Hello, everyone. I have read The Lie Behind The Lie Detector and it is very useful and informative. I have a troubling matter to discuss.
I am a teenager in a sex offender treatment program and I will take a polygraph within the next few weeks. It is my first. I want to answer it truthfully but I am afraid that due to the fact that the polygraph is unreliable, I will fail it and have my treatment extended. The people in the group tell me that the questions will only regard whether I have broken any rules during probation. Is that true? If not, what can I really expect during the polygraph? What kind of polygraph test can I expect to take, what types of questions will it contain, and what countermeasures can I employ to protect myself? I would appreciate advice. Thank you.
In some sex offender treatment programs, the first polygraph examination administered is a "sexual history disclosure test" that is not limited in scope to whether the examinee has broken rules of probation. The information provided by others in your group suggests, however, that you will not be administered such an examination.
The polygraph technique you will encounter will most probably be a "probable-lie control question test." Based on the reports you've heard from others, it seems that the relevant questions will be about whether you've complied with the terms of your probation. The countermeasures described in Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector should be helpful in protecting against the risk of a false positive outcome.
Thanks.
I've seen some of the posters here and some of their remarks are just vicious and meanspirited. It's nice to know that there are a few people out there who post legitimate, intelligent, and relevant responses to those who merely seek advice, not opinions.
Thanks again.
kcr and other interested individuals,
You will find the discussion of countermeasures and question types, etc on this site and in particular TLBTLD to be very informative. One thing that I have not seen mentioned though is the following.
*** very important*** The various question types (irrelevant, relevant, control) are reviewed as groups before the in-test phase of the test---in other words during the pre-test phase. You don't have to wait for the test (that phase where you are connected to the polygraph, you are being asked questions, and the charts/computer are/is rolling) and try to guess which questions are relevant and which are control (the ones you produce responses too). You should already know what they are from the pretest (before you are ever attached to the polygraph)...again, pay careful attention-- the questions will be reviewed in groups (largely because they would have to give individual explanations for each question if this were not the case) according to question type.
Those which are similar to but not the same as the main event, i.e., the relevant issues which is why you are there...and often misrepresented as some sort of beginning reprehensible activity that precedes and leads to the relevant issues--these are the control questions and again the ones you want to produce a response to. The ones that the polygraph operator will tell you are to establish a baseline, establish when you are telling the truth, etc are in fact none of the above but irrelevant questions (e.g., is today Friday?, etc). Again simply pay attention to the questions as they are posed to you in the pre-test phase. It should be pretty clear (if you are
simply trying to determine which group is relevant and which group is control as opposed to the type of each individual question) which questions you need to produce responses to. Again, if you listen, the polygraph examiner has unintentionally told you which questions you need to produce responses to in advance of the test (nice guy, right?---- naaah) which will allow you to successfully pass your test.
Seriously Anonymous, what makes you think anyone should listen to your unsolicited advice? That is providing they can even understand what you are saying. I've never read such a confusing string of drivel, except in the GG twins (George & Gino's) stuff.
Quote from: cop on Aug 06, 2004, 10:32 PMSeriously Anonymous, what makes you think anyone should listen to your unsolicited advice? That is providing they can even understand what you are saying. I've never read such a confusing string of drivel, except in the GG twins (George & Gino's) stuff.
Seriously, "cop," what makes you think anyone should listen to the empty bluster of an irate polygraph operator peeved at seeing the tricks of his trade openly aired (and powerless to stop it)?
Anonymous' advice was not, as you aver, unsolicited: it's directly responsive to kcr's inquiry. What gets your goat is not that there is anything wrong with Anonymous' advice, but that
you know it's spot on. ;D
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Aug 07, 2004, 03:36 AM
]you know it's spot on.[/i]
;D
How in the hell would you know that his advice is "spot on"? You have never used any countermeasures, and the only 2 polygraph tests you have taken you failed miserably. You are full of shit George. But you do have a good vocabulary. I aver to your use of the word "aver".
Quote from: cop on Aug 07, 2004, 02:31 PMHow in the hell would you know that his advice is "spot on"? You have never used any countermeasures, and the only 2 polygraph tests you have taken you failed miserably.
I know that the various question types (relevant, control, and irrelevant) are reviewed as groups during the pre-test phase because it's a well-documented, decades-old practice of the polygraph community.
For example, the DoDPI Test for Espionage and Sabotage administration guidelines (http://antipolygraph.org/documents/dodpi97-p-0009-appendix-i.shtml) provide as follows:
"7. Explain and review the sabotage and espionage relevant questions.
8. Explain and review the sacrifice relevant questions.
9. Explain and review the directed lie comparison questions.
10. Explain and review the irrelevant questions."
And DoDPI's Law Enforcement Pre-Employment Test (http://antipolygraph.org/documents/dodpi-lepet.pdf) manual, with a minor change in the order in which the sacrifice relevant question is reviewed, provides, at para. 7.1.6:
"Phase I questions are reviewed with the examinee in the following sequence, sacrifice relevant question, relevant questions, comparison questions, and irrelevant questions. Following the completion of Phase I testing, Phase II questions are reviewed with the examinee in the same sequence."
Polygraph pioneers John E. Reid and Fred E. Inbau also teach examiners to review questions as groups in their classic textbook,
Truth and Deception: The Polygraph ("Lie-Detector") Technique. 2nd ed. Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1977. Reid and Inbau omit sacrifice relevant questions, but otherwise teach polygraph examiners to review the question groups in the same order as DoDPI: relevant questions first, then irrelevant questions, and lastly irrelevant questions. See pages 24-32.
QuoteYou are full of shit George.
I leave it to readers to decide which of us is full of what. ::)
QuoteBut you do have a good vocabulary. I aver to your use of the word "aver".
You would have done well to have consulted a dictionary before writing that. ;)
And how did you get all that from the drivel anonymous was spouting? And yes you are right, I should have said 'I refer to your use of the word "aver"'. I stand corrected. But you still have no experience with countermeasures, you failed both polygraphs you have taken, and there is no way you could know what is good or bad information about them. And I find it ironic that you cite the very people you criticize as being frauds.
Quote from: cop on Aug 07, 2004, 06:04 PMAnd how did you get all that from the drivel anonymous was spouting?
Anonymous' post is certainly not drivel. But perhaps it is above your reading level. ::)
QuoteBut you still have no experience with countermeasures, you failed both polygraphs you have taken, and there is no way you could know what is good or bad information about them.
