- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 20, 2001, 06:54 AMQuote from: John on Jul 19, 2001, 07:08 PMJohn,
Only those who try to beat the polygraph ends [sic] up failing it.
Those who have shared their experience on the AntiPolygraph.org Personal Statements page (and here on this message board) give the lie to your claim.
Posted by Fred F.
- Jul 19, 2001, 11:47 PMQuote from: John on Jul 19, 2001, 07:35 PM
Fred, I'm really disappointed in the advice you gave Ken about about trying to beat the polygraph. First you told him to be honest and then you suggested he use tactics in an attempt to beat the polygraph. You are a hypocrite the polygraph professionals can do without
John,
Let me clarify my position.
First, It is VERY important to be honest.
However a polygraph examiner is NOT honest. A polygraph has no scientifically tested "baselines" or peer- reviewed research to establish efficacy.
A polygraph is "performed" by a "professional" that has 8-10 weeks of "training". This person then starts to assume that you are "holding back" information based on "readings" of your blood pressure, perspiration, and breathing patterns. If these "readings" are not what the examiner determines to be "normal" then you are deemed "deceptive" or depending on the examiners frame of mind, your "test" is "inconclusive", meaning that you are "withholding information". Then the examiner will attempt to "extract" this information on the premise that if you tell what you have "withheld" you will "pass".
Would you trust a physician with 8-10 weeks of medical school to tell you that by information gathered on your breathing, perspiration, and blood pressure is indicitive of terminal cancer and you are going to DIE?
You CANNOT determine "truthfulness" on a pseudoscientific format that the polygraph is based upon. The same goes for the scenario above, a medical student in 8-10 weeks CANNOT make a diagnosis from the parameters given.
Second, I did NOT suggest that he use "countermeasures" to beat the polygraph. My suggestion is always to be KNOWLEDGABLE in the "tactics" or "ploys" that a polygrapher will use in an attempt to discredit you and deem you "unworthy" , recognize these actions and COUNTER them by maintaining that you are HONEST and have INTEGRITY . Being educated is the power that can help produce a successful outcome to a polygraph. Using countermeasures is an INDIVIDUAL decision, I don't make decisions for people, the decision to use the countermeasures described in The Lie Behind The Lie Detector is for that individual to make.
I don't know if you have ever "passed" a polygraph John, however to honest people like myself, Nate, Dimas, who is a police officer that had a polygraph for another dept. that he was supposedly "deceptive", and Melvin, who successfully fought a bad polygraph and won, This website has given us invaluable education into The Lie Behind The Lie Detector.
Burger is right on the money when he said "professionals can do without hypocrite polygraphers".
Fred F.
Posted by Burger
- Jul 19, 2001, 10:07 PMQuote from: John on Jul 19, 2001, 07:35 PM
You are a hypocrite the polygraph professionals can do without
By "Polygraph Professional" do you simply mean someone who gets paid for running polygraphs? If that's all you meant, we have no quarrel. If you meant more than that, you, yourself, are a hypocrite. A professional doesn't lie to the people (customer/employer) he is working for and pretend to be doing people a favor, when in fact he's trying to screw their lives up in order to gain a few brownie points. To twist your words abit... "professionals can do without hypocrite polygraphers" which nearly all of them are. I suppose.
