- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 19, 2008, 03:45 PMWell, I guess Sancho has left the building.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 14, 2008, 04:02 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 14, 2008, 03:24 PMWhose money? are you being paid?
nopolycop You wroteQuoteI am not convinced the employment application is to be used in the selection process
I maintain that if the content of the application is used to reject any applicants or to separate "qualified applicants" from "unqualified applicants" that it is part of the selection process.
The conclusion to be reached that since the accuracy and efficiency of this part of the selection process is based solely on the unverified and unchallenged truth of the applicant then the application in and of itself has little value as a sole determining factor of an applicant's suitability for employment as a police officer. It doesn't really matter whether or not the application includes what you refer to as a Personal History Questionairre because even if it does, depending on the answers to those questions, rejection can occur even if the responses are unverified.
Sancho Panza
Regarding money, I am not being paid to type here, although I suspect many people who post here are on the clock somewhere. But, that is not the point. I work for myself, and I wasn't doing this, I could be doing something that was paying. I entered this whole discussion as a subject that interests me.
In any event, I don't have any problems with your assessment of the employment application, so why don't we move on?
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 14, 2008, 03:24 PMWhose money? are you being paid?
nopolycop You wrote
I maintain that if the content of the application is used to reject any applicants or to separate "qualified applicants" from "unqualified applicants" that it is part of the selection process.
The conclusion to be reached that since the accuracy and efficiency of this part of the selection process is based solely on the unverified and unchallenged truth of the applicant then the application in and of itself has little value as a sole determining factor of an applicant's suitability for employment as a police officer. It doesn't really matter whether or not the application includes what you refer to as a Personal History Questionairre because even if it does, depending on the answers to those questions, rejection can occur even if the responses are unverified.
Sancho Panza
nopolycop You wrote
QuoteI am not convinced the employment application is to be used in the selection process
I maintain that if the content of the application is used to reject any applicants or to separate "qualified applicants" from "unqualified applicants" that it is part of the selection process.
The conclusion to be reached that since the accuracy and efficiency of this part of the selection process is based solely on the unverified and unchallenged truth of the applicant then the application in and of itself has little value as a sole determining factor of an applicant's suitability for employment as a police officer. It doesn't really matter whether or not the application includes what you refer to as a Personal History Questionairre because even if it does, depending on the answers to those questions, rejection can occur even if the responses are unverified.
Sancho Panza
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 14, 2008, 01:15 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 14, 2008, 12:36 PM
Convinced yet?
Sancho Panza
I am not understanding what I am supposed to be convinced of. The application process is what it is, and good faith attempts to verify the information on an employment application should be taken, to nullify the risk of negligent hiring, and to ensure the applicant is qualified as such. Do you include the Personal History Questionairre in the employment application? And, is the background package, (material ostensively verfied by polygraph) included in your application, or is that a seperate issue? I vote we get to the meat of the issue as quickly as possible, time is money...
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 14, 2008, 12:36 PMThe application is the introduction to the selection process and provides the criteria for the first separation of qualified candidates from unqualified candidates. The selection process won't really start without one and without an application the background investigation doesn't have much to work on.
If one fills out an application and does not at least allege to be qualified for the position, their applications will most likely be rejected. For example if the job requires a highschool education and the applicant fails to answer that they have a high school education then they can be disqualified without further testing. Most government employment application packets include a notice that any intentional false statements in an application are not only grounds for disqualification but may be used as grounds for termination even after the applicant is hired.
The employment application used by some agencies require a doctors statement that the applicant can safely submit to physical agility testing as well as release forms for background information and if these forms are not properly filled out then the applicant is going to be rejected as well.
If inclusions or omissions in the employment application can be used in any way to disqualify an applicant, it must necessarily be included as part of the selection process.
Convinced yet?
Sancho Panza
If one fills out an application and does not at least allege to be qualified for the position, their applications will most likely be rejected. For example if the job requires a highschool education and the applicant fails to answer that they have a high school education then they can be disqualified without further testing. Most government employment application packets include a notice that any intentional false statements in an application are not only grounds for disqualification but may be used as grounds for termination even after the applicant is hired.
The employment application used by some agencies require a doctors statement that the applicant can safely submit to physical agility testing as well as release forms for background information and if these forms are not properly filled out then the applicant is going to be rejected as well.
If inclusions or omissions in the employment application can be used in any way to disqualify an applicant, it must necessarily be included as part of the selection process.
Convinced yet?
Sancho Panza
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 14, 2008, 11:30 AMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 14, 2008, 04:50 AMThe Employment Application
An employment application is intended to allow an applicant to set out, in writing, their desire for a posiion, their qualifications for a position and their history which supports their qualifications. A handwritten application would give some information regarding grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
I submit that if the information contained in the application is not confirmed in some manner, it has little or no value in determining someone's suitability for employment. Even confirmation that the applicant is the person who actually handwrote the application is required to draw any sort of conclusion about grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
My score for an employment applications independant value in determining suitability is 0 unless confirmed. Error rate is based on the honesty and accuracy of the applicant.