You refer to my experience of failing two polygraph examinations as if you're divulging some deep dark embarrassing secret. You're not. You know about my polygraph experience because I have shared it in my public statement, "Too Hot of a Potato: A Citizen Soldier's Encounter With the Polygraph." (http://antipolygraph.org/statements/statement-003.shtml) (There's a link to this statement at the bottom of each of my posts to this message board.) It was the experience of telling the truth and yet being branded as a liar by the polygraph that led me to educate myself about polygraphy.
Your claim that "there is no way" I "could know what is good or bad information about [polygraph countermeasures]" is untrue. One need only consult the polygraph literature.
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf) is well-annotated with references that skeptical readers can check for themselves.
QuoteAnd I find it ironic that you cite the very people you criticize as being frauds.
Indeed, polygraphers are frauds. But the sources I cited above were produced by polgyraphers for the training of other polygraphers. So what precisely is ironic about my citing them in a discussion of polygraph procedure? ::)
Well, George and "anonymous", I hope you have helped KCR pass his polygraph. Never miss a chance to help a pervert sex offender, right guys? And KCR, be sure to listen to George and anonymous, they really have some valuable information - and you might even do as well as George did and fail your test too.
Quote from: cop on Aug 07, 2004, 08:59 PMWell, George and "anonymous", I hope you have helped KCR pass his polygraph. Never miss a chance to help a pervert sex offender, right guys? And KCR, be sure to listen to George and anonymous, they really have some valuable information - and you might even do as well as George did and fail your test too.
Whether the population being screened is law enforcement applicants, CIA agents, or convicted sex offenders, polygraph screening has no validity whatsoever. Truthful persons in post conviction polygraph screening programs are in as much need of protection against the pseudoscience of polygraphy as anyone else. Indeed, they are arguably more so.
Truthful? Yeah right. Just like you were truthful when you failed both of your polygraph tests George. Everyone who thinks George was truthful, stand on your head and stack greasy bb's with your nose.
I'm quite enjoying this thread. It amuses me to see each one of cop's feeble attempts at putting up an intelligent argument swatted down like flies. Notice how he just gave up and resorted to childish name-calling?
"Perverts" or not, sex offenders as well communists, grade school students, ice cream vendors, government officials, or whatever need to be informed about polygraph "tests." The reason why a person needs to take a polygraph is irrelevant. The truth is, people are being misled about the polygraph's abilities.
Thanks again, George.
Hello there. I am too working on becoming a police officer. I am shocked by the idea of explaining how a to pass a poly to a sex offender. This is real scary stuff. Although I do not know the circumstances of KCR's charge or conviction, however I would not be too fond of having a sex offender as my neighbor, and especially one who can beat a poly test. I do agree that the poly is a poor way to test the validity of someones truth. People who shouldn't pass it, pass it, and people who should pass it, sometimes fail. It is flawed, big time. We shouldn't use the poly unless it is proven to be 100% accurate. I like this site, however there has to be another way to deal with the unrealiable reading of the poly. I don't think encouraging future peace officers to cheat and lie is the way to go. I think those who are concerned about taking a poly, find a department that doesn't poly. If you take the poly be honest, and take your lumps. If you don't believe in the poly, then why would you try to get into law enforcement when you know you may have to poly? I think the point has been made that poly's are worthless the majority of the time and the ability to determine if one is telling the truth using a machine still needs refinement. Before I took the poly I read all the material on using countermeasures and so on....However I used none. I couldn't do it, and didn't want to do it. A good peace officer should have integrity and morals. If one begins lying and cheating from the beginning shall we believe that the lying and cheating will stop once he gets the job? Why should it? In my opinion an officer should be selected by who he is, and not who he describes himself to be...Be honest, have faith and start out on the right foot and if you get hired you know it was because you were the best candidate and not the best cheat................
George W. Maschke, the one who runs this site and teaches child molesters how to beat the test is so consumed with bitterness that he will do anything he can to strike back at the polygraph industry - and he doesn't care how many perverts he helps or how many good citizens are hurt by his actions. And to think he once tried to be an FBI agent. I think he has proved he was not worthy of that position.
Quote from: cop on Aug 08, 2004, 07:06 PMGeorge W. Maschke, the one who runs this site and teaches child molesters how to beat the test is so consumed with bitterness that he will do anything he can to strike back at the polygraph industry - and he doesn't care how many perverts he helps or how many good citizens are hurt by his actions. And to think he once tried to be an FBI agent. I think he has proved he was not worthy of that position.
There is one bright spot in all this. From what I have been able to determine, George's advice on countermeasures is so poor that most of the perverts and liars who try to use it are caught anyway. So perhaps George is doing some good after all - the people who follow his advice fail their tests just like he did.
A few additions to the discussion (and this is a different person posting as 'Anonymous') -
Polygraph screening is flawed - the pissed off examiners posting on this thread should at the very least start by admitting that. Many of your colleagues already have...
For all reading this thread - be mindful of what is taking place here. The insults and accusations being flung about here are the desperate attempts by POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS to dissuade the good-intentioned reader from believing anything on this site. Make no mistake - teaching criminals, liars, etc. to "beat" or "cheat" a polygraph is WRONG. However, continue to remind yourselves of the true purpose of this site. Is it to teach the previously mentioned to successfully pass a polygraph examination? No. The purpose of this site is to expose a FRAUDULENT practice and show it for what it truly is. If it is so easy to teach deceptive examinees to pass a polygraph examination, WHY IS IT STILL BEING USED? Think about it.
Based on George's many postings on this site, I have found that his advice many times does not involve attempting countermeasures at all. George's first attempt at advice is typically to avoid polygraph "tests" at all costs - advice I wholeheartedly agree with. Only in the case of required polygraphs (e.g. pre-employment screening) does George recommend utilizing countermeasures as a pro-active protective step - again if this is such a big deal why do polygraph examiners still have jobs?
Don't be fooled by the attempts being made here to throw people from the anti-polygraph path. Polygraph screening is wrong and it is a scam. The FBI is currently reporting somewhere between a 50 and 60 percent FAILURE rate for their pre-employment screening exam. Does anyone really believe that 50 to 60 percent of people who have been deemed ACCEPTABLE HIRES and offered conditional appointments are actually lying? 50 to 60 percent? Not a chance - anyone who tries to argue that is simply a fool. This country is definitely moving swiftly downhill but it's not that bad yet. There are still a lot of good people who truly want to work for an agency like the FBI that are UNFARILY being dismissed from the hiring process for reasons that are not at all proven or backed up. What a slap in the face.
Just think of it this way - wouldn't you get pissed off and hurl insults if someone was exposing you as a fraud? I would... everyone likes to be employed...
And is that why you are pissed off? Because George and sycophants like you are being unmasked and liars and bitter losers.
