I am working on getting my Top Secret Clearance for a programmer position from a contractor company for the Government. I now have an interim top secret clearance and to get full TS clearance I need to pass a polygraph test. The test is scheduled for September 12th at the NSA. What should I expect from this type of polygraph test? This is how I decided I am going to aproach my test:
Going to be completely honest. I am 19 years old but I have not done anything such as drugs in my life. I will admit that I am a liar because everyone lies in childhood. I will admit that i've cheated in school specially in my younger days. I have stole a candy bar or two in my younger days. All this I will admit.
Not going to do any breathing exercises. I am going to go in without knowing what breathing pattern I should have to pass the test. I will just late nature run its course.
Is this polygraph as bad as others or a bit easier specially since im younger?
The people on this site will tell you that you are being foolish. They will likely tell you not to admit to anything, although I hardly think the NSA would be concerned about the things you previously described. They will advise you to learn and use countermeasures for your bennefit. I am a proponent of polygraph testing and advise you to follow the directions of your examiner.
Before you take your exam, be sure you are clear about anything you know would exclude you from employment, such as recent drug use or criminal activity. In your posting you said: "All this I will admit." This may indicate there are things you will not admit. This is what will create problems for you. If you lie, withhold, or omit pertinant information, you will be setting yourself up for more problems and extended testing, maybe even disqualification.
Quote from: Guest on Aug 25, 2003, 03:11 PMThe people on this site will tell you that you are being foolish.
Yes, you are foolish if you think the polygraph can detect lies (or the truth). The only lie the polygraph can detect is if you are lying about just having had an orgasm during the test.
I'm going to be completely honest about everything and see how it goes. I don't think I need to trick the system to pass because I really have anything that is worth hiding :P
really *dont* have anything worth hiding, sorry typoed
Quote from: Anonymous! :) on Aug 25, 2003, 04:07 PMI'm going to be completely honest about everything and see how it goes. I don't think I need to trick the system to pass because I really don't have anything that is worth hiding :P
Well, lots of other people didn't have anything to hide and wound up failing. You must not have read any/many personal testimonials about false positives. But what the heck, good luck.
On the other hand, if your intent is to be honest (which is good, good for you), what are you doing here on this website?
Quote from: Anonymous! :) on Aug 25, 2003, 04:07 PMI'm going to be completely honest about everything and see how it goes. I don't think I need to trick the system to pass because I really have anything that is worth hiding :P
So you think every person who has been accused of lying about a relevant question during a polygraph examination and was disqualified really was lying?
I think if you stick with your stated strategy (which I'll admit is the same approach I unsuccessfully adopted), there is a nontrivial probability you'll learn the hard way that your reasoning is incorrect.
Even so, good luck to you.
Anon, please update us as to the results of your test. When is it anyway? This site needs real time feed back from people who go into the test with a basic approach. That is "I'm going in with intent to tell no lies as I have not done anything" , "I'm not goint in to lie but will use CM's" and finally7, "I'm going to lie cause I something and want to hide it".
Thanks,
Aldo
I'm on this website because I was searching the word polygraph and NSA polygraph on google.com and found this website. Look I just don't want to cheat on this test. Does it make me a better man to cheat on this polygraph? If I got caught, wouldn't I fail? The reason I post is not to start a debate on polygraph tests but to see what feedback I can get from you guys. I want to hear more of Guests point of view. Do you think I should let go and let God or cheat the machine as im telling the truth with the way I breath (and let God help me a bit too :)). I read the book and understand everything about the control questions that will be asked and how to answer things. I should refer back to my childhood and stuff. I have read about people who have taking them but some reason I don't quite feel moraly right to just trick the system. I might do it I just want to know the following:
1.) Since im not going to be working directly with any agency but through a contractor will they go easier on me? Will they even look at my breathing etc. as much or will they just size me up during the interviews?
2.) Is it easier to pass if your younger?
