieBabyCryBaby on Dec 10, 2006, 06:06 PMYeah, guess that confirms my suspicions. I don't believe you are simply a law enforcement recruit. You talk just like one of the regular anti-polygraph posters on this forum. In fact, you sound very much like someone I know from this forum. Hmmm. . . That reminds me: anyone seen Digithead lately?You have an interesting choice of names, by the way:
Manus celer Dei "the swift hand of God."
I created a long post to respond to you again, but the server ate it. Instead of retyping it completely, I'll brush across my most salient points:
-I don't know who Digithead is.
-I may well be more educated than a typical examinee. I use jargon because I'm academically and professionally familiar with its use, not because I have seen it on this or other websites.
-I, as a matter of curiosity, character, and professional courtesy, do as much research as I can to understand what future employment entails, including the hiring process itself. I feel to not do so is both unwise and a bit of an insult to a prospective employer.
Posted by LieBabyCryBaby
- Dec 11, 2006, 02:28 PMOh, there you are, Digithead. Nice of you to stop by. You certainly have plenty of time, despite your academic duties, to peruse the various topics on this forum and respond very quickly to the implication I made.
You should agree, though, that Manus definitely speaks with the trained tongue of the well-versed anti-polygraphite (you like that word?) rather than the typical unlearned curiosity of a law enforcement applicant who just recently stumbled onto this website. That is why I assume, perhaps erroneously, I admit, that he/she is a wolf in sheepskin.
You should agree, though, that Manus definitely speaks with the trained tongue of the well-versed anti-polygraphite (you like that word?) rather than the typical unlearned curiosity of a law enforcement applicant who just recently stumbled onto this website. That is why I assume, perhaps erroneously, I admit, that he/she is a wolf in sheepskin.
Posted by digithead
- Dec 11, 2006, 04:22 AMQuote from: LieBabyCryBaby on Dec 10, 2006, 06:06 PMYeah, guess that confirms my suspicions. I don't believe you are simply a law enforcement recruit. You talk just like one of the regular anti-polygraph posters on this forum. In fact, you sound very much like someone I know from this forum. Hmmm. . . That reminds me: anyone seen Digithead lately?
Manus celer Dei "the swift hand of God."
At least you know your Latin, but manus is not me. Religion is not my thing, I'm one of those godless academics, remember?
Plus sockpuppets are not my style...
But George can verify the different IP addresses if you want evidence of your false positive as I only post from school and home...
I'm also buried with writing semester papers and grading final exams so I don't have time for long posts...
Posted by fatman1955
- Dec 11, 2006, 12:14 AMManus, you will soon see how you really feel about the polygraph after you take it. If you pass you will swear by it being accurate. If you fail it although you told the truth you will loath it. There is no credible science involved in the polygraph. Please also do not assume it is an art. Voodoo and reading palms is an art and just as accurate. The polygraph is an interrogation tool and you are your worst enemy when you take the test. It starts doing the pre interview and I would caution you to be careful what you say because your works may come back to haunt you. When the test starts, remember the polygraph tester is not your friend. His/her job is to get an admission of guilt out of you. If for some reason he/she just does not like you that may be enough to fail you. If they don't like a reading on the chart you must be using countermeasures and you will fail. The best advice that can be given to you is to get a good night sleep, take the test and hope that when your employment coin is tossed it lands on heads with you getting the job. The more advice you get about how credible or not credible the polygraph is will ultimately sabotage you. Since the test is not recorded it will be your word against the tester if you fail. If you fail, you be the judge of the appeal process. With that said, I wish you all the luck on the test. It really makes no difference in the end if you are pro or anti-polygraph until you take the test.