I am not convinced the employment application is to be used in the selection process as much as it is used as a basic introduction to the candidate, and only after selection, is the information then subject to verification. It is interesting, that when I first started in police work, the employment ap. was typtically very short. I was astounded that when I went for a Top secret clearance, that the Personal History Questionairre, (Ibelieve that was the name) was so very detailed. To get my "Q" clearance, it took 4-5 months, and each and every fact on that questionairre was verfied by a human being. IN fact, a few years later, I ran into an old girlfriend who related a story to me, that she was tracked down by the investigator and asked about me. I had never listed her as a reference, but someone else told him about her. Also, polygraphs were not given by DOE at that time. I suspect that the poly has replaced such a thorough background check.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 14, 2008, 04:50 AMThe Employment Application
An employment application is intended to allow an applicant to set out, in writing, their desire for a posiion, their qualifications for a position and their history which supports their qualifications. A handwritten application would give some information regarding grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
I submit that if the information contained in the application is not confirmed in some manner, it has little or no value in determining someone's suitability for employment. Even confirmation that the applicant is the person who actually handwrote the application is required to draw any sort of conclusion about grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
My score for an employment applications independant value in determining suitability is 0 unless confirmed. Error rate is based on the honesty and accuracy of the applicant.
An employment application is intended to allow an applicant to set out, in writing, their desire for a posiion, their qualifications for a position and their history which supports their qualifications. A handwritten application would give some information regarding grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
I submit that if the information contained in the application is not confirmed in some manner, it has little or no value in determining someone's suitability for employment. Even confirmation that the applicant is the person who actually handwrote the application is required to draw any sort of conclusion about grammar, penmanship, and spelling.
My score for an employment applications independant value in determining suitability is 0 unless confirmed. Error rate is based on the honesty and accuracy of the applicant.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 12, 2008, 11:30 AMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 11, 2008, 11:39 PM
Nopolycop: why are you talking in third person?
Also to add to the discussion of hiring procedures...I believe the interview portion is the most subjective. Have you ever sat on an interview committee? Here, at least a few years back, the interview committee could not ask questions, they just handed the applicant a paper with the questions and gave the applicant 10-15 minutes to respond. They would let you give points if an applicant hit on an area of interest. With this scenario, everyone should have the same score, right?....many times I wondered if the other interviewers were watching the same person I was as the scores were substantially different?
Like Sancho stated....there are many tests administered to LE that are not 100%...why only focus on the poly? One other area they have used in Utah is the committee observing scenarios with the applicant and a live individuals acting as the bad guy (not videos). With this, the 'actor' can change his/her demeanor each and every time depending on the applicants behaviors....subjective? yes – Informative – you bet!
Application - Physical Agility - Written Examination – Polygraph - Background Investigation - Oral review board - Psychological Testing (MMPI and others) - Personal Interview with Hiring Authority – CVSA - Urinalysis (Drug Screen) AND Scenario Observation. If I weren't so tired right now I could probably think of a few other testing methods.
Also to Nopolycop you posted:
Sancho,
Please forgive my audacity, but your 'fast and furious' paricipation on this forum begs the question: "Have you been hired by the pro-polygraph scoutmasters to camp out here and push their agendas?"
No offence intended.
You and I both know you stated that to push buttons. But hey, no offense intended.
First, as Sancho pointed out, it was another poster who asked the question in red.
Secondly, not sure why I posted in the third person, but in recollection, it was likely because I had just written a third person biographical mention of myself for a literary project for my business, and I was likely still in 3rd person mode. Perhaps one of the statement analysis experts that are here can shed some light...
Yes, I have participated as the interviewer in oral boards, with the scoring of the individuals participation being on a subjective basis. I have also particpated as a candidate in several, and also know from that experience that it is a subjective process, (see comments below).
In any event, I agree that most aspects of the hiring process have at least some subjective components to them, with the exception of the written test, (depending on the type, of course) and the physical agility test. the others are are heavily dependant upon the graders subjective view of the candidates performance, including the oral interview and any scenario type of skill assessment. But, it is the poly and psych which carry a stigma with it that that if you "fail" you are not fit to be a cop. If you do not do well on an oral interview, it is common to get help on how to handle oral interviews.
In fact, when I was still very young, barely an adult with little life experience, I started testing for police officer positions. I did not pass my first two oral interviews. Because I wanted to be a cop, and thought my answers were good, I set up an appointment with one of the interviewers on my last one, and sat down with him to ask why I did so poorly. He was very informative, and told me that I lacked communications skills. Consequently, I practiced delivering the answers that they were seeking, and on the next oral boards, I aced it. In addition, when the opportunity to complete my BA came along, I decided to pursue a minor in communications. I no longer fear public speaking, being put on the spot, etc.