"1.) Since im not going to be working directly with any agency but through a contractor will they go easier on me? Will they even look at my breathing etc. as much or will they just size me up during the interviews?
2.) Is it easier to pass if your younger? "
They will not be any "easier" on you and age does not play a factor in your ability to pass or fail. You have heard from a few here. I found Mr. Truth's comment interesting:
"On the other hand, if your intent is to be honest (which is good, good for you), what are you doing here on this website" Is Mr. Truth suggesting the people on this site are less than honest?
Sorry Anomynous I didn't answer your question. Listen to your examiner and relax. If you have any issues with a particular relevant question, let your examiner know before testing begins. Otherwise do as your instructed.
Guest
Yes, you can trust your polygrapher. If you are honest, there is absolutely no way you'll be scored deceptive.
If you believe that, you are a fool.
Anonymous,
Be aware that polygraph examiners from various agencies follow the discussions on this message board. Assuming that you really are a 19-year-old programmer whose polygraph examination is scheduled for 12 September, you have in all likelihood posted enough information about yourself that the NSA polygraph unit will have identified you.
You have no reasonable expectation of anonymity anymore and have left yourself little choice but to adopt the "complete honesty" approach suggested in Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml).
If you have read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector carefully, you know that the NSA primarily uses the relevent/irrelevant technique for screening purposes. This technique has no validity as a test of truth versus deception; it is merely a fishing expedition for damaging admissions. As we note in the 3rd edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, NSA applicants are frequently accused of deception and subjected to as many as three (or even more) polygraph examinations.
I don't know to what extent your age might be a factor in the outcome of your NSA polygraph examination(s), but note that recently, a high school student who had applied for a work-study program was accused of deception (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1235.msg9870#msg9870) multiple times and scheduled for a fourth polygraph session, so youth is not necessarily an advantage.
Good luck on the 12th. It is to be hoped that the NSA polygraph unit will not fail you out of spite for having educated yourself about polygraphy.
I suggest you go over to the "polygraphplace" website if all you want to listen to is Guest.
Good luck. Like George said you are probably already nailed by your polygrapher. Adopt the complete honesty approach or learn CM's. You are going to need them. Your polygrapher will likely DQ you just for being here on this site.
QuoteIs Mr. Truth suggesting the people on this site are less than honest?
Gentle Reader,
No, Mr. Truth is by no means suggesting users of this site are less than honest. Sometimes we do not foresee the consequences of our actions:
QuoteBe aware that polygraph examiners from various agencies follow the discussions on this message board. Assuming that you really are a 19-year-old programmer whose polygraph examination is scheduled for 12 September, you have in all likelihood posted enough information about yourself that the NSA polygraph unit will have identified you.
[glb]Not going to do any breathing exercises. I am going to go in without knowing what breathing pattern I should have to pass the test. I will just late nature run its course.
Is this polygraph as bad as others or a bit easier specially since im younger? [/glb]
This means that the reason for this post was not to find out if the polygraph test was easy to cheat but rather to put this individual at ease about the process. I think he just stumbled on to a site of wrong-doing and no one at the NSA will hold this against him. Stop trying to fill fear in this person. Just do the right thing Anonymous and go to the site he described. Atleast there is some honest people there.
I would be scared if the first site I came accross about polygraphs was about how they are so bad. I would almost be scared in to tricking it myself but you should go the honest path like you said and everything will be fine.
Quote from: TestMan on Aug 26, 2003, 03:12 PM I think he just stumbled on to a site of wrong-doing and no one at the NSA will hold this against him.
How is antipolygraph.org a 'site of wrong doing'?
hey
sorry about starting this topic if you want to close it you can. I see it is turning in to a flaming fest :P
I decided I will just go through the test being completely honest. Thanks for the information anti-polygraph but I feel I need to go with my gut here. This site is good to see the other side of the polygraph test that I may of not thought about until I visited. Its just sort of funny because the date is wrong and my age is off a bit. I just was wondering about how they treated younger folks etc. So no need to really stick up for me there TestMan, although thanks.