Quote from: cop on Aug 08, 2004, 11:59 PMAnd is that why you are pissed off? Because George and sycophants like you are being unmasked as liars and bitter losers.
And for your benefit "KNOWN CHILD RAPIST", sycophant means ass kisser.
There go "cop" and "I-SMELL-BS" with the name-calling. I assume the both of you are grown adults, but that is what is so ironic.
Read my other posts in this thread. It doesn't matter why a person needs to take a polygraph. The test is a fraud. For all you know, I might NOT be a sex offender. I could be saying I am a sex offender because I have a friend who is, or I could be a polygraph examiner myself, or just a bored middle-aged man browsing around on the internet. It DOESN'T really matter. My identity, intentions, or past are irrelevant. What does matter is that this "very accurate test" often yields false-positives and false-negatives and that people need to be informed about this. True, people can use the advice on this site for whatever reason they desire, good or bad, but that is also irrelevant. It simply stands that the polygraph is a fraud.
Every post made by "cop" and "I-SMELL-BS" are rude and disrespectful. Everyone has a right to an opinion, but when this right is used to hurl insults at people, it becomes juvenile. Be aware that the both of you and other similar posters are part of a very small minority on these boards. Find another cause.
KCR, I would have to disagree with you. I think the intentions of a person wanting to learn countermeasures is relevant. This site is dedicated to revealing the validity of a polygraph test, which is ok. It is a right of freedom of speach, however there has to be a line drawn as to the cost of providing such information. I am going out on a limb here, but do we arm every person with a loaded gun to prove that it's the person and not the gun that commits the crime? Personally I think the point has been made about poly's, they don't work like they should.
I am more concerned when you have criminals especially ones who have assaulted others coming to this site in order to beat the system. Where's the integrity, and how do can you sleep at night with the thought that a person you are teaching to cheat the system commits another violent offense. I am open to reforming those who are honestly trying to straighten their lives out and turn it around, however any person who uses this site to avoid being caught for violating the law is pure SCUM. I think the "post-conviction polygraph program" discussion board should be deleted. This is as bad as selling criminals armor piercing bullets. I strongly believe in our freedom of speach, however I do believe in values. Supplying information relating to sexual offenders polygraph testing is pretty low. It's ironic how convicted criminals come to this site to get information on how to cheat, while claiming they have turned their lives around. Some people never learn, however I'm disapointed that there are people out there willing to help them......
SM,
While you do indeed make a very good point and I for the most part agree with you, especially about not assisting criminals, but I have one pertinent issue I believe I must point out. The biggest problem with the poly is not that the criminal is learning to beat it, it is that the LE agencies give so much credit to it that it allows the criminal to beat it by them not following up on an issue the old fashion way and hitting the street and doing some investigative work.
I have always said that the poly is a great tool at getting people to confess. However, it is not a tool that can be relied on to convict or dismiss anything.
Quote from: sm on Aug 09, 2004, 05:29 AMKCR, I would have to disagree with you. I think the intentions of a person wanting to learn countermeasures is relevant. This site is dedicated to revealing the validity of a polygraph test, which is ok. It is a right of freedom of speach, however there has to be a line drawn as to the cost of providing such information. I am going out on a limb here, but do we arm every person with a loaded gun to prove that it's the person and not the gun that commits the crime? Personally I think the point has been made about poly's, they don't work like they should.
I am more concerned when you have criminals especially ones who have assaulted others coming to this site in order to beat the system. Where's the integrity, and how do can you sleep at night with the thought that a person you are teaching to cheat the system commits another violent offense. I am open to reforming those who are honestly trying to straighten their lives out and turn it around, however any person who uses this site to avoid being caught for violating the law is pure SCUM. I think the "post-conviction polygraph program" discussion board should be deleted. This is as bad as selling criminals armor piercing bullets. I strongly believe in our freedom of speach, however I do believe in values. Supplying information relating to sexual offenders polygraph testing is pretty low. It's ironic how convicted criminals come to this site to get information on how to cheat, while claiming they have turned their lives around. Some people never learn, however I'm disapointed that there are people out there willing to help them......
SM,
AntiPolygraph.org's objective in making information about polygraph countermeasures freely available to the public is not to help criminals beat the system, but rather to provide the truthful with a means of protecting themselves against the random error associated with an invalid "test." However,
there is no way of making this information to those who legitimately need it without also making it available to everyone. For further discussion, see "A Response to Paul M. Menges Regarding the Ethical Considerations of Providing Countermeasures to the Public." (http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-029.shtml)
You suggest that the Post Conviction Polygraph Programs (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?board=13.0) discussion forum should be deleted. That's not going to happen. We created this forum in response to numerous communications received from self-described false positive victims in such polygraph screening programs. We believe that it's important that such persons should have a forum in which they may discuss their experiences, ask questions, and exchange information. For those who disapprove, you may consider this forum as a window into an area of public policy that would otherwise be closed to you. Bear in mind that even if this forum were deleted (indeed, even if AntiPolygraph.org were taken off the Internet),
information about polygraph countermeasures would remain readily available to anyone seeking it.
Now you know why I am always smelling BULLSHIT. George just keeps piling it on. This site exists for one reason and one reason only. To give George an opportunity to vent his anger and to give him other losers like him a chance to blame the polygraph for the loss of their DREAM JOBS, FREEDOM, WHATEVER.... They want to blame someone other than the one person responsible for their problems - themselves.
George,
I somewhat understand the point you are trying to make. You are trying to discredit the poly. That is your right as American. However aren't you a bit concerned on who is using this information. In no way are you intentinally helping criminals beat the system, but the reality is these are some of the people that are coming to this site to obtain information. Is there any way to screen people who want information? It is alarming to see a whole long list of sex offenders asking how to beat the poly. Its down right scary and insulting to the families who have endured the pain of dealing with the victim of a sexual crime. I am a very conscientious person. I think values and morals are very important in reestablishing a decent society. There is so much crap going on because people have forgotten compassion for one another. I have children, George, and I want them to grow up in a decent society and that society will include criminals, including reformed sex offenders. I have no problems that. I do find it a bit alarming some of the sex offenders are looking for information on how to beat the rap, because they still are the same person. Those that do, are scum. I think its up to us not to help those type of people and that includes unitentionall help.
