- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Phlyfisher
- Dec 23, 2008, 02:23 AMSheesh-
I had a really similar experience with the FBI polygrapher. I wonder if the FBI guys are really similar in their interviewing techniques or if you and I may have had the same interviewer. You weren't interviewed by a Mr. Anderson were you?
I had a really similar experience with the FBI polygrapher. I wonder if the FBI guys are really similar in their interviewing techniques or if you and I may have had the same interviewer. You weren't interviewed by a Mr. Anderson were you?
Posted by Mr. Bellemont
- Dec 22, 2008, 06:39 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Dec 05, 2008, 12:58 AM
That line of questioning seems atypical (and rather voyeuristic) for FBI pre-employment polygraph screening. I would be interested to hear from any other FBI applicants if they have been asked similar questions.
The individual interrogating me at the FBI also tried to steer some of the questioning to perverse sexuality.
Mr. Bellemont
Posted by pancho76
- Dec 11, 2008, 12:27 PMExactly! as long as I don't bring up little details into the equation; I should be alright. Because like I said "I have nothing to hide"
For example in the first posting I read that he mentioned something about hanging out with the local gang; but what he ment was his neighborhood friends. The examiner thought completely different and started asking him questions about his gang affiliations!!! This to me seems ridiculous but I guess its those little words that they try to stick to in order to try and get you to confess to something that doesnt even exist.
For example in the first posting I read that he mentioned something about hanging out with the local gang; but what he ment was his neighborhood friends. The examiner thought completely different and started asking him questions about his gang affiliations!!! This to me seems ridiculous but I guess its those little words that they try to stick to in order to try and get you to confess to something that doesnt even exist.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuoteAs long as I know im right and that I have nothing to hide, I shouldn't have nothing to worry about.
Yes you DO! You can tell the truth, know you are telling the truth, and STILL FAIL! You ALSO have to NOT volunteer ANY information, or make ANY admissions, no matter HOW INSIGNIFICANT you think it is, IF it concerns a RELEVANT question.
IOW, you have to NOT nibble at the BAIT they use to lure you in during their FISHING EXPEDITION!
Example, "you're have trouble with this question. Anything bothering you? Must be something. I want to help you get this job! Let's get everything off your chest so you can clear your mind and do better on that question (hahaha!)! Okay now Mr. Applicant. What could be troubling you? (what little tidbits can you give me to hang you with?
) Blah! Blah! Blah!"TC
Posted by pancho76
- Dec 10, 2008, 04:32 PMYeah your right, the polygraph is just a machine they use to measure reactions you have no real control over. As long as I know im right and that I have nothing to hide, I shouldn't have nothing to worry about. I can't let something like this machine get me down because I know myself more than any machine will ever know me. I just hope the background investigators can see past this machines "predictions" and see the real person that I am; because I feel that I am a good candidate for this position.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 09, 2008, 01:18 AMQuoteI guess I just have to learn to relax when it comes to taking these tests, and not let that evil machine find any change in my bodies reactions.
The reactions the machine measures are controlled by the unconscious mind (through the brain stem and lthe brain's lymbic system). You really have no direct control over them.
But that is not the point. The point is NOT to let them convince you that reactions equate to deception, and use that as a pretext to get you to volunteer information they can then blow out of all logical proportion to use against you to rationalize the reaction. It is an INTERROGATION! Volunteer nothing concerning a "relevant" question".
They use upside down logic. If you react, they assume it is a lie, and must then get an admission or other info from you to MAKE IT A LIE. If that makes sense.;
Employment polygraphs are "fishing expeditions". So don't act like a fish!
TC
Posted by pancho76
- Dec 08, 2008, 02:42 PM"Several people here have reported the same thing. Why the hell did you tolerate that?"
It was my first time taking a polygraph and I didn't know what to expect. I know thats not a very good excuse but I just wanted to get it over with. Also like i've said before; "I guess this is just something that you have to deal with if you plan on being in law enforecement"
That's why im also against it's use; because if you decide not to take it they wont continue the hiring process with you. But now im not really worried about it because I know they won't find anything bad on me; no matter how deep they dig. The thing that does worry me is the FBI polygraph... Not because I have something to hide; but from what i've read it seems as if they wont event start a background check on you if you seem even slightly deceptive in the polygraph. It's like they aren't even giving you a chance to prove your not lying because of what some dumb, non-factual, machine is saying. I guess I just have to learn to relax when it comes to taking these tests, and not let that evil machine find any change in my bodies reactions.