This site is good to see both sides of polygraph tests but I am going to have to go with the other side. I don't feel its moraly right to go ahead and cheat on a polygraph test.
Thanks guys, if this topic is getting to heated you can delete/close it or what not
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Aug 26, 2003, 11:45 AMAnonymous,
Good luck on the 12th. It is to be hoped that the NSA polygraph unit will not fail you out of spite for having educated yourself about polygraphy.
Most of your comment I agree with but I think this last thought demonstrates a certain jaundiced view that is likely wrong. Polygraphy "tests", like a few other psych tests, work more poorly if the subject understands the actual theory of the test. Polygraphers do what they can to obfuscate but this doesn't mean they want examinees to fail simply because they read this site.
BTW, Ian Rowland's Cold Reading techniques were incorporated learned and executed by M. Shermer in an interesting demonstration of the power of the psychological manipulation - details in current issue of "Skeptic."
-Marty
Quote from: Anonymous! :) on Aug 26, 2003, 03:49 PMhey
I decided I will just go through the test being completely honest. Thanks for the information anti-polygraph but I feel I need to go with my gut here.
I quite agree with you. That would also be my decision were I in your shoes. The fact that the polygrapher will lie to you (albeit, to increase the odds of the poly working) is no reason to lie yourself. Just like if I found myself working for liars I would raise hell and/or quit before buying into the culture and rationalizing.
-Marty
QuoteLike George said you are probably already nailed by your polygrapher.
Maybe. Anonymous doesn't need to worry about anonymity. I have examined many persons who have told me they have visited this site. After we discuss and laugh about their experience here we conduct an exam with no problems. Visiting this site is not grounds for disqualification, using countermeasures is! Just as any attempt to thwart the test would.
QuoteIt is to be hoped that the NSA polygraph unit will not fail you out of spite for having educated yourself about polygraphy.
No worries George.
Quote from: Guest on Aug 26, 2003, 04:05 PM
I have examined many persons who have told me they have visited this site. After we discuss and laugh about their experience here we conduct an exam with no problems.
Really? Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.
-Marty
LOL
This thread is starting to sound like polygraphplace.
You examiners/liers are entertaining to read.
It is unfortunate that human nature would have most people believe your lies that "if you tell the truth and follow your examiners instructions everything will go just fine".
Why is it that we as supposed intelligent beings have to get kicked in the face and screwed by one of you polygraphers before we wake up?
I truely hope your "test" goes well Anonymous.
Please post back here with your results and experiences. I hope you prove us anti-poly people wrong.
Quote from: Marty on Aug 26, 2003, 04:13 PM
Really? Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.
-Marty
Quote from: Marty on Aug 26, 2003, 04:13 PM
Really? Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.
-Marty
Sorry. I am new at this. I didn't get my reply to the quote in.
Not all exams require CQs and yes I'm that good. The anger in this thread is amusing. Are some of you actually ticked he didn't follow your advise and counsel?
Quote from: Guest on Aug 26, 2003, 05:47 PM
Not all exams require CQs and yes I'm that good.
Good. Are you honest enough to admit that other types of exams (outside of the CIT) are considered by most polygraphers to be inferior as they produce higher false positives? Why is not the DLT more often used? It seems few are trained in it.
-Marty
You can only suspect someone is using countermeasures; you have no definitive method of determining it otherwise, short of a confession from the examinee. That is a fact, plain and simple.
Quote from: Mr. Truth on Aug 26, 2003, 06:13 PMYou can only suspect someone is using countermeasures; you have no definitive method of determining it otherwise, short of a confession from the examinee. That is a fact, plain and simple.
Confession is not the only way. CM's can be reasonably implied and the person DQ'ed for deception when an examinee claims no knowledge of CM's yet fails a CIT (GKT) on CM specific information, either by properly administered poly or by Drew's machine. However, I suspect this occurs rarely.