Dimas,
I agree with you on the point about law enforcement weighing so heavily on polygraph results. It is kinda un-American to accuse someone stemming from a test that is flawed. I personally heard of department that don't use the poly because of its inaccuricy. Personally I feel the point of the validity has been made. If a polygraph test is so reliable why would they not be mandatory when hiring in the law enforcemen field? It is a bit shocking to disqualify people from careers they may have been pursuing their whole life due to an inaccurate type of test such as a poly. I do feel there needs to sometype of lie detection testing that is 100% accurate. This is due to the fact that some people will lie about their past on job applications. Those people need to be weeded out. People who are not honest about their past most likely are not OK/comfortable with themselves. I don't think those are qualities we want in our law enforcement. However we must be carefull when letting the "cat out of the bag" on who is using this information..
SM,
I think that which is truly scary and insulting is that public officials who should know better are relying on such a thoroughly discredited pseudoscience as polygraphy for purposes of supervising persons on probation and parole. Those responsible for setting terms of probation and parole need to be aware that 1) polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis and 2) the polygraph is easily passed through the use of simple countermeasures that polygraphers cannot detect.
The polygraph countermeasure information available on AntiPolygraph.org can only help wrongdoers to the extent that public officials wrongly rely on polygraphy.
SM,
Like others I agree with your feelings on teaching/providing information to criminals that might allow them to pass a polygraph "test." Certainly not something anyone wants given the already mentioned value the polygraph holds in the eyes of some agencies.
However, keep in mind that this site is not the only way to find that information. Do you think the process in general, scoring, countermeasures, etc. is all top secret information? This site makes it readily available, yes. But that doesn't mean it's not all available elsewhere. Put the blame where it truly needs to go - on the polygraph community for upholding this myth that polygraph screening is valid and necessary. Don't blame the site for exposing a fraud.
anonymous....
Do you really need the help of people who admit they are sex offenders to disprove the validity of the poly???
SM,
Please... you started off so innocenty questioning this site and what it's all about. No problem. Don't start twisting things around. Where in the hell did I ever say we needed the help of sex offenders to disprove the validity of polygraph screening? And how do you even gather an implication to that effect from my post?
You're not thinking logically on this one - if, by simply visiting this site and reading about countermeasures, a convicted sex offender can easily pass a polygraph "test" while being deceptive and still commiting heinous acts, why is the polygraph still being used for these purposes?
Obviously you are a non-believer in the polygraph as you are acknowledging that the information on this site arms criminals with the ability to pass the "test." Like I said before, why blame this site (or any of the HUNDREDS of books that summarize everything available on this site)? This was mentioned in another thread - go check out www.911hotjobs.com and look through the literature available for purchase on a LAW-ENFORCEMENT SPONSORED site. In fact, I purchased an electronic book from that site and learned everything I needed to know about the polygraph and how to beat it using countermeasures.
Polygraph "testing" should be a thing of the past, plain and simple. Say tomorrow a website pops up advertising a simple, prepared-in-the-comfort-of-your-own-home mixture that would enable anyone to magically pass a urinalysis drug test. Would you blame the website? Hell no! You wouldn't even have time to because that urinalysis drug test would be DONE. Seems like a long shot, doesn't it? Why is that? Because drug testing is based on valid scientific principles. The polygraph is hack science - just look at its' history. Even al Qaeda admits it doesn't work (see the translated literature available somewhere on this site for more info on that...).
Don't think you're alone in wanting to protect your kids from sex offenders. Given the failings of the polygraph as well as the harsh (and warranted) punishments for convicted sex offenders, I can't stand the fact that polygraph "results" are so heavily relied upon in these cases. Do you sleep better at night knowing that the polygraph has put innocent people behind bars and required humiliating sex offender registration for non-sex offenders? Think about the consequences of all of these things. But, the polygraph has kept the guilty people behind bars as well, right? I ask you this - how do you really know? Joe Sex Offender came to this site, learned about countermeasures and has been released from treatment and is no longer on probation. But he's guilty as sin. Blame the polygraph, man. The examiner's "opinion" is what set him free. Examiners will spout off about how it's the "best we've got" (check out www.polygraphplace.com and you'll see what I mean). Doesn't matter - it's not good enough. It ruins lives while at the same time not REALLY doing much good. The bad outweighs the good which means despite it being the best we've got it's still not good enough.
Quote from: Anonymous on Aug 09, 2004, 05:52 PMSM,
www.911hotjobs.com and look through the literature available for purchase on a LAW-ENFORCEMENT SPONSORED site.
That site is not "sponsored" by law enforcement.
cop,
FYI, to sponsor means to provide financial support. The particular site in question receives most of its financing from LE agencies who advertise on the site. While it probably all comes down to semantics, I believe even the most common simpleton such as yourself can probably see that "sponsor" is an appropriate word to use in this case.
Quote from: dimas on Aug 09, 2004, 07:05 PMcop,
FYI, to sponsor means to provide financial support. The particular site in question receives most of its financing from LE agencies who advertise on the site. While it probably all comes down to semantics, I believe even the most common simpleton such as yourself can probably see that "sponsor" is an appropriate word to use in this case.
You are even worse than a simpleton, you are an idiot. That site does not get ANY money from ANY law enforcement agency of ANY kind. They sell stuff! That is the only way they make their money. They try to look official, to fool idiots like you. Guess it worked on you.
Cop,
Think before you speak. Go check the site out yourself - do you see all of those listings for jobs with law enforcement agencies? Okay, step two. Click on the little button that says post a job. Now, what does it say? You have to pay for it. All of those different departments, agencies, etc. listed under featured employers - yes, they all paid money to be listed there.
Follow my logic - all of those law enforcement agencies that are advertising jobs have paid to put those ads up. So what does that mean? The site is SPONSORED by law enforcement agencies. Wow - given the number of times you've insulted posters' intelligence, I'd have thought you'd do a little homework before you started typing. So, you're just a poly cop, right? Not an investigator , I hope?
::sigh::
Yet another battle in the war of facts and reason vs. the bluster of
angry polygraphers...
Quote
spon·sor
n.
1. One who assumes responsibility for another person or a group during a period of instruction, apprenticeship, or probation.
2. One who vouches for the suitability of a candidate for admission.
3. A legislator who proposes and urges adoption of a bill.
4. One who presents a candidate for baptism or confirmation; a godparent.
5. One that finances a project or an event carried out by another person or group, especially a business enterprise that pays for radio or television programming in return for advertising time.
tr.v. spon·sored, spon·sor·ing, spon·sors
To act as a sponsor for.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Good for you Gino baby, you have learned to read a dictionary. Now let me tell you one more time, none of those things apply to that site. Those are free links not sponsored. But you never did check your facts.
Quote from: Anonymous on Aug 09, 2004, 11:57 PMCop,
Think before you speak. Go check the site out yourself - do you see all of those listings for jobs with law enforcement agencies? Okay, step two. Click on the little button that says post a job. Now, what does it say? You have to pay for it. All of those different departments, agencies, etc. listed under featured employers - yes, they all paid money to be listed there.