With the exception of the poly and psych, the other aspects of a hiring process do not follow you around from job application to job application. Having a BA in psychology, we actually studied the principals behind the MMPI in my abnormal psychology class, and with that understanding, know what the test is measuring, and how to make sure your answers and the results of that test falls within the "normal" range. I frankly find the psych the least effective part of the hiring procedure, but still, a poor recommendation from the psychologist can haunt a person for a long time.
The issue I have with the poly is primarily centered around the pass/fail nature of the results. I have taken 3 polys and a CVSA in my career, and all have been the last step in the hiring process, and the offer of employment was conditioned upon passing each. But, as has gone unrefuted in many of my past posts, is the notion that one cannot "pass" or "fail" a polygraph, because the ultimate grade is not an objective one, but instead a subjective one. How can one "pass" or "fail" an opinion? Secondly, there appears to be no good, emperical scientific studies which purport to give an accurate determination about the validity of the pre-employment screening polygraph. The best I have I have read is that the specific issue accuracy rate is about 90%, and the screening poly is somewhere below that, with the ranges somewhere between 70 and 90 percent.
The result of this poor accuracy rate is that truthful applicants are accused of being liars, and that stigma follows them into the next job application, because on every background information package I have ever filled out, it asked if I had ever take a polygraph before, and what those results were. As I had previously posted, I "failed" my first poly, even though I also was 100% truthful with the examiner, and also despite the fact that even one of the questions on the poly was "have you lied to me today?" and I passed that question. So, what is a young police applicant supposed to think at that point?
I mention this, because shortly thereafter, I had applied to another agency, and was top on the hiring list. During the background investigation, it was learned that I had "failed" a previous poly, and was removed from the second hiring process, despite the fact that this second pdepartment did not use the poly!!!
So, to counter this, I decided to move out of the area where people were not aware of this "failed" poly, and hire on with a department that did not poly their applicants.
So Donna, the above is why I have some issues with the poly being used in the pre-employment screening process.
Sancho:
Your employment background is impressive, and I applaud you for fighting the good fight. Can you expand on your poly background, so the readers here can assess the credibility of your answers? And if not, please elaborate as to why this question should not be answered.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 12, 2008, 08:25 AMNopolycop, My proposals are simply an attempt to try to keep the discussion on track and make sure that we give each method a thorough discussion. We certainly can't keep someone from jumping in or jumping around as long as they follow the rules of the board.
Donna, why would it matter that Nopolycop used 3rd person?
Candy was the person who asked me if I was a "Hired Gun"
Your thoughts about the interview process are certainly worthy of discussion and I hope you stay with us on this thread because we will get there.
I see the purpose of this thread as an opportunity to thoroughly discuss all of the methods commonly used to determine applicant suitability for law enforcement jobs. I am concerned that if we do too much jumping around from subject to subject we'll end up baiting and name calling again.
As for me. I have 27 years as a police officer. I have participated in the hiring process as an applicant and served 4 years as department training officer where I reviewed applicant pools, administered written testing and acted as overseer for the hiring process. As an investigator I have conducted applicant background investigations. I worked several years as part of a multi jurisdictional drug task force starting in undercover operations and finally becoming project manager. In that capacity I had final hiring/firing recommendation responsibilities to the board of directors governing the task force. I have done work for state and federal agencies, but without going back through old paperwork, I believe that those activities are the subject of a non-disclosure agreement and they would probably not be seen as relevant for this discussion.
Sancho Panza
Donna, why would it matter that Nopolycop used 3rd person?
Candy was the person who asked me if I was a "Hired Gun"
Your thoughts about the interview process are certainly worthy of discussion and I hope you stay with us on this thread because we will get there.
I see the purpose of this thread as an opportunity to thoroughly discuss all of the methods commonly used to determine applicant suitability for law enforcement jobs. I am concerned that if we do too much jumping around from subject to subject we'll end up baiting and name calling again.
As for me. I have 27 years as a police officer. I have participated in the hiring process as an applicant and served 4 years as department training officer where I reviewed applicant pools, administered written testing and acted as overseer for the hiring process. As an investigator I have conducted applicant background investigations. I worked several years as part of a multi jurisdictional drug task force starting in undercover operations and finally becoming project manager. In that capacity I had final hiring/firing recommendation responsibilities to the board of directors governing the task force. I have done work for state and federal agencies, but without going back through old paperwork, I believe that those activities are the subject of a non-disclosure agreement and they would probably not be seen as relevant for this discussion.
Sancho Panza
Posted by Donna.Taylor
- Jan 11, 2008, 11:39 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 11, 2008, 11:46 AMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 11, 2008, 08:36 AMIf you have experience as a police officer or have participated in hiring police candidates and wish to cite that experiece, please feel free to do so.