It was my first time taking a polygraph and I didn't know what to expect. I know thats not a very good excuse but I just wanted to get it over with. Also like i've said before; "I guess this is just something that you have to deal with if you plan on being in law enforecement"
That's why im also against it's use; because if you decide not to take it they wont continue the hiring process with you. But now im not really worried about it because I know they won't find anything bad on me; no matter how deep they dig. The thing that does worry me is the FBI polygraph... Not because I have something to hide; but from what i've read it seems as if they wont event start a background check on you if you seem even slightly deceptive in the polygraph. It's like they aren't even giving you a chance to prove your not lying because of what some dumb, non-factual, machine is saying. I guess I just have to learn to relax when it comes to taking these tests, and not let that evil machine find any change in my bodies reactions.
Posted by sheesh
- Dec 08, 2008, 03:00 AMWell... all I can do is laugh about it now.
They lost a candidate they determined was credible until this test.
I believe they were doing a background check on me. Once that's finished they'll find out I have a perfect record, excellent credit, my employers have wonderful things to say about me, and so do my friends and family. It's silly... how all of those evidenced facts will mean nothing compared to a subjective test that measures my reactions to questions. Even funnier... is that based on the tests theory, my reactions are still no proof of a lie.
Oh well, I told the truth and I guess that is that. I've already moved on, just came back to see what others ideas were on what happened.
And last thought... if there is supposedly a 50% pass/fail rate, I wonder how many people are good at lying, don't react to lies... and vice versa... how many people are terrible at telling the truth, or just genuinely have reactions to certain questions. Once you understand the logic, and see those ratios... your eyebrows raise.
Even after reading up on polygraphs though... I still don't know what happened or why I failed (And yes I told the truth on every question). I guess I'll put it into a category of one of those questions you can never find the answer to:
What is the meaning of life?
How many licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop?
Ect...
They lost a candidate they determined was credible until this test.
I believe they were doing a background check on me. Once that's finished they'll find out I have a perfect record, excellent credit, my employers have wonderful things to say about me, and so do my friends and family. It's silly... how all of those evidenced facts will mean nothing compared to a subjective test that measures my reactions to questions. Even funnier... is that based on the tests theory, my reactions are still no proof of a lie.
Oh well, I told the truth and I guess that is that. I've already moved on, just came back to see what others ideas were on what happened.
And last thought... if there is supposedly a 50% pass/fail rate, I wonder how many people are good at lying, don't react to lies... and vice versa... how many people are terrible at telling the truth, or just genuinely have reactions to certain questions. Once you understand the logic, and see those ratios... your eyebrows raise.
Even after reading up on polygraphs though... I still don't know what happened or why I failed (And yes I told the truth on every question). I guess I'll put it into a category of one of those questions you can never find the answer to:
What is the meaning of life?
How many licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop?
Ect...
Posted by G Scalabr
- Dec 05, 2008, 10:56 PMQuote from: pancho76 on Dec 05, 2008, 04:03 PM"It was probably just a technique to piss you off and get you talking"
... The room temperature can be messed with, the tightness of the devices put on you might be purposely adjusted to make you feel uncomfortable, or the examiner might show a threatening attitude.
Abusively manipulating the room temperature was apparently a favorite technique of the Philadelphia Police polygraph unit. We received quite a few reports from applicants that had been subjected to the "Philly Hot Box" in which an electric space heater was turned on at full blast in a small polygraph suite (which was already heated with the climate control system present in the building).
Philadelphia Police Commissioner Sylvester Johnson courageously abolished polygraph screening at his agency in May of 2002--shortly after the above thread was posted.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 05, 2008, 06:53 PMQuoteI felt as if I couldnt even blink or something or the machine would go "off". I remember my left arm tingling and starting to go numb because the strap was so tight;
Several people here have reported the same thing. Why the hell did you tolerate that?