Follow my logic - all of those law enforcement agencies that are advertising jobs have paid to put those ads up. So what does that mean? The site is SPONSORED by law enforcement agencies. Wow - given the number of times you've insulted posters' intelligence, I'd have thought you'd do a little homework before you started typing. So, you're just a poly cop, right? Not an investigator , I hope?
Once again you show your stupidity dimwit. Those are free links - not paid listings.
"Cop,"
Don't piss on our shoes and tell us it's raining. Anonymous gave you detailed instructions on how to confirm that law enforcement agencies sponsor www.911hotjobs.com by paying for job postings there. Perhaps his instructions were too complicated for you to follow. Here's a direct link:
http://www.911hotjobs.com/advertise2.htm
Do you still deny it? ::)
This law enforcement-sponsored website also profits from selling literature on how to pass a polygraph "test." Go to the following page, and in the lower right you'll find a group of listings under the header, "Polygraph Testing Materials":
http://www.911hotjobs.com/bookstore/testcenter.htm
Although the website is intended for public safety applicants, they'll sell the materials to anyone who'll pay for it...even convicted sex offenders.
Anonymous,
chill for second. I'm not blaming this site. I am simply stating that there are posts from sex offenders with questions on how to avoid being caught and admitting they HAVE BEEN DECEPTIVE. They are posting their dishonesty, and I never said you are intentionally helping sex offenders/criminals learn to beat the poly, however read the posts because that's what you are getting. I'm not even disapointed by the fact others are trying to lie to on the poly to gain employment. If Joe Blow feels he has to to lie on the poly that is his choice and if he gets caught he may be excluded from law enforcement all together.
Whether not law enforcement sponsors this site is irrelevant. Just because freedom of speach allows you to provide information without violating any laws is fantastic, however don't we have a MORAL DUTY to do what's right? Do people get screwed on poly graph test? I'm sure they do. Will I ever get screwed on a poly test? I'm sure I will, however because of the responsibility I have to the community I still am not going to support providing any information to criminals that are looking to beat the system.
Is there anything wrong with law enforcement using the poly to hire candidates? I would say no. It is their right, however unfair it seems. I recently went to a medical exam and answered yes to questions that may exclude me from the hireing process. Personally I didn't think it was relevant since I know my own health better than any doctor who speaks to me for five minutes does. I could have lied on the questionare and nobody would have ever known, but I didn't, it's called morals.
Now, before we debate what being supportive is, my interpretation is when one provides any type of information, advice, suggestions, and answering of relevant questions.
I like this site. It makes some very good points about how the poly is not reliable and as stated before I am not as much concerned about the people who are looking for ways to beat the poly for hiring purposes although I feel if you need to lie on a poly then the problem doesn't lie with passing or failing the poly. The problem is that the individual is either ashamed or uncomfortable with themselves. That is a problem. How can one enforce the law if they feel guilty about the times they have broken the law and not been caught. One of my first posts states to be honest with yourself. Admit to what you have done and take your lumps. I think most of the candidates who have made posts about being screwed by the poly are being honest and sincere and if they were screwed by a false reading on a poly is indeed a shame.
Unfortunately that is part of the deal when you try to get into law enforcement. and for those people who have been falsely convicted for failing a poly, it is a bigger shame for the system. I would like to address the point that I don't think as many people fail the poly for telling the truth as some of these posts state. I would say most of the story lies somewhere in the middle. If these people would come here to learn how to beat the poly, which may be considered cheating, then why would I believe them to be telling me the truth? I would be more inclined to believe a person who has failed the poly and rather than try to beat the poly the next time, decide to apply somewhere else and just try again. Police Departments don't black ball and most likely a good candidate will get another chance to take a poly.
I don't fully understand how the poly works. I know it mainly deals with responses to body functions such as breathing, heart rate, sweating, etc., but I do understand everyones body reacts differently to stimuli.
I am not here to make enemies with anyone or accuse anyone of directly helping criminals. What I am asking is not to give criminals the upper hand. If an individual admits he is trying to beat the poly to avoid prosecution, then why would you even reply to his post. The guy is scum! Even if they feel they have been wrongly accused, at least take a moment in deciding if helping them pass a poly is in the best interest of society. Most people who are low income qualify for free legal aid, and If they have a problem with a poly then they should address it with their attorney.......
Cop;
Polys are crap, pure and simple.
I wouldn't waste my time on this website if I didn't believe in George's objective of ridding our society of this ridiculous tool.
I've done my time attached to the silly contraction, and both times I went in with the, "since I'm telling the truth, why should I worry?" attitude :).
Though unlike George, I INITIATED the polys in both instances. Moreover, to ensure that results would be undisputable, I used attorneys to employ the services of two TOP firms in the the Dallas area (seems that in Dallas, you have to go through an attorney to access the highest accredited firms). I spent THOUSANDS of dollars to ensure the truth would hold water via the use of two highly credible firms.
I've never had a criminal record, never arrested, NEVER had other allegations against me, I've held a TS clearance w/a BI, am well educated, at a senior management level of the institution I work for, and a volunteer in my community.
I falsely failed BOTH polys, on the two separate allegations.
After the results the operator of one firm had the nerve to point his finger in my face and start yelling, "You lied! You lied! Admit it! Admit it! Tell me the truth!!!". ---- And this how a highly credible firm performing this type of work acts? The best in Dallas?
Of course, no evidence was found to back either of the poly results, leaving the poly standing out there by itself, unsupported. Child Protective Services never interviewed me on the allegations (sent me 'dismissal' letters in both instances), the accusations never went to court, I was never even visited by law enforcement. Yeah, what a great tool a poly is.
So, in the 90% accuracy that poly operator claimants have, how many false positives are being excluded? Mine was. Are others? Probably many, as false positives aren't something one tells the world about or puts forth as statistical data; it's something that one hides because of the negative connotations associated w/the failures.
I'll bet the farm that there are many people out there that end up as defendants that confidentially volunteer to a poly and fail, only to be cleared of charges, later. I'll bet that they NEVER discuss their false positive results, because of the negative connotations associated with failing a poly, as the operators have LIED to the public on the accuracy and the creditability of the results for so long, and it seems to be taboo to face off against poly community claims of accuracy.
Sure, some people will misuse this site, but as Seeker said in a post a yr or so back, "This site does have both sides - good and bad. What anyone chooses to find here will be based upon their intentions when coming to this site." That philosophy can be applied to anything in life; what's meant for a good cause can be twisted into evil results.