As a point of reference, Nopolycop is a sworn law enforcement officer, who has participated in several hiring processes in his 30 year career in law enforcement. This career has covered both full-time work as a law enforcement officer, and also part-time (reserve) posiitons, which he currently holds. He has worked as a Chief of Police, a patrol officer, investigator, and also has held a Top Secret clearance when he worked as a DOE facility in their nuclear security detatchment.
His educational background is that he has three advanced degrees, (Associate of Science, Bachelor of Arts, and Juris Doctor).
He also currently serves as an expert witness in the field of law enforcement use of force and homicide investigation. He is NOT a polygrapher, nor has he had any formal polygraph training.
Nopolycop: why are you talking in third person?
Also to add to the discussion of hiring procedures...I believe the interview portion is the most subjective. Have you ever sat on an interview committee? Here, at least a few years back, the interview committee could not ask questions, they just handed the applicant a paper with the questions and gave the applicant 10-15 minutes to respond. They would let you give points if an applicant hit on an area of interest. With this scenario, everyone should have the same score, right?....many times I wondered if the other interviewers were watching the same person I was as the scores were substantially different?
Like Sancho stated....there are many tests administered to LE that are not 100%...why only focus on the poly? One other area they have used in Utah is the committee observing scenarios with the applicant and a live individuals acting as the bad guy (not videos). With this, the 'actor' can change his/her demeanor each and every time depending on the applicants behaviors....subjective? yes – Informative – you bet!
Application - Physical Agility - Written Examination – Polygraph - Background Investigation - Oral review board - Psychological Testing (MMPI and others) - Personal Interview with Hiring Authority – CVSA - Urinalysis (Drug Screen) AND Scenario Observation. If I weren't so tired right now I could probably think of a few other testing methods.
Also to Nopolycop you posted:
Sancho,
Please forgive my audacity, but your 'fast and furious' paricipation on this forum begs the question: "Have you been hired by the pro-polygraph scoutmasters to camp out here and push their agendas?"
No offence intended.
You and I both know you stated that to push buttons. But hey, no offense intended.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 11, 2008, 02:03 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 11, 2008, 01:03 PMQuoteOne thing I do hope, though, is that Donna and Barry join in, as they currently involved in pre-employment polygraphy
sniff....sniff.........ok....uh....I guess I'll just go organize my sock drawer. Fine then.
sniffle sniff
EJ, it was my understanding that you no longer conduct polygraphs, which is why I did not include you in the above post.
Posted by EJohnson
- Jan 11, 2008, 01:03 PMQuoteOne thing I do hope, though, is that Donna and Barry join in, as they currently involved in pre-employment polygraphy
sniff....sniff.........ok....uh....I guess I'll just go organize my sock drawer. Fine then.
sniffle sniff
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 11, 2008, 12:15 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 11, 2008, 11:53 AMNopolycop. I think video testing should certainly be added to the list.
I propose that we wait through the weekend to give others an opportunity to join the thread and start Monday discussing employment applications: Pros and cons for their suitability in separating desirable applicants from undesirable applicants.
I would also like to propose that you and I jointly determine when we think a method has been sufficiently discussed and agree when it is time to move on.
What do you think about leaving our discussion of polygraph until last since it is likely to be the most contentious?
Sancho Panza
I guess I am not comfortable deciding what topics are open for discussion and when, nor when a topic has been sufficiently discussed. I believe anyone choosing to participate here as as much as they wish, with the only requirements that they follow the rules of antipolygraph.org. So, while I agree in concept with your proposal, I recommend we just let the discussion flow, and self-moderate. For example, if you think a sugbect matter has been sufficiently addressed, just drop out till others have also come to that conclusion.
One thing I do hope, though, is that Donna and Barry join in, as they currently involved in pre-employment polygraphy.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 11, 2008, 11:54 AMEJ if no one else disagrees I think that swimming would fall under physical agility.
Sancho Panza
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 11, 2008, 11:53 AMNopolycop. I think video testing should certainly be added to the list.
I propose that we wait through the weekend to give others an opportunity to join the thread and start Monday discussing employment applications: Pros and cons for their suitability in separating desirable applicants from undesirable applicants.
I would also like to propose that you and I jointly determine when we think a method has been sufficiently discussed and agree when it is time to move on.
What do you think about leaving our discussion of polygraph until last since it is likely to be the most contentious?
Sancho Panza
I propose that we wait through the weekend to give others an opportunity to join the thread and start Monday discussing employment applications: Pros and cons for their suitability in separating desirable applicants from undesirable applicants.
I would also like to propose that you and I jointly determine when we think a method has been sufficiently discussed and agree when it is time to move on.
What do you think about leaving our discussion of polygraph until last since it is likely to be the most contentious?
Sancho Panza