- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Nov 18, 2009, 11:27 PMIt's based on a false premise. Namely, that if there is a consistent spike in the subject's sympathetic response when answering a question, they are probably being deceptive. All one can really conclude is that the person is "reacting" to the question. Could be a lot of things other than deception.
It's like saying a person with a high temperature must have a virus. All one can really conclude is that the person's immune system is fighting something. Could be many things.
Of course, preemployment polygraphs are nothing more than INTERROGATIONS disguised as a test for truthfulness. Most operators probably know the machine isn't really testing for truthfulness. Doesn't matter. It IS an effective interrogation tool to use on gullible people.
TC
It's like saying a person with a high temperature must have a virus. All one can really conclude is that the person's immune system is fighting something. Could be many things.
Of course, preemployment polygraphs are nothing more than INTERROGATIONS disguised as a test for truthfulness. Most operators probably know the machine isn't really testing for truthfulness. Doesn't matter. It IS an effective interrogation tool to use on gullible people.
TC
Posted by efitz_21224
- Nov 18, 2009, 09:32 AMThe test is accurate? Are you out of your mind?
I took the FBI poly and failed...on drug use. I've never even touched a drug. I've gone so far as to work in a drug rehab clinic for over 8 years at Johns Hopkins University, so I'm about as 'anti-drug' as you can get.
There's a reason this non-scientific, laughable test isn't used in court. I'm in med school (now realizing how glad I am that I didn't end up in the FBI). I know a thing or two about the human body - the nervous and endocrine systems - and the polygraph is nothing more than a joke. It's akin to reading tea leaves or one's horoscope. Anyone who places merit in this test is obviously not a scientist.
I took the FBI poly and failed...on drug use. I've never even touched a drug. I've gone so far as to work in a drug rehab clinic for over 8 years at Johns Hopkins University, so I'm about as 'anti-drug' as you can get.
There's a reason this non-scientific, laughable test isn't used in court. I'm in med school (now realizing how glad I am that I didn't end up in the FBI). I know a thing or two about the human body - the nervous and endocrine systems - and the polygraph is nothing more than a joke. It's akin to reading tea leaves or one's horoscope. Anyone who places merit in this test is obviously not a scientist.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 03, 2008, 02:43 AMQuote from: Anonymous on Nov 03, 2008, 02:34 AMI do not want to go through this ordeal! Is there anything that I can do to properly prepare for the polygraph test?
With regard to the FBI polygraph, my advice would be to "just say no." The risks are not worth the potential rewards. Polygraph countermeasures (which you'll find explained in Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector) can at best reduce the risk of a false positive outcome, they are no guarantee of passing this invalid test.
Posted by Anonymous
- Nov 03, 2008, 02:34 AMI do not want to go through this ordeal! Is there anything that I can do to properly prepare for the polygraph test?
Posted by polyfool
- Sep 03, 2008, 01:53 PMWOWitisover,
If you feel your polygraph examiner acted in an unethical manner, you should most certainly report him. However, don't expect it to be easy to get the agency to investigate your complaint. It may take several attempts and you may need to seek help from your elected official to get some attention. It seems that's the only method to get a response.
I was successful in getting the agency to investigate my unethical polygraph examiner. However, the FBI would only tell me that it was investigating my complaint and that it had dealt with the matter--that's it. Who knows if the examiner was even investigated? I have nothing to go on but the agency's word.
I wouldn't expect to get any other information about your polygraph examiner, including previous complaints. Good luck to you.
If you feel your polygraph examiner acted in an unethical manner, you should most certainly report him. However, don't expect it to be easy to get the agency to investigate your complaint. It may take several attempts and you may need to seek help from your elected official to get some attention. It seems that's the only method to get a response.
I was successful in getting the agency to investigate my unethical polygraph examiner. However, the FBI would only tell me that it was investigating my complaint and that it had dealt with the matter--that's it. Who knows if the examiner was even investigated? I have nothing to go on but the agency's word.