Besides, how many people have been interrogated and released back into our society w/o further investigation because they DID pass a poly when they were guilty? Ask the Ted Bundys of the world. All the more reason to ban polys.
Cop, what would you and "I smell" do it you weren't operating polys? Sell tuna behind a fish counter? And thus your justification for being proponents of a vehicle of crap... "I got no where else to go, I got no where else to go..." ;D
We'll get the crap polys out our society one day, you'll see.
Quote from: sm on Aug 09, 2004, 05:29 AM I am going out on a limb here, but do we arm every person with a loaded gun to prove that it's the person and not the gun that commits the crime? Personally I think the point has been made about poly's, they don't work like they should.
SM, the problem w/using a gun as an analogy, is that guns don't go off falsely. I.e., if we did arm every person w/a loaded gun, the statistics would be flawed if the guns didn't work properly (like the poly).
Thus, if a gun was like a poly, the gun COULD commit the crime (10% of the time, since polys are SUPPOSEDLY 90% accurate...). ;)
Sometimes it catches folks like kcr
Polygraph adds new twist
By Dave Forster, The Forum
Published Tuesday, August 10, 2004
As a district judge and former public defender in northwestern Minnesota, Donald Aandal is no stranger to child molesters and rapists.
But until a few years ago, he had no idea they struck so often.
"Everything we could imagine is worse," said Aandal, a judge based in Warren since 2000. "What we knew 10 years ago and what we know today is night and day, and we're still just scratching the surface."
Aandal credits that revelation to lie detector tests, an increasingly common requirement of sex offender treatment programs in North Dakota and Minnesota. Counselors and probation officers praise the exams as crucial for treating offenders, but as was seen Monday in Cass County District Court, the practice can also create difficult questions for prosecutors.
In court was Donald James Henderson, a 46-year-old Fargo man convicted in 2002 of gross sexual imposition against children in Bottineau and Cass counties.
The charges he faced Monday centered on the abuse of another child in 1997 and 2000, which Henderson admitted to in a polygraph test for treatment following his 2002 conviction.
The counselor, as required by law, reported the abuse, the police investigated, and the Cass County state's attorney charged Henderson, 1024 40th St. S., on new counts of gross sexual imposition. Henderson came to court Monday to plead guilty to the new charge.
Assistant Cass County State's Attorney Mark Boening said local sex offender counselors worry harsh prosecution of Henderson will discourage future offenders from being open. Boening recommended supervised probation, to be served concurrently with the probation Henderson already is serving.
East Central District Judge Georgia Dawson thought the crime called for more, though, and added five years of probation to Henderson's current sentence.
"At first blush, this certainly did not appear to be an appropriate sentence," Dawson said. "Frankly, I'm not convinced that it is at second blush."
In similar cases statewide, prosecutors usually take the route Boening did and recommend a more lenient sentence, Assistant Attorney General Jon Byers said. They don't want their prosecution to hinder treatment for other offenders, but they don't want to offer blanket immunity, either.
"There's really not an easy answer to it," Byers said.
Henderson's case also raised a looming legal question surrounding the polygraph confessions.
His defense attorney, Bruce Quick, said he isn't sure the test results are admissible in court. One could argue the confessions aren't voluntary, because refusing to take the tests can be a violation of probation, Quick said.
Boening disagreed, but the attorneys didn't need to address the issue.
Henderson had admitted to the crime a second time, after hearing his Miranda rights and waiving his right to an attorney, when police followed up on the report from the counselor.
"If this had been simply the polygraph that was submitted, he would have fought it," Quick said.
Boening and Quick said Henderson is the first person they know of in Cass County to be charged with a crime that came out in a probation-mandated polygraph test.
In northwestern Minnesota, counselors advise their offenders to be vague about the identity of their victims, said Aandal, the judge from Warren. That way, the offender can be honest about his history and counselors don't have to report the old crime. In some cases, the strategy has revealed up to 100 new victims, Aandal said.
The intent of the tests isn't to uncover new crimes to prosecute, though, Aandal said.
"Our primary focus is treatment, so we don't get more victims," he said.
Readers can reach Forum reporter Dave Forster at (701) 241-5538
Quote from: top-cop on Aug 11, 2004, 03:07 PMSometimes it catches folks like kcr
And sometimes it doesn't; and sometimes it catches people who are telling the truth and sometimes it doesn't.
What's your point?
Quote from: cop on Aug 09, 2004, 07:37 PM
You are even worse than a simpleton, you are an idiot. That site does not get ANY money from ANY law enforcement agency of ANY kind. They sell stuff! That is the only way they make their money. They try to look official, to fool idiots like you. Guess it worked on you.
Cop,
First, I would like to put to rest this talk about how you and ISBS are Poly-examiners. While you may indeed be "wannabe" examiners, Polygraph examiners you are not.
Second, I was correct in my assumption that you are indeed a simpleton, because only a simpleton would not realize that idiot and simpleton are synonymous. Therefore, Mr. "intelligent", you have once again pointed out to all of us how lacking in that department you really are.
The following is simply to help you LEARN, and definitely not to show off my amazing ability to look things up in the dictionary (WEBSTER'S New World). Something I suggest you learn to do.
IDIOT: ignorant and common person, layman, ignorant person, a very foolish or stupid person. a mentally retarded person.
SIMPLETON: a person who is stupid or easily deceived; fool.
FOOL: a person with little or no judgment, common sense, wisdom, silly or stupid person; simpleton, a mentally retarded person.
THESAURUS (WEBSTER'S)
IDIOT: simpleton, nincompoop, booby, fool. ::)
In the future it may serve your cause to educate yourself, before you think yourself intelligent enough to make attacks against the intelligence of others. Now, whether or not you actually have the mental capacity is a whole other problem in and of itself. This I believe is substantiated by your inability to
comprehend that whole sponsorship issue with the 911 site.
wow, that was some great reading!
Quote from: sm on Aug 09, 2004, 03:44 PMHowever aren't you a bit concerned on who is using this information.
I used the information on this board to make the decision to REFUSE taking the polygraph, and in all likelihood it kept me out of prison. I thank you and my children thank you, George.
Quote from: sm on Aug 09, 2004, 03:44 PM I have children, George, and I want them to grow up in a decent society...
I have children as well...and there was 50/50 chance that I would have lived the next 50 years in a 6x12 cell without seeing my children if I had taken the polygraph. It was evident from the beginning of the investigation that I was presumed guilty, and I am sure the police polygrapher would have nailed it home with his "test".