-Marty
Quote from: Marty on Aug 26, 2003, 03:52 PM
Most of your comment I agree with but I think this last thought demonstrates a certain jaundiced view that is likely wrong. Polygraphy "tests", like a few other psych tests, work more poorly if the subject understands the actual theory of the test. Polygraphers do what they can to obfuscate but this doesn't mean they want examinees to fail simply because they read this site.
Marty,
My expressed hope that the NSA polygraph unit would not "fail" Anonymous based on his/her having educated him-/herself about polygraphy is based on reports of such things having happened to applicants with other agencies who admitted their knowledge of polygraphy, including, but not limited to, the case of CIA applicant Maureen Lenihan, which is mentioned in
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. It is to be hoped that with knowledge of how the "test" actually "works" (and doesn't) becoming more and more widespread (and, perhaps, admissions to such knowledge becoming less shocking to polygraphers) that such knee-jerk reactions by polygraphers will become less common.
My expressing the hope that Anonymous would not be disqualified merely for admitting his/her knowledge of polygraphy was also made in the hope that those NSA polygraphers who read this thread would realize the wrongness of such conduct and not engage in it.
Situations such as Anonymous's do pose a larger ethical question for the polygraph community: how will you handle those who understand "the lie behind the lie detector?" Former American Polygraph Association president Skip Webb declined to answer (http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#informed-subjects) this question when I put it to him some three years ago. It's about time the APA, which professes to be "dedicated to truth," provided a candid answer.
George,
Thanks for that clarification. I share that hope.
-Marty
Guest,
Your contribution to this discussion is welcome. You might consider registering on the message board so that your posts will not be confused with those of others. (Registration will also enable you to edit your posts and to exchange private messages with other registered users.)
I would very much like to believe that an examinee's admission to knowing about "the lie behind the lie detector" would never be used against an applicant for employment, but the feedback we have received from those who have adopted the "complete honesty" approach is not encouraging. Neither is the polygraph community's failure to articulate how polygraphers should handle informed sources.
The NSA's polygraph regulation (http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#NSA) and associated documentation, which we obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, makes no mention of how NSA polygraphers are to handle informed subjects. If you are in a position to know, perhaps you could tell us how NSA polygaphers handle those subjects who admit to knowing that polygraphy is a pseudoscientific sham?
I am not in the know regarding their procedures. My status as an examiner is "inactive". Thanks for the invite. I will consider a more perminant registration.
QuoteYou can only suspect someone is using countermeasures; you have no definitive method of determining it otherwise, short of a confession from the examinee.
Beleive what you want Mr. Truth. Since I know everyone will ask, I will answer now. I am not inclined to discuss how. What would be the benefit to polygraph by providing such information to the nice folks here?
Quote from: Guest on Aug 27, 2003, 11:00 AMI am not inclined to discuss how. What would be the benefit to polygraph by providing such information to the nice folks here?
Credibility? ::)
QuoteCredibility?
Plenty. Do you need any? 8)
Guest,
The National Academy of Sciences did not find the polygraph community's claimed ability to detect countermeasures to be credible. Why should we?
I would not try and convince anyone here, especially you, that everyone in polygraph can detect CMs. Obviously some of the folks here have claimed to use them successfully, any proof of that?
Quote from: Guest on Aug 27, 2003, 06:28 PMI would not try and convince anyone here, especially you, that everyone in polygraph can detect CMs. Obviously some of the folks here have claimed to use them successfully, any proof of that?
It would appear Antipolygraph.org is more than willing to back up its faith in countermeasures. I understand you're new to this site so you might not have noticed it yet, but Dr. Richardson has setup a challenge (on the main page) to the polygraph community that hopes to prove that countermeasures are not detectable. Furthermore, I believe it's fair to say that the burden of proof now rests on the polygraph community to present evidence that countermeasures are detectable, and not ap.org to prove that they aren't, since this site has provided research to support its claim (i.e. studies by Dr Honts) and is willing to demonstrate the veracity of that claim through Dr. Richardson's challenge.