Posted by John (Guest)
- Jul 19, 2001, 07:35 PMFred, I'm really disappointed in the advice you gave Ken about about trying to beat the polygraph. First you told him to be honest and then you suggested he use tactics in an attempt to beat the polygraph. You are a hypocrite the polygraph professionals can do without
Posted by John (Guest)
- Jul 19, 2001, 07:08 PMWhen asked if you ever took a polygraph before, just be honest and tell them yes. If they ask what the results were, be honest and tell them inconclusive. If asked were you requested to be re-examined, just tell the truth and say yes, but due to the travel expense required, you declined. Be honest. Only those who try to beat the polygraph ends up failing it. This is probably what you don't want to hear, but it's the "TRUTH"
Posted by Burger
- Jul 12, 2001, 08:45 PMWhat technique(s) is being used for all these pre-employment tests that are coming up "inconclusive"? My experience has been that pre-employment tests are multiple issue exams. If this is indeed the case, are the examiners calling the applicants inconclusive for every issue or just one? An inconclusive result means that the polygrapher cannot determine truth or deception for that particular question. It does not and should not mean the person is lying and should not be a barrier for the applicants further consideration. It does mean that the background investigator has some work to do... to verify through other means if the applicant is being truthful or not. It is a sad, and I mean SAD, state of affairs if our law enforcement agencies cannot prove someone did or did not do something that would disqualify him/her and STILL NOT GIVE THE HUMAN BEING THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. Those responsible for the public safety need to come back to reality. There is no substitute for a thorough complete background investigation. Short cuts such as the polygraph are unnecessary and unethical. Do they really save time? NO! What did we ever do before the polygraph? Gee, I think we can do that now can't we? The way we treat applicants makes me ashamed that I'm even associated with the business!
Posted by dimas
- Jul 12, 2001, 10:58 AMI agree with Fred, it is always best to go with total honesty.
The fact that you took it so long ago probably won't affect your chances and you were termed inconclusive so you didn't exactly fail. If you choose to hide it they may never even know about it, but depending on which Federal agency they are they may be better at finding things like that than the local PD's are.
You really have nothing to hide or be ashamed of, just like Fred said, tell them exactly what you posted here and I am sure everything will go well.
If you decide to use counter measures remember the key word is "subtle" anything that makes the graphs go to high will indicate the use of counter measures, or at least make them suspicious. You could also try the total honesty approach (I would like to think there are still some examiners with integrity out there), however in my case it didn't work in my favor.
Best of Luck and no matter what don't give up.
Dimas
The fact that you took it so long ago probably won't affect your chances and you were termed inconclusive so you didn't exactly fail. If you choose to hide it they may never even know about it, but depending on which Federal agency they are they may be better at finding things like that than the local PD's are.
You really have nothing to hide or be ashamed of, just like Fred said, tell them exactly what you posted here and I am sure everything will go well.
If you decide to use counter measures remember the key word is "subtle" anything that makes the graphs go to high will indicate the use of counter measures, or at least make them suspicious. You could also try the total honesty approach (I would like to think there are still some examiners with integrity out there), however in my case it didn't work in my favor.
Best of Luck and no matter what don't give up.
Dimas
Posted by Fred F.
- Jul 11, 2001, 11:47 PMKen,
I think that it is safer to admit to having taken the poly than to deny it. It may be possible that your "jacket" is still in the agencies inactive files. If you are questioned about it just tell them what you have said here, that you couldn't afford to make another road trip to repeat the test
Your best bet would be to contact the agency that you took the test with and ask them how long they keep the old background "jackets". It is possible that they keep them only 1 year and destroy them or they could keep them 5 years.
Your next step is to download and read The Lie Behind The Lie Detector and get yourself educated on just what tomfoolery the polygraph is. When you take your next poly you will have the power of knowledge and the ability to counter the ploys of the polygrapher.
Good Luck
Fred F.
I think that it is safer to admit to having taken the poly than to deny it. It may be possible that your "jacket" is still in the agencies inactive files. If you are questioned about it just tell them what you have said here, that you couldn't afford to make another road trip to repeat the test
Your best bet would be to contact the agency that you took the test with and ask them how long they keep the old background "jackets". It is possible that they keep them only 1 year and destroy them or they could keep them 5 years.
Your next step is to download and read The Lie Behind The Lie Detector and get yourself educated on just what tomfoolery the polygraph is. When you take your next poly you will have the power of knowledge and the ability to counter the ploys of the polygrapher.
Good Luck
Fred F.
Posted by ken
- Jul 11, 2001, 05:51 PMI have taken a polygraph for a state police agency approx.4 years ago it was termed "inconclusive", they wanted me to repeat but I withdrew because of the cost involved in traveling to the state for the third time, my question is next month I am required to take another one for a Federal Agency. I was wondering if at all it will come up if I had ever taken one, and if it does what should I tell them?