Here's the kicker...I AM INNOCENT! I used the information on this site to educate myself about my rights, the procedure and the reliability...nothing more. I didn't come here to learn how to cheat the test. I came here to learn about the test itself and what I read scared the shit out of me. I am an intelligent guy...I could have employed the counter measures to insure a favorable outcome. Instead I learned that contrary to my belief, the test DOESN'T WORK. If I had learned here that it does indeed work, and taking it and being honest would have cleared my name, of course I would have taken it.
What I read here convinced me that the polygraph could only hurt me. I refused to take it and instead insisted that the investigators complete their witch hunt with good old-fashioned police work. You know what they learned? I AM INNOCENT. I would bet dollars to donuts (any of you cops wanna take that bet?) that had I taken the poly I would have failed and the investigation would have ended there....no questions asked...straight to jail.
Instead, I let them interview my kids, my neighbors' kids, my friends' kids...the took all my computer equipment, all my cameras, CDs, etc. You know what they discovered? I AM INNOCENT.
So you can call me a pervert, molester, whatever you want. But the fact of the matter is that I am cleaner than ALL of you...I have been investigated and came out clean. I suffered through the darkest times, I ran the gauntlet of police abuse and community scorn and I walked through the valley of the shadow of death and I have come through the other side as clean as a whistle.
And I have come through in no small part because of the information on this site. So thank you George....from the bottom of my heart. When I tuck my kids into bed at night, or we play at the park or I drop them at school or help with their homework....when I kiss my wife or watch a funny TV show or hear the rain....when I experience all of the little things that would have been taken away by the polygraph had I not educated myself about it, I say a silent thank you to George and this site.
Railroaded,
I must congratulate you on your NOT giving in to the polygraph horror. You are wise to use this site to enrichen yourself to the biased, horrifying outcome that the polygraph can render. Bravo!! to you and your family!!!
Regards
In Oregon when one is released on bail they sign a condition of their release that they can be subject to polygraph. Is this really legal? I researched laws pertaining to it but thus far only found ones in regards to if you are a sex offender and they still can not be considered admissible in court hearings. Does anyone have any other information about this and weather or not it is legal.
Quote from: NervousOregon on Dec 12, 2005, 05:45 PMIn Oregon when one is released on bail they sign a condition of their release that they can be subject to polygraph. Is this really legal? I researched laws pertaining to it but thus far only found ones in regards to if you are a sex offender and they still can not be considered admissible in court hearings. Does anyone have any other information about this and weather or not it is legal.
NervousOregon,
The authorities in your state have in all likelihood been advised by their own attorneys that such a requirement is in conformity with Oregon law. While polygraph "testing" is sheer quackery and should never be relied upon, it would be best to seek the advice of a lawyer regarding the extent to which the Oregon judiciary may (however mistakenly) rely upon it.
That is part of the problem we have little to no money and there are other possibilities of a lawsuit against the county because of other technicalities of this case but mean while he may end up in jail because of one severely messed up system if he is forced to take the polygraph but is reading up on polygraph's via this site. Part of the problem is finding a good lawyer who will take it on a contingency basis that there will be money in it for them later down the line. But until the supposed criminal matter is cleared up we can not pursue a civil matter very easily because lawyers are not willing to take on both cases since we do not have money for the criminal. However I will contact a lawyer about this specific technicality since I do not believe that public defense will do an effective job. Thank you for your quick response!
NervousOregon,
You might also wish to contact the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon (http://www.aclu-or.org) regarding the situation that prompted you to post here. Their e-mail address is info@aclu-or.org.
As you can tell by the log in name what I am. I am replying to this for several reasons. First off I came to this site to find out the laws regarding Parole adding this requirement and if i can refuse it. George can check the logs and see I did not download any reading material on how to beat a Poly.
Its easy to beat a poly, all you have to do is not take one.
Now the reason for my reply:
I have taken 11 polygraphs in 8 years.
I was in a SO treatment program that required them.
First poly i failed. Reason it was on sexual history and what i revealed in treatment and I refused to talk about 1 incident because I might be prosecuted for it even though it happened in 1978 with an adult female.
1 month after failing I revealed some of the circumstances of the incident and passed the next polygraph.
A year later I took a maintenance poly. Passed.
A year after that took an Exit poly. Passed.
2 years later I pissed off my parole officer so she had me take a polygraph. I failed it.
Consequences of that where to see a pysch and take another test. I did, i revealed I had had sex outside of marriage. Not a criminal offense. Took another polygraph and failed.
Consequences- put back into treatment program. Took another polygraph after 6 months of treatment where I did the assignments but did not reveal any further wrong-doing or law breaking. Results- Passed.
A year later took another Exit Poly. Failed.
2 weeks later took another, Failed.
This was at a time of huge emotional distress between my wife and I and looking like I was headed for a divorce. Was told I had to pass the next one or they would violate my parole and send me to prison. I revealed no wrong doing or parole violations. I demanded a different polygrapher. 2weeks later took the test.
Results of test- passed.
Parole said it was a false pass and said I had to use the original polygrapher.
Took his test. Results Passed.
What is the point to all this?
After 8 years of dealing with polygraphs with both pass and failed tests I assure you they are very inaccurate. Since no one can track who is posting this except but what I reveal, I have no reason to lie. Or to tell the truth. You weigh it for yourselves on what to believe or not to believe. I know this. I have committed no crimes that were asked about on the polygraph tests. In fact funny thing is on all the questions regarding crimes since my release from prison, i passed. or at least that was not the questions they(polygraphers) said i showed deception on. Questions i failed were stupid questions about have I told the whole truth to my therapist or my parole officer.
On the last 4 tests the pertininent (spelling) question was wether I had engaged in any sexual relations with anyone other than my wife that I did not reveal to my therapist or parole officer. My answer was no. Remained no and is still no. Why did I fail 2 of the tests and pass the other 2? No one knows. Why did parole say the next to last test was a "false Pass"? Does that mean even they know its the same as flipping a coin?
Now about this site helping criminals.
I dont think it really does. Considering how many people I have personally seen get drastic actions taken against them for failed polygraphs and only have them come back and pass the next one without revealing any thing they lied about on the first test to.
A polygraph is not going to stop someone from committing a crime.
A polygraph as a tool is total BS. Its the same as Good Cop-Bad Cop, or "I will have them go easier on you if you just admit it" and we read everyday how that false promise gets false confessions.
Why are polygraphs being forced on sex offenders? Because Sex Offenders are the easiest section of the criminal society to pick on. No one will stand up for thier rights. Not even the ACLU. I am speaking from experience here. You can be convicted of a felony in this country and serve your time and people will give you a chance to show you will not offend again and you can get housing, employment, and assistance from groups like GoodWill and Easter Seals and the Salvation Army to help you get back into society. With 1 blaring exception. If you are convicted of a sex crime. Then forget it. No one will help. You get laid off if anyone knows of your crime. You can't find employment in any place that has females working in it.