Members of the polygraph community, on the other hand, have provided absolutely no evidence to support their claims other than "just take our word for it."
If you make any damming admissions, be aware that
they will be sent to DIS for your final Top Secret
determination, but of course, they won't tell you that.
They may tell you that they are your friend, unified
against the agency, or they will play the SOB role. The
agency must attract people with secretive backgrounds,
so this unhealthy cycle is just perpetuated, and is what
those applicants are used to. This is the unhealthy
cycle of typical abusers (e.g., spousal/child abusers).
At least for the DSS/DoD clearances, there are a number
of steps, plus appeals, that the clearance determination
can go through, but for the SI part, there is never any
explanation, just dead silence. For the DSS/DoD
clearances, the investigators never hound, or lie,
to you, and it is ALWAYS best to be honest with them
(if not, they will get you on personal conduct). For the
SI clearance, you have someone who is deceptive and
hostile, so it makes you wonder about working for a
place like that...
I'm sure everything will work out. I will be sure to let you know how I do on the test. If they know I posted here well good for them. I'm a reliable American and only took this job to help my Country. If things don't go well I will just find a different job which doesn't have as much benefit for my Country.
Thanks for the information, you did scare me a bit about the polygraph but now I just don't care. I am just going to go in and give them the answers to the questions they ask. If they ask me how much I know about polygraphs I will let them know i've been to a few websites about polygraph tests but never really got in to reading in detail about them. If they ask which websites I will tell them i've been to all the websites which came up on google.com. If they have a problem with me searching the web then the job wasn't right for me in the first place. Also if the person thats going to do me reads this well i'd like to say hey, ill see you soon.. :)
I have stopped reading information about polygraphs except for this thread and some of the for-polygraph websites.
Anonymous :)
QuoteAlso if the person thats going to do me reads this well i'd like to say hey, ill see you soon..
Of course if the examiner reads your posts here and informs you that visiting this site is a sign of "questionable" moral character, you can always ask him "Well, what were YOU doing there??? ;)
Reminds of that cartoon where people are exiting an x-rated movie, and a man is embarrassed to be seen by someone he knows, so he says:
"I don't watch these things myself; I'm looking at who else is here watching this stuff."
Am I the only person who smells something fishy about this whole thread?
Let me put it this way -- I'll be shocked if "Anonymous :)" DOESN'T report passing his exam with flying colors, and will reiterate his faith that people with nothing to hide have nothing to fear from the polygraph.
Quote from: Anonymous! :) on Aug 26, 2003, 01:42 AMLook I just don't want to cheat on this test. Does it make me a better man to cheat on this polygraph? If I got caught, wouldn't I fail? The reason I post is not to start a debate on polygraph tests but to see what feedback I can get from you guys. I want to hear more of Guests point of view. Do you think I should let go and let God or cheat the machine as im telling the truth with the way I breath (and let God help me a bit too :)).
This quote is especially odd.
I talked to a friend of a friend and he said no one that fits this description of anonymous is even taking a test. Hes prolly just a examiner which is trying to get the people who visit this post to think twice about antipolygraph.org. This is just what I heard and might not be 100% accurate but im just giving you a heads up.. I'd ban his ip or something
He has something to hide, else he would not be here. After all they call it a "lie " detector, not truth detector.
In any case, if he passes, he's using some knowledge gained here.
Jonnlaw
He has something to hide, else he would not be here. After all they call it a "lie " detector, not truth detector.
In any case, if he passes, he's using some knowledge gained here.
Jonnlaw
Quote from: Elmo on Aug 29, 2003, 01:15 AMI talked to a friend of a friend and he said no one that fits this description of anonymous is even taking a test. Hes prolly just a examiner which is trying to get the people who visit this post to think twice about antipolygraph.org. This is just what I heard and might not be 100% accurate but im just giving you a heads up.. I'd ban his ip or something
While it's possible for a polygrapher to identify someone who provides enough unobfuscated detail of their situation, the converse is essentially impossible. That said I have little doubt there has been numerous ad hoc attacks on antipolygraph.org. This is likely effective to some degree as people have a predisposition to believing authority figures and confusion is the polygraphers friend.