I wouldn't expect to get any other information about your polygraph examiner, including previous complaints. Good luck to you.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 31, 2008, 12:01 AMQuote from: WOWitisover on Jul 29, 2008, 09:40 AMMy applicant coordinator alluded to the fact that my polygrapher has had several complaints made against him from applicants and internally as well from other filed offices. Can I make a public information request reference his service record or formal complaints against him? If he has a history of inappropriate behavior can I get the information and have it included in the letter I am going to send to go along with my file?
While I don't think you'd be successful in obtaining your polygrapher's service record under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), you might have better luck requesting copies of any complaints filed against him. In addition, you might want to file a complaint of your own. You can include that and any documentation you may obtain under FOIA with a letter to the Bureau regarding your polygraph results, but I wouldn't wait for the FBI to make a determination on your request before writing an initial letter contesting the polygrapher's accusation of deception.
You might also want to consider writing a more detailed account of your polygraph experience for inclusion on AntiPolygraph.org's Personal Statements page (and feel free to hold your polygrapher publicly accountable by naming him):
https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml
Posted by polytek
- Jul 30, 2008, 09:28 AMYou may want to start by employing your own polygrapher to quality control the video of the test and the charts themselves.
One of the inherent problems with polygrpahers is tha tthere is no psychometric test on them at the classroom stage. I feel that too many polygrapher do not have the correct mental acuity and personality to become wielders of the doomsday sword.
If even one of them has the gunslinger mentality then its ONe too many - and the majority are of that ilk.
One only has to peruse the content of 'The Trolls' that posted here regularly a few months back. It is scary to think that the so-called 'Illuminati' of APA got their gigglies by posing here under grandiose nicks - mouthing off like the maniacs they are accused of aping.
Only when the public clamour and petition the new govt about its promise of change - and include the polyfoolery therein - only then will govt start to take note that there are too many loose cannons in the polygraph industry.
One of the inherent problems with polygrpahers is tha tthere is no psychometric test on them at the classroom stage. I feel that too many polygrapher do not have the correct mental acuity and personality to become wielders of the doomsday sword.
If even one of them has the gunslinger mentality then its ONe too many - and the majority are of that ilk.
One only has to peruse the content of 'The Trolls' that posted here regularly a few months back. It is scary to think that the so-called 'Illuminati' of APA got their gigglies by posing here under grandiose nicks - mouthing off like the maniacs they are accused of aping.
Only when the public clamour and petition the new govt about its promise of change - and include the polyfoolery therein - only then will govt start to take note that there are too many loose cannons in the polygraph industry.
Posted by WOWitisover
- Jul 29, 2008, 09:40 AMQuote from: WOWitisover on Jul 14, 2008, 04:49 AM
I am curious. Did you believe their machine could detect deception prior to being tested?
TC
No. I know it measures my body's response to questions, not actual deception.
George, thanks for the answers to my questions.
The whole process has left me very angry. Not so much at not getting the job but the fact that the polygrapher can attack my integrity in his evaluation and that it becomes a part of my record that can keep future opportunities from me.
My applicant coordinator alluded to the fact that my polygrapher has had several complaints made against him from applicants and internally as well from other filed offices. Can I make a public information request reference his service record or formal complaints against him? If he has a history of inappropriate behavior can I get the information and have it included in the letter I am going to send to go along with my file?
I would like to mitigate the damage the polygrapher has done to my future job opportunities.
Does any one have any ideas or advice?
Posted by goofbal
- Jul 20, 2008, 07:14 PMI received my FBI rejection letter about a week in a half ago. I am actually appealing the polygraph results. My first polgraph, the polygrapher told me he could not read it, because I was too calm. Then I was asked what I was thinking about? I was allowed to retake it two months later. Apparently they read that one and deemed it a failure. Thus, I am appealing the results to the applicant coordinator.