If you were in a job interview and the interviewer insisted on interviewing you while stepping on your toe, would you allow that?
Did you tell the polygraph operator your arm was going numb? If he refused to loosen it up, it would have been within your right to pause the polygraph, and insist on speaking to your personnel rep.
As for breathing, you should have just breathed like you normally do. They have no control over how you breath. He was probably worried you were employing "countermeasures" which would have just shown what a dumbass he is, as deep breathing is not a CM! CMs are meant to INCREASE your response to control questions.
Incidently, if the FBI were to hire you, you'd have the pleasure of taking the polygraph every five years, I believe. With your employment status on the line.
TC
Posted by pancho76
- Dec 05, 2008, 04:03 PM"It was probably just a technique to piss you off and get you talking"
Now that I think about it; youre right!
I've been reading alot about polygraphs lately and every thing i've read or seen about the polygraph is against its use. It's just a method they use to try make you confess to things they think you're hiding. It's as if they take a possible confession as a "trophy"; a way of proving to themselves and their peers that they found something that was hidden!
In most cases, people don't have anything to hide at all. They might have just used the wrong word at the wrong time; examiners might even make people think they have something they're hidding but can't remember. By doing this the examiner starts digging for any slight amount of information you might give him; and he manages to twist that information into all shapes and sizes to try and find things from your past that don't even exist.
Other information I read about this was that ; a polygraph can be manipulated so that you seem to be a deceptive person. The room tempature can be messed with, the tightness of the devices put on you might be purposely adjusted to make you feel uncomfortable, or the examiner might show a threatening attitude.
I remember yesterday when I took the exam the straps were very uncomfortable on me; they told me not to take any deeps breaths during the test or make any big movements. I felt as if I couldnt even blink or something or the machine would go "off". I remember my left arm tingling and starting to go numb because the strap was so tight; I also felt as if I needed to take a deep breath because I couldn't breathe correctly. The thing that I find amusing is when before the test and during the test they keep on repeating "just relax"; how can you relax when they made you feel so uncomfortable? In these circumstances anyone is going to seem deceptive!!!
I guess this is just something that you have to deal with if you plan on being in law enforecement especially as a "G-man"... I just hope I do better for the FBI polygraph!
Now that I think about it; youre right!
I've been reading alot about polygraphs lately and every thing i've read or seen about the polygraph is against its use. It's just a method they use to try make you confess to things they think you're hiding. It's as if they take a possible confession as a "trophy"; a way of proving to themselves and their peers that they found something that was hidden!
In most cases, people don't have anything to hide at all. They might have just used the wrong word at the wrong time; examiners might even make people think they have something they're hidding but can't remember. By doing this the examiner starts digging for any slight amount of information you might give him; and he manages to twist that information into all shapes and sizes to try and find things from your past that don't even exist.
Other information I read about this was that ; a polygraph can be manipulated so that you seem to be a deceptive person. The room tempature can be messed with, the tightness of the devices put on you might be purposely adjusted to make you feel uncomfortable, or the examiner might show a threatening attitude.
I remember yesterday when I took the exam the straps were very uncomfortable on me; they told me not to take any deeps breaths during the test or make any big movements. I felt as if I couldnt even blink or something or the machine would go "off". I remember my left arm tingling and starting to go numb because the strap was so tight; I also felt as if I needed to take a deep breath because I couldn't breathe correctly. The thing that I find amusing is when before the test and during the test they keep on repeating "just relax"; how can you relax when they made you feel so uncomfortable? In these circumstances anyone is going to seem deceptive!!!
I guess this is just something that you have to deal with if you plan on being in law enforecement especially as a "G-man"... I just hope I do better for the FBI polygraph!
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Dec 05, 2008, 12:58 AMQuote from: sheesh on Dec 02, 2008, 02:40 AMAfter strapping me in the chair he went over the questions that would be on the test, and said it would start in a bit. He asked if I had ever lied about anything important, and I told him yes... back in college my (now) wife and I had split up for a bit and I had relations with another woman once but didnt tell her when she asked me... eventually I did. He seemed to have been turned off by that answer. He asked if I had ever cheated, and I told him the truth that I had test answers in high school and used them. He stopped and seemed angry mentioning that this isnt what the FBI wants and how can we trust cheaters etc...