Interesting that polygraphplace chooses to censor their forums so heavily but given their craft's charateristics it probably can't be any other way. Too bad. If there was a technique that wasn't itself deceptive and provided truth discrimination I would sure like to pursue it and help it succeed.
-Marty
Quote from: Elmo on Aug 29, 2003, 01:15 AMI talked to a friend of a friend and he said no one that fits this description of anonymous is even taking a test. Hes prolly just a examiner . . .
Could be. Doesn't matter though. You guys are focused enough that if it were an attempt to thwart your efforts it wouldn't have worked anyway. You guys are so dedicated and smart that the Fed/Gov is increasing its reliance on PDD by leaps and bounds. Good luck anyway.
Quote from: Guest on Aug 29, 2003, 02:55 AMCould be. Doesn't matter though. You guys are focused enough that if it were an attempt to thwart your efforts it wouldn't have worked anyway. You guys are so dedicated and smart that the Fed/Gov is increasing its reliance on PDD by leaps and bounds. Good luck anyway.
As I've said elsewhere, I guess this means we'll have fewer cases of spying. We'll just have to wait and see. Somehow I doubt it.
In the short term, increased reliance on the polygraph could be seen as a setback.
In the long term, it just means there are more and more opportunities for people to discover what a fraud this technique is.
Hi, I took my test today and I think I did pretty well. It started out with asking me what I knew about polygraph tests. From there I told the truth about the sites i've visited and I even explained about this post. I explained to him that I didn't believe anything about anti-polygraph and went to other sites that were for polygraph tests as well. My goal was to find good information about what i'm in for. I am a programmer and I usually like to research before I start coding. I guess I did this here too and it did turn in to a pretty big thread and debate. From there he started telling me about the machine and how it works. Since you guys are experts you know this already but I had two left finger sensors, two stomach sensors and a right arm sensor. The guy who did my polygraph was very friendly and polite. He went over the questions and I answered honestly to every question. I did have a problem with swallowing. Some reason my body would want to swallow every 5 minutes or so. A few sessions in I got better at controlling my swallows and he said I was doing great. He then asked me if I was ok with the questions and I was. There was only one time he had to ask if there was a problem with a question. That question was "Were you born in MD?" The reason is because I happened to have a problem swallowing during the question so we redid it and everything ended up alright. He left the room for about 5 minutes towards the end and came back in hinting that I passed but did not come out and say it. He then talked to me some more about the new job I was getting and walked me to the NSA visitor entrance. Towards the end he told me his name and that he was the Technical Director and told me I can use that information while posting about my polygraph experience.
In conclusion I do not know if I pass but I feel good about the test. I'll let you all know the official results as soon as I get it. 100% honesty was the way I approached this test and forum post.
Congratulations! I also like your decision to be completely open with them.
I've heard it's somewhat unusual for NSA (used to be No Such Agency) people to grant permission about much of anything they do.
I'm curious. Since you indicated you honestly answered all the questions and showed no discomfort I'm assuming you got a "R/I" type test. I think Skeptic has also indicated they use an R/I version at NSA. Is that your take as well?
BTW, what programming languages and systems do you like best? Me, I like C++ but I've heard good things about Java and VB.NET.
-Marty
Quote from: Anonymous :) on Sep 13, 2003, 02:25 AMHi, I took my test today and I think I did pretty well. It started out with asking me what I knew about polygraph tests. From there I told the truth about the sites i've visited and I even explained about this post.
............
In conclusion I do not know if I pass but I feel good about the test. I'll let you all know the official results as soon as I get it. 100% honesty was the way I approached this test and forum post.