And funny little thing about polygraph examiners. They work out of Sex Offender Treatment program offices and share in the money collected. And if your a Sex offender required to take a polygraph, that polygrapher has to be an "Approved Sex Offender Polygrapher". SO he has close ties with the treatment program. And the treatment program makes its money by having people in treatment. The SO's in treatment have to pay for all this, Plus the state also pays them.
One reason I passed the finale 2 polygraphs even though nothing changed in my "story" was that the state was no longer subsidising my treatment and they couldn't require me to pay more.
Here is an alarming trend I see. They fail you on the polygraphs all the way up until parole is about to put you in prison, then you pass the next poly. Why? because if your in prison, your not in the program, and as such they are not getting paid.
I dont have nothing against the treatment programs. Hell it did me a lot of good. Of course I am not a predator but I see where it does good for others too. I am stead fastly against polygraphs though. I would rather go see a Tarot card reader and have more faith in thier results than i would in a polygraph.
QuoteReg_Sex_Off wrote: Why are polygraphs being forced on sex offenders? Because Sex Offenders are the easiest section of the criminal society to pick on. No one will stand up for thier rights. Not even the ACLU.
As the ploygraph may not be a reliable tool, the investigators believe that it is better that nothing to get confessions. While I don't believe that the ploygraph is useful in employment processes because it simply "weeds out" applicants who interview good though the agency don't like, I think it may be useful in getting confessions out of scumbag sex offenders who prey on children and other innocent victims.
As you can see by now, polygraphs don't work, but its a good way to raise revenue to your local therapy session or LE agency. Anyone convicted of a crime will usually pay dearly and financially. That's all part of the crime "mill" folks. Just a part of the system, one to keep the money flowing to LE agencies, the courts and the judicial "system." Welcome to the real world.
I need information about using poly graphs on mentally retarded people. I have a man in jail who is mentally retarded and need
to know if a polygraph can even be accurate on somone who is
mentally retarded, traumatic brian injury. Please let me know if
you have any information. Thanks, Liz Lafferty
lizlaffertyventure5@yahoo.com
QuoteI have a man in jail who is mentally retarded and need
to know if a polygraph can even be accurate on somone who is
mentally retarded, traumatic brian injury.
Polygraphs have been determined to be inaccurate, unreliable, and scientifically invalid for the non retarded, so I imagine the same would apply for the retarded.
TC
Mr Cullen
To be fair, even your favorite oft quoted NAS study found accuracy rates significantly above chance for some uses.
QuoteTo be fair, even your favorite oft quoted NAS study found accuracy rates significantly above chance for some uses.
To wit, the NAS reported concluded the following:
"Estimate of Accuracy Notwithstanding the limitations of the quality of the empirical research and the limited ability to generalize to real-world settings, we conclude that in populations of examinees such as those represented in the polygraph research literature, untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests for event-specific investigations can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection.
Accuracy may be highly variable across situations. The evidence does not allow any precise quantitative estimate of polygraph accuracy or provide confidence that accuracy is stable across personality types, sociodemographic groups, psychological and medical conditions, examiner and examinee expectancies, or ways of administering the test and selecting questions. In particular, the evidence does not provide confidence that polygraph accuracy is robust against potential countermeasures. There is essentially no evidence on the incremental validity of polygraph testing, that is, its ability to add predictive value to that which can be achieved by other methods."
QuoteTo be fair, even your favorite oft quoted NAS study found accuracy rates significantly above chance for some uses.
To wit, the NAS reported concluded the following:
"Estimate of Accuracy Notwithstanding the limitations of the quality of the empirical research and the limited ability to generalize to real-world settings, we conclude that in populations of examinees such as those represented in the polygraph research literature, untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests for event-specific investigations can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection.
Accuracy may be highly variable across situations. The evidence does not allow any precise quantitative estimate of polygraph accuracy or provide confidence that accuracy is stable across personality types, sociodemographic groups, psychological and medical conditions, examiner and examinee expectancies, or ways of administering the test and selecting questions. In particular, the evidence does not provide confidence that polygraph accuracy is robust against potential countermeasures. There is essentially no evidence on the incremental validity of polygraph testing, that is, its ability to add predictive value to that which can be achieved by other methods."
I can't think of anything more absurd, or cruel, than subjecting a retarded person to a polygraph interrogation on the pretext of "getting at the truth" or "eliminating" him/her as a "suspect".
TC
QuoteTo be fair, even your favorite oft quoted NAS study found accuracy rates significantly above chance for some uses.
To wit, the NAS reported concluded the following:
"Estimate of Accuracy Notwithstanding the limitations of the quality of the empirical research and the limited ability to generalize to real-world settings, we conclude that in populations of examinees such as those represented in the polygraph research literature, untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests for event-specific investigations can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection.
Accuracy may be highly variable across situations. The evidence does not allow any precise quantitative estimate of polygraph accuracy or provide confidence that accuracy is stable across personality types, sociodemographic groups, psychological and medical conditions, examiner and examinee expectancies, or ways of administering the test and selecting questions. In particular, the evidence does not provide confidence that polygraph accuracy is robust against potential countermeasures. There is essentially no evidence on the incremental validity of polygraph testing, that is, its ability to add predictive value to that which can be achieved by other methods."
(MY UNDERLINING)
I can't think of anything more absurd, or cruel, than subjecting a retarded person to a polygraph interrogation on the pretext of "getting at the truth" or "eliminating" him/her as a "suspect", which is the typical ruse used by LE agencies and others to get people to voluntarily submit to a polygraphic interrogation.
Incidently, consider the phrase "significantly above chance" If one were to assume that to mean 20% "above chance" that would equate to only 60%! If 50% is "chance", then 1.2 x .5 = .6 or 60%. I'll even spot you 5%. Let's say 65% accuracy. That is not very accurate. Especially considering the way the polygraph is presented to the public at large, and suspects in particular.
So to be fair, and in the spirit of gentlepersonly debate, I'll revise my statement and say that the polygraph has not been found to be VERY accurate, and has been found to be unreliable, and NOT a scientifically valid test.
"Dear Suspect. We think you stole money from your employer. Will you take the polygraph test, which is really not a scientifically valid test, is unreliable, and not very accurate. About 60-65% accurate. We can not FORCE you to take it. You are within your legal rights to decline. But if you do, you must be hiding sumthin! What are you hiding scum bag? What ya afraid of, huh?!'
TC
"M-O-O-N" That spells "Tom Cullen"