- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by RoamingBack
- Jan 13, 2013, 09:58 AMCompleted a law enforcement administered CVSA in AZ recently. Just noting a few of the procedures.
Relevant and control questions were explained by the examiner but not quite as we understand them here. Of interest was the 'answer no to this question even though it is really a yes question' so they could get a reading. Took the exam three times and then a few questions a forth time. And, as the guides all indicate, the examiner gets up, goes out, comes back and says "you had trouble with this / these questions."
When they turn to go out you (or I could) can see the graphs... I doubt seriously that there is any reason, except to let one cool their heals and get notions about how they did, for the examiner to leave the room. I think that kind of 'roll playing' may go over fine with criminal suspects but only reinforces the negative aspects of these exams to the (solely) job applicant. It is demeaning to be treated like a suspect.
I most probably failed mine and, while I continue seeking work, I now will never take another such exam. It is too traumatic and simply not necessary. Years ago, early '70s, I worked for LE and there was no such exam. Good background investigations rooted out the questionable applicant. Real detectives who could smell a fake made pretty sure that recruits were jake. Now it seems that we hear about all sorts of corruption in civil service and 'hunches' are not allowed... just a machine that cannot tell if the person is lying or had too much chili for dinner the night before. All take care.
Relevant and control questions were explained by the examiner but not quite as we understand them here. Of interest was the 'answer no to this question even though it is really a yes question' so they could get a reading. Took the exam three times and then a few questions a forth time. And, as the guides all indicate, the examiner gets up, goes out, comes back and says "you had trouble with this / these questions."
When they turn to go out you (or I could) can see the graphs... I doubt seriously that there is any reason, except to let one cool their heals and get notions about how they did, for the examiner to leave the room. I think that kind of 'roll playing' may go over fine with criminal suspects but only reinforces the negative aspects of these exams to the (solely) job applicant. It is demeaning to be treated like a suspect.
I most probably failed mine and, while I continue seeking work, I now will never take another such exam. It is too traumatic and simply not necessary. Years ago, early '70s, I worked for LE and there was no such exam. Good background investigations rooted out the questionable applicant. Real detectives who could smell a fake made pretty sure that recruits were jake. Now it seems that we hear about all sorts of corruption in civil service and 'hunches' are not allowed... just a machine that cannot tell if the person is lying or had too much chili for dinner the night before. All take care.