While I admire the "complete honesty" approach I must point out that you earlier said:
QuoteI decided I will just go through the test being completely honest. Thanks for the information anti-polygraph but I feel I need to go with my gut here. This site is good to see the other side of the polygraph test that I may of not thought about until I visited. Its just sort of funny because the date is wrong and my age is off a bit. I just was wondering about how they treated younger folks etc. So no need to really stick up for me there TestMan, although thanks.
Please note the test date was also Sept 12 in your original post. Your own words suggest "Human Subject" may have been correct. Perhaps you have another explanation?
-Marty
I learned multiple languages in school but I will be doing Java development for the contracting company if I get the clearance. I am learning unix adminstration on my own time as well. I havn't read much about R/I from this website so i'm not sure about that. He asked questions like are you sitting down to check and see what my level was for telling the truth and then questions that had to do with something important to the national security. I have been a pretty good person growing up so the test wasn't really all that nerve wrecking for me as it might be for someone else. I did have problems keeping myself from swallowing. When I was driving to the NSA I was singing in my car and I did have a cough attack 20 minutes from the NSA. Not sure if thats the reason for so much reaction there or not. I felt better as the tests went on though.
I guess I was tired of people saying how bad off I was going to be because I gave the correct date so I started to cover it up a bit. After posting that I wanted to edit it out but I am a guest and can not. I do understand your concern though. I also don't like knowing that its that easy to find out who someone is based on a small bit of information. I guess the statements the people were making about it made me feel like a idiot so I was trying to make myself look better.
Well, anonymous. I find your comments and explanation reasonable. Thanks for the clarification. You may well have been fortunate in getting an R/I. While not considered as reliable as the CQT, it would be more appropriate for someone exposed to some detail about the CQT.
Again, good luck and best wishes that you passed.
-Marty
Anonymous,
Thank you for updating us on how your polygraph examination went. Based on your account, it seems likely that you passed.
In evaluating your experience, bear in mind that you actually left yourself no choice but to adopt a "complete honesty" approach, including telling your polygrapher about your post here, since you posted enough specific detail to allow yourself to be identified. That you were polygraphed by the NSA polygraph unit's technical director is circumstantial evidence that you were, in fact, so identified.
It is heartening that your having posted here has apparently not resulted in retaliation. Your telling the NSA that you "didn't believe anything about anti-polygraph" (whether or not such is actually the case) may also have been helpful.
The questions you described suggest that you were indeed subjected to a Relevant/Irrelevant "test." As I mentioned earlier in this message thread, this is the standard technique used by the NSA for screening purposes.
In this technique, the irrelevant questions (like, "Are you sitting down?") were not to "see what [your] level was for telling the truth." They are not scored at all. Instead, reactions to relevant questions are compared to each other, and the polygrapher looks for a "conspicuous, specific, and significant" reaction to a relevant question over multiple chart collections (question series). You'll find this technique discussed at greater length at pp. 115-19 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml).
Anonymous,
Assuming your security clearance is granted, you can expect to be subjected to the ritual of polygraph screening on a regular basis so long as you continue to work on NSA contracts. If you disbelieve the information that is provided here on AntiPolygraph.org, you might wish to consult the report of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph, The Polygraph and Lie Detection (http://www.nap.edu/books/0309084369/html/). I think you'll find it to be consistent with that which is provided here.
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Sep 13, 2003, 06:12 AMAnonymous,
Assuming your security clearance is granted, you can expect to be subjected to the ritual of polygraph screening on a regular basis so long as you continue to work on NSA contracts. If you disbelieve the information that is provided here on AntiPolygraph.org, you might wish to consult the report of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph, The Polygraph and Lie Detection (http://www.nap.edu/books/0309084369/html/). I think you'll find it to be consistent with that which is provided here.
I took his comments about not "believing" to be more along the lines of not "absorbing" which was clearly the case. His earlier comments indicated some surface knowledge about PL controls but certainly not a deep or intuitive understanding. Given his comments to the examiner about actually posting here, I would expect this thread would almost certainly be reviewed post test. Given his specificity, there's a good chance they were aware of it in advance.
Fascinating in any case.
-Marty