- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Just thinking
- Mar 13, 2010, 03:29 PMI think the veracity and accuracy of the polygraph can be summed up by the proponents own admission's. Example; one of the techniques used to invalidate a polygraph is to tense up your butt cheeks at specific times during questioning. To combat this, the FBI, CIA, etc have installed devices in the chairs to detect this trick. Seems amusing at first, having a "Butt Clenching device" in a chair but it does bring up a simple question. If you put so much stock in the polygraph's accuracy, why do you need this device? In essence, your saying that the test is so fragile and falible that I can beat it by simply tensing up my ass. The mere fact that we have had 100 years of debate over this and "accuracy" numbers that range from 50% to 99% tells us we have no idea how well this thing really works, if it even does.
Posted by elismom
- Mar 11, 2010, 02:58 PMI had a "significant response" to the drug questions as well. And I have never used drugs or bought/sold any either. I did mention that I knew people who did, and I also mentioned small things that the examiner thought were laughable.
What ended up happening to you? I did get some hostile questions afterwards, but there was nothing to tell, so after about 10 times of asking me what drugs I used, he told me it was over and that he would send the results over. I'm so disappointed in the whole thing.
What ended up happening to you? I did get some hostile questions afterwards, but there was nothing to tell, so after about 10 times of asking me what drugs I used, he told me it was over and that he would send the results over. I'm so disappointed in the whole thing.
Posted by agony
- Jan 29, 2010, 02:56 PMSee page 115 of TLBTLD for a good explanation of why subjects who obviously passed are still subjected to a token hostile interrogation.
The most likely reason for that question is that your examiner believes that you must have experimented with illegal drugs at some point because "everybody does" in their youth, especially if they had friends who were "into drug use in college". Since such minor illegal drug use would not bar your employment, he's not interested in dragging a real confession out of you.
But, since you didn't admit any drug use, he assumes you're lying -- and he doesn't want you to walk away thinking you've completely "fooled the lie detector". So he tried to scare you a little by probing around the subject.
-Aunty Agony.
The most likely reason for that question is that your examiner believes that you must have experimented with illegal drugs at some point because "everybody does" in their youth, especially if they had friends who were "into drug use in college". Since such minor illegal drug use would not bar your employment, he's not interested in dragging a real confession out of you.
But, since you didn't admit any drug use, he assumes you're lying -- and he doesn't want you to walk away thinking you've completely "fooled the lie detector". So he tried to scare you a little by probing around the subject.
-Aunty Agony.
Posted by TerminalLon3some
- Jan 27, 2010, 09:28 PMAt the end of my poly my examiner told me that I had a reaction to a drug usage question. I've never used a drug in my life. I was honest about dozens of other things and even asked some probing questions about what constitutes what on certain questions. Actually, I was probably honest to a fault on some things. That being said, I've never really done anything wrong in my life and have no record of any kind. I even have a Federal Secret Security Clearance. The sort of things I was 'coming clean' about were almost laughable and the gentlemen had to tell me a couple times that those were not the sort of things they were asking about.
Now, with all that being said he told me that I had a reaction to a drug usage questions. I told him I have never used an illegal drug and that was pretty much that. I didn't get put back on the poly and I wasn't 'interrogated' further. He said I would find out the results from my test in 30 days...
What do I take away from this? The fact that he says I registered a response on this question concerns me, but should the lack of a real post-test interrogation be a decent sign? One thing that made me think this may have been a farce is that I had listed that I had known a couple guys that were into drug use in college and that I had cut ties with them because of it. Would he use that alone to question me further about that? Or would that have been addressed more in the pre-poly interview?
This whole experience has left me confused. I've never had much belief in the polygraph as an accurate truth detecting instrument. Far from it. But this experience has really convinced me of the idiocy of this instrument and its usage.
Now, with all that being said he told me that I had a reaction to a drug usage questions. I told him I have never used an illegal drug and that was pretty much that. I didn't get put back on the poly and I wasn't 'interrogated' further. He said I would find out the results from my test in 30 days...
What do I take away from this? The fact that he says I registered a response on this question concerns me, but should the lack of a real post-test interrogation be a decent sign? One thing that made me think this may have been a farce is that I had listed that I had known a couple guys that were into drug use in college and that I had cut ties with them because of it. Would he use that alone to question me further about that? Or would that have been addressed more in the pre-poly interview?
This whole experience has left me confused. I've never had much belief in the polygraph as an accurate truth detecting instrument. Far from it. But this experience has really convinced me of the idiocy of this instrument and its usage.