Posted by EXC0P
- Jul 20, 2008, 02:06 PMDrive By Posting To Follow:
Just call 1-800-WHAAAABULANCE and complain there
"After hitting an 11 Y/O girl witnesses saw the officer wrap an alcohol container in a poncho and throw it in a dumpster"<-Officer killed an 11 Y/O girl in Tennessee
Or:
"Video shows the TASER jolt being applied for 37 seconds" <-concerning the killing of an "unruly" teen.
Or:
"Police use TASER on blind woman with cancer"<-FYI any officer no matter how fat or stupid that can't avoid harm from an unarmed blind woman with cancer needs to go sell shoes at Sears.
And these are just the stories from the last three days.
IMNSHO
Police should get two of these every month with results made available to the public.
Just call 1-800-WHAAAABULANCE and complain there
"After hitting an 11 Y/O girl witnesses saw the officer wrap an alcohol container in a poncho and throw it in a dumpster"<-Officer killed an 11 Y/O girl in Tennessee
Or:
"Video shows the TASER jolt being applied for 37 seconds" <-concerning the killing of an "unruly" teen.
Or:
"Police use TASER on blind woman with cancer"<-FYI any officer no matter how fat or stupid that can't avoid harm from an unarmed blind woman with cancer needs to go sell shoes at Sears.
And these are just the stories from the last three days.
IMNSHO
Police should get two of these every month with results made available to the public.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 20, 2008, 04:40 AMQuote from: WOWitisover on Jul 14, 2008, 03:10 AMDid I fail the 2nd polygraph?
It is standard operating procedure for polygraphers to accuse the examinee of deception and/or withholding information and to interrogate when the charts are scored as "deception indicated." So it sure sounds like you failed.
QuoteCan the polygrapher add his two cents into a recommendation failing me?
Yes. He can include his own characterizations of the polygraph examination in his report. Because the FBI has a deliberate policy of not audio- or video-recording polygraph examinations, the polygrapher can be confident that any examinee who challenges his account of what was said in the polygraph suite will be unable to prove his case.
QuoteWould they go through the trouble of three years of testing, after I had already passed one of their polygraphs to fail me because of a seemingly troubled new polygrapher gives me two inconclusive results?
You bet. The FBI has made passing a polygraph an absolute requirement for employment.
QuoteWhy would they not take the step to try it with another polygrapher, as they had already spend so much time, energy and money to get me to this spot at the end?
It's not their money. And those in charge at the FBI and other federal agencies simply don't care about the injustice they have dealt you (and many others).
QuoteCan anyone answer any of my questions? Offer any advice? How many qualified people that should be protecting all of us from unseen threats are denied the opportunity because of an idiot sitting in front of a box who probably has not been in combat in a foreign land on behalf of their country or on the street in the city arresting violent offenders?
The FBI has a pre-employment polygraph failure rate on the order of 50%. Given that polygraphy has no scientific basis, it's clear that many qualified, honest applicants are being falsely branded as liars and wrongly blacklisted (for life) from FBI employment. As I've stated earlier, I think that the FBI's pre-employment polygraph is a risk not worth taking.
You'll want to write a polite but firm letter to the FBI contesting your polygrapher's false accusation of deception. This letter should be added to your permanent FBI file and will document the fact that you do not tacitly concur with the accusation of deception.
You'll also want to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file, including (but not limited to) all documentation associated with your polygraph examination. It is not unheard of for polygraphers to exaggerate or even fabricate admissions. Because they are rated on the basis of admissions obtained after "deception indicated" charts, they have an incentive to overstate an examinee's admissions, and with the FBI's no-recording policy, they face little risk in doing so.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jul 14, 2008, 04:49 AMWell, I'm not trying to "rub it in", but here are some of the standard replies polygraphers (like Jim Sacket of the Las Vegas PD, Patrick Coffey, a private examiner, who accused this board's administrer of working for Al Qaeda...et al) have posted on this board numerous times in the past:
You act as if you are "entitled" to a job with the FBI, you are NOT!