The questions about having ever lied about anything important and having ever cheated were both probable-lie "control" questions, answers to which are secretly expected to be less than completely honest. In fact, the more honestly one answers these questions, and as a result feels less anxiety when answering them, the more likely one is to wrongly fail, because reactions to these questions are used as a basis for comparison against reactions to the relevant questions (the ones they really care about), which are about drug use or sales, the completeness of your application, and counterintelligence issues.
The polygrapher's apparent anger at your admissions was no doubt feigned, part of a routine spiel intended to cut off admissions.
QuoteHe turned the machine off, moved me to another seat and said, so what do you think? I was suprised we were done and said that it wasn't that bad. Then he said "you know you failed"?
I was pretty shocked and told him i was suprised. Before I could say anything else he said.. I know you're lying... now is the time to confess. I had nothing to lie about so I told him so. He said if there is something that we can use to figure out why you reacted negatively we might be able to get you through.. but I need to know.
I went through everything I could think of... since he didn't tell me what he thought I was lying about. None of my thoughts seemed to interest him. Then he went over drugs... crime... arson... espionage... pornography... EVERYTHING! It was like he didn't know what I was lying about but wanted to get anything he could.
Your experience is unlike most that have been reported. Usually, FBI applicants are accused of deception with regard to specific questions. It's possible, of course, that you "failed" them all, leading to the wide-ranging post-test interrogation.
QuoteThen he asked a series of questions that I am sure are set up in this order... How was your father? How did he treat you? How well did your mom and dad get along? Then he said... Were you ever abused as a kid? I replied that my father never hit me, and he responed... I never asked if your father abused you, only if you were ever abused. But it was like an association chain... because he then went on to ask if I had any emotional problems that I had hidden that were painful to bring up... it was like he was trying to get me to direct myself into those questions.. then it went on to relatives.
That line of questioning seems atypical (and rather voyeuristic) for FBI pre-employment polygraph screening. I would be interested to hear from any other FBI applicants if they have been asked similar questions.
QuoteI said somethign about playing football with the neighborhood gang... earlier in the discussion which then went on to... "so you said you were in a gang?" I said no... i meant the kids in our neighborhood who I would play football with. He said.. were they in a gang? I said no... i just used the wrong word, and my town is a little town... im not sure if there are even gangs in the town. He said.. "well you would know better than me"... that went over into a bad area about 30 minutes from my town... where he said.. you know... this town has gangs.. did you have any friends from this town? No? did your friends have any friends from that town?
That is really Kafkaesque. While I would recommend that any FBI applicant who has wrongly failed the polygraph should file a Privacy Act request for his or her file, I think you especially will need to do so. Your polygrapher sounds like just the kind of person who might inflate -- or even fabricate -- an admission.
QuoteSo... im so confused now. Obviously I failed, as he told me flat out first thing. But... we went through the test super quick and he didnt make a peep about anything or say I was reacting to certain questions during the test or in-between... just a "you failed" at the end.
That's not unusual. The "in-test" phase, when the examinee is hooked up to the polygraph instrument and the question series are asked, is typically brief. It is only after the charts have been scored (typically out of sight of the examinee) that the polygrapher returns and, if the charts have been scored "deception indicated," delves into a post-test interrogation.
QuoteHe never told me what I failed, even though I tried to find out. The only thing I can think of is that I reacted to some general question like "do you plan on lying to me today"....
That question was likely a "sacrifice relevant" question -- a question that, although relevant, is not scored. If indeed you failed, then it would be because your reactions to the scored relevant questions were stronger than your reactions to the "control" questions. See Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector for more information on polygraph procedure.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 05, 2008, 12:27 AMQuoteHe seemed to get upset at me, and would give me a smart remark towards anything I would say. I even explained to him that I would not, be wasting his and my time if I had currently used drugs. I also told him I had just finished my six year contract with the Marine Corps; and that they tested me atleast twice a year. But, that did not seem to matter to him; he just replied that urinalysis can be cheated! I replied that; how can I cheat a urinalysis for 6 consecutive years.
