Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is the last month of the year?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Oct 29, 2009, 02:42 PM
QuoteI understand.. thanks for the input... Since this was for a LEO position I am sure she would of not liked it if I told her to do my polygraph first and then I will give you my old results... Seems like a catch 22 to me.... you cant win either way....

No you couldn't, and it is a catch 22.  I only posted that to show what a farce the whole process is.

If you have already taken a polygraph and failed, you are in a bad position to start with.  There are LE agencies that no longer require a polygraph.

TC
Posted by thesolutions
 - Oct 29, 2009, 09:00 AM
I understand.. thanks for the input... Since this was for a LEO position I am sure she would of not liked it if I told her to do my polygraph first and then I will give you my old results... Seems like a catch 22 to me.... you cant win either way....
Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Oct 29, 2009, 01:49 AM
QuoteAlso, when the administrator wrote my report about the questions I showed deception on, she said that I did not give any good reasons for the deception and that she figured I was lying...

You could just as easily say she gave you no reasons to show how the polygraph showed you were "deception".  But that is exactly the assumption they make.

I respectfully submit that it would have been MORE logical for the 2nd polygraph operator to just test you, post her result, THEN ask for the results of your previous test?  If she came up with the same result, would that have been more impressive?

Let me read your palm.  Have you ever had your palm read?  Yes?  How long did she say you'd live to?  80?  YES!  I see the SAME THING! 

What a joke!

Posted by BBernie
 - Oct 28, 2009, 11:16 PM
Has anyone heard of another "truth detector" being looked at involving analyzing brain patterns to determine if someone is telling the truth?  I have heard studies are being done regarding this.  I am unsure of the validity of them, but from what I heard, the accuracy is a heck of a lot better than the CVSA or the polygraph x10!
Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Oct 28, 2009, 11:11 PM
Now, try the same scenario with a couple of radiologists.   And I bring this up because polygraphers at "The Polygraph Place" have tried to compare polygraphs with X-rays.  Using a lame argument like "Gee, no scientific test is perfect.  Even x-rays have an error rate!".  This, in response to astonished posters looking for answers after failing a polygraph.

Anyway, I don't think a second radiologist would be as easily biased by the conclusion of a previous radiologist when reading an X-ray.  He/she would just carefully read the chart.  Many would not even want to know what a previous doctor had concluded.  "Just let me take a look at it.  Have a seat in my waiting room lad." 

And the thing is, X-rays have "test-retest" validity.   IOW, if you x-ray the same cranium several times, you're going to get pretty much the same result.  You may get different professional conclusions, from different radiologists, usually in really close cases, but it's the same damn cranium!  The test conditions are the same and are controllable.  Put the same freaking head up to an x-ray plate and shoot freaking x-rays through the same freaking head, and you'll get the SAME freaking shot.

The same can NOT be said of polygraphs.  You can't control conditions.  People can pass one test, then fail another.  And even is there WAS a congruity of test results, there is STILL no unequivocal relationship between "reactions" on a polygraph chart, and "deception".   If an X-ray shows a fracture in a head then there is a fracture in the patients freaking head!  If a job applicant shows a consistent pattern of "reaction" on a chart to specific questions, you can only concluded his/her autonomic nervous system is consistently "reacting" to that question.  For whatever reason that happens to be.

And of course, none of this matters.  The polygraph is not a test.  It's an interrogation DISGUISED as a test.  The only thing that matters is to what degree the person subjected to the polygraph BELIEVES the polygraph is a test.  The more they BELIEVE it, the more SUSCEPTIBLE they are to questioning their own answers, and fall prey to the interrogators subtle and not so subtle suggestions.

Posted by thesolutions
 - Oct 28, 2009, 10:47 PM
Also, when the administrator wrote my report about the questions I showed deception on, she said that I did not give any good reasons for the deception and that she figured I was lying...
Posted by thesolutions
 - Oct 28, 2009, 10:45 PM
This administrator was the current one I was taking the test with. Before the test she did ask if I ever took a polygraph before and what where the results, as well as what questions did I fail. And yes this is a true story... sad but true...
Posted by BBernie
 - Oct 28, 2009, 10:33 PM
If it wasn't so funny and true ... it would be very, very sad!
Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Oct 28, 2009, 10:28 PM
QuoteI informed this administrator of the failed test and also failed the same two questions on this test. When they asked me about the deception on these two question I did tell them that I was concerned about the questions since they were ones I was accused of lieing about on another test.

To whom do you refer when you say "this administrator"?  The one for the previous polygraph or the one for the MOST RECENT polygraph?

It would not be wise to tell polygraph interrogator #2 you failed test questions A and B when tested by polygraph chart gazer #1.  Don't you think they'd be likely to go along with their fellow colleague and ALSO fail you on those questions?

It's kinda like going into a bar and hitting on woman #1, getting rejected, then going up to and hitting on woman #2 at the next table right in full view of woman #1.   Woman #1's rejection of you, puts peer pressure on #2 to also reject you!  And if you went down the street to another bar, would you hit on a woman and say:  "I just got rejected by a woman down the street.  Can I buy you a drink?"

TC
Posted by thesolutions
 - Oct 28, 2009, 06:55 PM
I recently took a polygraph with an agency and was informed that I was DQed since my polygraph test showed deception and I did not give any good reasons for the deception. When my test was completed and I was questioned about the questions showing deception I just told them that I was telling the truth and did not have a reason for the deception. Before this test I took another polygraph with another agency and failed as well. I informed this administrator of the failed test and also failed the same two questions on this test. When they asked me about the deception on these two question I did tell them that I was concerned about the questions since they were ones I was accused of lieing about on another test.

Does anyone have any advice on how I should of handled this situation?

Thanks....