The test is 98% accurate! You must have judy had a bad examiner!
Just take your little "spanking" and get on with your life!
The test is scientific and 86-98% accurate. Can you cite any studies proving that the test IS NOT ACCURATE?!!!
There are only three or four people who have posted on this board claiming to have been tested "False Positive". In actuality, such results are VERY RARE. You must be lying!
Welcome to the "pity party"! Get over it!
If only we could get more people to this board BEFORE they are tested!
You committed a cardinal sin, you MADE AN ADMISSION regarding a "relevant" test questioin. And you did it in writing. You have nothing to gain by doing that. Trust me, they will blow it out of all proportion and use it against you with higher ups. Best thing to do is tell them you don't care what their machine says, you've never committed a crime. Repeat is a hundred times, over three days, if necessary. The last thing a polygrapher wants it to have a chart consistently "outside of acceptable parameters" without an admission, or info volunteered by the victim they can use to justify the spastic "squiggly" marks.
I am curious. Did you believe their machine could detect deception prior to being tested?
TC
You act as if you are "entitled" to a job with the FBI, you are NOT!
The test is 98% accurate! You must have judy had a bad examiner!
Just take your little "spanking" and get on with your life!
The test is scientific and 86-98% accurate. Can you cite any studies proving that the test IS NOT ACCURATE?!!!
There are only three or four people who have posted on this board claiming to have been tested "False Positive". In actuality, such results are VERY RARE. You must be lying!
Welcome to the "pity party"! Get over it!
If only we could get more people to this board BEFORE they are tested!
You committed a cardinal sin, you MADE AN ADMISSION regarding a "relevant" test questioin. And you did it in writing. You have nothing to gain by doing that. Trust me, they will blow it out of all proportion and use it against you with higher ups. Best thing to do is tell them you don't care what their machine says, you've never committed a crime. Repeat is a hundred times, over three days, if necessary. The last thing a polygrapher wants it to have a chart consistently "outside of acceptable parameters" without an admission, or info volunteered by the victim they can use to justify the spastic "squiggly" marks.
I am curious. Did you believe their machine could detect deception prior to being tested?
TC
Posted by WOWitisover
- Jul 14, 2008, 03:10 AMI wanted to post my experience here and get any feedback that was offered. I think sharing the story will help me personally as is hard for me to currently swallow.
I wanted a career in the FBI since I was in college. I graduated from college and enlisted in the US Army with a military intelligence MOS. I served as a reservist and was deployed over seas. I joined a police department and served for a couple years. Then I started my application process to the FBI as a special agent. I made it through the entire process including the Phase 2 testing, medical, the background check, and the polygraph. I failed my initial PT test that would have sent me to adjudication. I waited for over a year and drastically improved my physical fitness. I also experienced some personal issues that kept me from continuing testing right away.
I got myself squared away and got my file reactivated. I was reactivated and completed a medical update, a background update, and then found out I had to take another polygraph because mine was over two years old.
This did not worry me in the least as I had nothing to hide, and I had not had any problems with either my police polygraph or my previous FBI polygraph.
I went to the office and met the new polygrapher. I took the polygraph and it did not go as the others had gone. He told me I had problems on some of the questions. He asked me why I would have responses and I told him I did not know. One of the issues was alcohol use (I don't drink) and the other was had I committed a serious crime (I have not). I explained to him when asked about crime, I think about many disturbing things as an experienced police officer in a big city. He goes on a bit and asks me the same questions and tells me he will send it up to HQ, but he knows they will have issue with my results.
I leave and talk to the applicant coordinator a few days later who tells me I need to take it again because my test was "inconclusive".
I ask if it is possible to get another polygrapher to take my next test, possibly the one who passed me on the original. The coordinator tells me they will try and make that happen.
I get a call a few days later that another polygrapher is not available and I will have the same guy. This worries me as I did not pass the first one and know I won't have anything different to say during my next polygraph.