Another thing I explained to him was that I had just gotten my BA in criminal justice; why on earth would I throw my six years of military experienece, with one tour of duty in Iraq; and a Bachelors degree in criminal justice over a stupid decision of getting high one time?
It was probably just a technique to piss you off and get you talking. They want to piss off the guys, and make the female applicants cry. Break you down, so to speak. Weaken you a bit and try to get you to say something you wouldn't say if you were calm and collected. Old interrogator trick.
Best thing is NOT to get into an argument with them or fall for it.
Just focus on the original test question, which was probably quite SPECIFIC. Have you taken illegal drugs in the past xxx years? Had you? No? Did you understand the quesiton? Then there you go, nothing to discuss. So you might try something like: "I understand the question. I have NOT taken drugs...etc. Nothing is bothering me". Repeat it until you are blue in the face. He is just trying to get you to talk.
The angrier the polygraph chartist gets, and the calmer you should remain. Let them do the ranting. Don't worry, it's JUST AN ACT!
Someone posted yesterday about an FBI polygraph deception divination artist who ranted angrily during the interrogation, but then became really nice (like a switch had been flicked off) after leaving the exam room and escorting the applicant out. Even gave him directions to where he was going. Should have shook his hands and said: "Hey, great performance by the way!"
TC
Posted by maybe
- Dec 04, 2008, 11:08 PMApplicant searched for and viewed pornographic images on his official work computers when employed by four separate government contractors during the periods from 1992 to 1996, 1996 to 1999, 2001 to 2004, and 2005 to 2007. Applicant knew his employers had policies prohibiting the use of office computers to access pornography. He also knew that by using his workplace computers to access and view pornography, he was violating his employers' policies and his agreements to abide by those policies. He preferred to access and view pornography at work because he feared discovery by his wife or children if he used pornography at home. When he elected to access and view pornographic images and movies in the workplace, he took steps to hide his behavior from his employers. If he had a private office, he stayed late and viewed pornography after regular work hours. He also stated that after viewing pornography, he involved himself with masturbation in his office or in a workplace bathroom. Applicant did not tell his employers about his use of pornography in the workplace because he feared losing his job and other possible adverse consequences. (Ex. 2 at 5, 8; Tr. 54-
Posted by maybe
- Dec 04, 2008, 11:02 PMThis is why the polygraph will stay ... not my choice but it works in like 1 % of all case but it works ..and then we all get these juicy stories the polygraphers just love
http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/07-13466.h1.pdf
In August 2004, Applicant accepted a position with a government contractor. The position required that he hold a security clearance and be granted eligibility for access to SCI. As a part of his background investigation, Applicant underwent a polygraph examination conducted by another federal agency. From the facts that Applicant provided on the polygraph, the other agency denied his request for a security clearance and access to SCI because it concluded that his use of pornography included searching for and viewing pornographic images of underage females. Applicant denied actively seeking or using child pornography. He stated he sought and used only adult heterosexual pornography. He acknowledged that he had no way of knowing or verifying the ages of the females whose pornographic images he had viewed over the course of many years. He also stated that he was attracted to and considered pornography involving teen-aged girls to be legal pornography. (Ex. 2 at 6; Tr. 61-63.)
http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/07-13466.h1.pdf
In August 2004, Applicant accepted a position with a government contractor. The position required that he hold a security clearance and be granted eligibility for access to SCI. As a part of his background investigation, Applicant underwent a polygraph examination conducted by another federal agency. From the facts that Applicant provided on the polygraph, the other agency denied his request for a security clearance and access to SCI because it concluded that his use of pornography included searching for and viewing pornographic images of underage females. Applicant denied actively seeking or using child pornography. He stated he sought and used only adult heterosexual pornography. He acknowledged that he had no way of knowing or verifying the ages of the females whose pornographic images he had viewed over the course of many years. He also stated that he was attracted to and considered pornography involving teen-aged girls to be legal pornography. (Ex. 2 at 6; Tr. 61-63.)