I go to my next polygraph and it is absolutely a horrible experience. I am a decorated soldier and police officer and I felt like I was a criminal by the end of this polygraph.
We sat down and talked prior to the test and then went through the questions one time. Again the problem with the "serious crime" question. He tries to get me to admit what is causing the problem with the question, which starts to anger me as I am telling the truth.
He goes and leaves the room for 10 minutes then comes back and says we have to go through the questions again. We do this. I apparently have the same reaction to the serious crime question again as he starts a rudimentary and simple interrogation about what I have done. I am getting mad and tell him I have not committed any crimes.
I explain to him a thought that popped into my head during one of the questions about crime, relating to a work related use of force incident on duty at the police department. It was an emotionally charged incident for me that I thought about during the polygraph and that particular question. He starts asking me why I did not disclose this before hand. I explain it was something that happened in an every day work situation that was within the scope of my duties and that it had been properly documented at the PD. He tells me he wants me to write it out on an addendum to my SF-86. I write it out clearly, articulating the incident, and that he had asked me to write it down.
He then moves into a chair seated to close in my personal space and starts a very rookie interrogation of me, trying to get me to admit a crime I did not commit. I was angry during the questions but after found it amusing he would try that on someone who has interrogated and interviewed my share of suspects, victims and witnesses.
I leave and get into contact with my applicant coordinator a few days later. We have an interesting conversation about my polygraph and my polygrapher. I explain what happened and ask for their opinion. I also want to confirm that what I had written down was not an admission of any wrong doing but a note he asked me to write (I made it very clear in the note what had happened and why I was writing it down). I expressed my anger at the interrogation (I understand it was part of the process). The coordinator tells me in not so many words that there are good and not so good polygraphers.
During my conversation I am given the impression there have been many complaints about this polygraphers from applicants in my area. I ask what happens if I got another inconclusive result. I though the coordinator told me I would get a retest.
Three weeks go by and I get a ding letter. My letter says I was not selected because there were more qualified applicants. It also says that I was not denied a security clearance and good luck to me. It was from a security element at HQ.
I was stunned.
I have a friend who was recently dinged on the FBI process after his polygraph and his letter said told him not to contact the FBI, gave him the process for appeal, and let him know how to request his file using the freedom of information act.
I don't know what the differences in the letter means but it sounds like he was rejected for failing the poly.
Did I fail the 2nd polygraph? Can the polygrapher add his two cents into a recommendation failing me?
Would they go through the trouble of three years of testing, after I had already passed one of their polygraphs to fail me because of a seemingly troubled new polygrapher gives me two inconclusive results?
Why would they not take the step to try it with another polygrapher, as they had already spend so much time, energy and money to get me to this spot at the end?
As you can imagine I am very disappointed and a little disgusted. I need to contact my applicant coordinator one last time to ask about the letter I received.
Can anyone answer any of my questions? Offer any advice? How many qualified people that should be protecting all of us from unseen threats are denied the opportunity because of an idiot sitting in front of a box who probably has not been in combat in a foreign land on behalf of their country or on the street in the city arresting violent offenders?
Are you kidding me?
I wanted a career in the FBI since I was in college. I graduated from college and enlisted in the US Army with a military intelligence MOS. I served as a reservist and was deployed over seas. I joined a police department and served for a couple years. Then I started my application process to the FBI as a special agent. I made it through the entire process including the Phase 2 testing, medical, the background check, and the polygraph. I failed my initial PT test that would have sent me to adjudication. I waited for over a year and drastically improved my physical fitness. I also experienced some personal issues that kept me from continuing testing right away.
I got myself squared away and got my file reactivated. I was reactivated and completed a medical update, a background update, and then found out I had to take another polygraph because mine was over two years old.
This did not worry me in the least as I had nothing to hide, and I had not had any problems with either my police polygraph or my previous FBI polygraph.
I went to the office and met the new polygrapher. I took the polygraph and it did not go as the others had gone. He told me I had problems on some of the questions. He asked me why I would have responses and I told him I did not know. One of the issues was alcohol use (I don't drink) and the other was had I committed a serious crime (I have not). I explained to him when asked about crime, I think about many disturbing things as an experienced police officer in a big city. He goes on a bit and asks me the same questions and tells me he will send it up to HQ, but he knows they will have issue with my results.
I leave and talk to the applicant coordinator a few days later who tells me I need to take it again because my test was "inconclusive".
I ask if it is possible to get another polygrapher to take my next test, possibly the one who passed me on the original. The coordinator tells me they will try and make that happen.
I get a call a few days later that another polygrapher is not available and I will have the same guy. This worries me as I did not pass the first one and know I won't have anything different to say during my next polygraph.
I go to my next polygraph and it is absolutely a horrible experience. I am a decorated soldier and police officer and I felt like I was a criminal by the end of this polygraph.
We sat down and talked prior to the test and then went through the questions one time. Again the problem with the "serious crime" question. He tries to get me to admit what is causing the problem with the question, which starts to anger me as I am telling the truth.
He goes and leaves the room for 10 minutes then comes back and says we have to go through the questions again. We do this. I apparently have the same reaction to the serious crime question again as he starts a rudimentary and simple interrogation about what I have done. I am getting mad and tell him I have not committed any crimes.
I explain to him a thought that popped into my head during one of the questions about crime, relating to a work related use of force incident on duty at the police department. It was an emotionally charged incident for me that I thought about during the polygraph and that particular question. He starts asking me why I did not disclose this before hand. I explain it was something that happened in an every day work situation that was within the scope of my duties and that it had been properly documented at the PD. He tells me he wants me to write it out on an addendum to my SF-86. I write it out clearly, articulating the incident, and that he had asked me to write it down.
He then moves into a chair seated to close in my personal space and starts a very rookie interrogation of me, trying to get me to admit a crime I did not commit. I was angry during the questions but after found it amusing he would try that on someone who has interrogated and interviewed my share of suspects, victims and witnesses.
I leave and get into contact with my applicant coordinator a few days later. We have an interesting conversation about my polygraph and my polygrapher. I explain what happened and ask for their opinion. I also want to confirm that what I had written down was not an admission of any wrong doing but a note he asked me to write (I made it very clear in the note what had happened and why I was writing it down). I expressed my anger at the interrogation (I understand it was part of the process). The coordinator tells me in not so many words that there are good and not so good polygraphers.
During my conversation I am given the impression there have been many complaints about this polygraphers from applicants in my area. I ask what happens if I got another inconclusive result. I though the coordinator told me I would get a retest.
Three weeks go by and I get a ding letter. My letter says I was not selected because there were more qualified applicants. It also says that I was not denied a security clearance and good luck to me. It was from a security element at HQ.
I was stunned.
I have a friend who was recently dinged on the FBI process after his polygraph and his letter said told him not to contact the FBI, gave him the process for appeal, and let him know how to request his file using the freedom of information act.
I don't know what the differences in the letter means but it sounds like he was rejected for failing the poly.
Did I fail the 2nd polygraph? Can the polygrapher add his two cents into a recommendation failing me?
Would they go through the trouble of three years of testing, after I had already passed one of their polygraphs to fail me because of a seemingly troubled new polygrapher gives me two inconclusive results?
Why would they not take the step to try it with another polygrapher, as they had already spend so much time, energy and money to get me to this spot at the end?
As you can imagine I am very disappointed and a little disgusted. I need to contact my applicant coordinator one last time to ask about the letter I received.
Can anyone answer any of my questions? Offer any advice? How many qualified people that should be protecting all of us from unseen threats are denied the opportunity because of an idiot sitting in front of a box who probably has not been in combat in a foreign land on behalf of their country or on the street in the city arresting violent offenders?
Are you kidding me?