There's a new website VoiceStress.com (http://www.voicestress.com) dedicated to exposing "The Truth About Voice Stress Technologies." The site provides research abstracts, testimony on voice stress analysis, and a message board.
While I welcome all efforts at exposing voice stress analysis as a fraud, visitors to VoiceStress.com should be aware that the site is operated by a key promoter of a competing fraudulent pseudoscience: polygraphy. The domain name "voicestress.com" is registered to none other than Milton O. "Skip" Webb, Jr., the president of the American Polygraph Association (http://www.polygraph.org). The following is the result of a WHOIS search on the domain name "voicestress.com":
Quote
Registrant:
WEBB,MILTON (VOICESTRESS2-DOM)
9101 Volunteer Drive
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22309
US
Domain Name: VOICESTRESS.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
HOSTMASTER (HO2313-ORG) hostmaster@NAMESERVICES.NET
Name It
1800 Skibo Road #252
Fayetteville, NC 28303
US
1-910-485-0298
Billing Contact:
WEBB, MILTON (MXW889) skipwebb@stickdog.com
WEBB,MILTON
9101 Volunteer Drive
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22309
US
703 360 8102 123 123 1234
Record last updated on 27-Apr-2001.
Record expires on 20-Jan-2002.
Record created on 20-Jan-2001.
Database last updated on 30-Jul-2001 18:08:00 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS0.NAMESERVICES.NET 208.234.1.33
NS1.NAMESERVICES.NET 209.27.134.5
;D
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!!!
This is comical at best, seems to me to be a group of people trying to protect their livelyhood by passing off as much criticism as they can onto cvsa, not that cvsa is any better mind you, it just seems to me that one who lives in a glass house would be wise not to start throwing stones
I recently posted this message on the voicestress.com forum, I am interested to see how long it remains there.
Quotewill be very surprised if this post actually makes it to the forum without being popped by the administrator. That said.... to quote from this home page: "Are confessions the same as validity? Hardly. For years cops used to get confessions from suspects with all kinds of lie detector ruses, like wiring a naïve suspect to a photocopier, or using the old Motorola radio in their squad cars that could change a red light to green when the mike button was pressed. And, a phony ploy works only so long before people catch on. Just how accurate are voice stress analyzers? Let's set aside for the moment what their salesmen have to say, and look at what the scientists have reported." Although I have as little faith in CVSA as I do polygraph, I would love to see "scientific proof" that the polygraph is any more reliable than the CVSA. A copy of this post will be posted on other boards. Mr. Webb, lets be honest, after all truth is what we're after right?
in case anyone is interested the webmaster of voicestress.com replied to my post quoted below
QuotePlease provide me an e-mail address, and I will be happy to provide you with a number of research papers, both lab and field studies, that clearly provide proof that the polygraph has been shown do be far more accurate at detecting deception than voice stress. More importantly, the research will show that the polygraph has the capability to detect truth, unlike the chance probability shown for voice stress. Voice stress likes to tout that it has no inconclusives and makes a big deal of polygraph's inconclusive rate. You should understand that all tests should have an inconclusive rate to provide greater accuracy on the calls that are made. If one looked at fingerprints and took 100 cases in which fingerprints were found at a crime scene and assuming that in 20 of those instances, the prints collected did not provide sufficient criteria upon which to make an identification of the suspect, then even if the other 80 cases were correctly identified, the accuracy rate, including the 20 "inconclusive" cases would be 80 per cent. Obviously most forensic sciences are not held to this standard. Only the cases in which fully identifiable prints were collected would be considered and the accuracy would be listed as 100% . Polygraph does not enjoy this lienancy. Our detractors claim that inconclusive tests should count as errors! Errors are sometimes made in polygraph decisions just as they are in many other tests that we depend upon every day. Everything from PSAs and mamograms to stress thalium tests have both false positives and negatives. Should we discontinue their use until they achieve 100% accuracy? I hope not for the sake of the people who are often saved by their use. We use the best that our present technology has to offer and strive to make it more accurate. Polygraph is doing that. However, voice stress has not been shown to have any accuracy beyond chance and is clearly being used solely for it's value as an interrogational prop. Even the sellers of this device warn its users to refrain from portraying it as other than "an investigative tool" and to keep it out of court at all costs. You are certainly entitled to your opinion of polygraph but you should form that opinion after reading the literature available and after evaluating the research. Unfortunately many people form their opinion after failing a test because they did not provide truthful answers during a polygraph test and failed the examination. That's a bit like cursing the rock that stubbed your toe.
Quote from: wannabe on Aug 02, 2001, 07:21 PM
I will be happy to provide you with a number of research papers, both lab and field studies, that clearly provide proof that the polygraph has been shown do be far more accurate at detecting deception than voice stress. More importantly,the research will show that the polygraph has the capability to detect truth,
unlike the chance probability shown for voice stress.
Wannabe,
Provide Mr. Webb with an email address and then forward the information to George for posing on this site. Everyone on this site would welcome the chance to see his "research" that provides proof that the polygraph is far more accurate than CVSA.
He also claims to have proof that the polygraph can detect deception....isn't the polygraph just another computer program.....IT CANNOT DO THAT...it can only provide "MEASUREMENTS" for "INTERPRETATION" by the polygrapher, thus your basic coin toss as to how he will intepret it.
George and Gino have issued numerous "challenges" to Mr. Webb to provide information on exactly how the polygraph can capably detect the truth. He has never done so. Yet he tells you he will.....Interesting
Quote from: wannabe on Aug 02, 2001, 07:21 PM
Our detractors claim that inconclusive tests should count as errors! Errors are sometimes made in polygraph decisions just as they are in many other tests that we depend upon every day. Everything from PSAs and mamograms to stress thalium tests have both false positives and negatives. Should we discontinue their use until they achieve 100% accuracy? I hope not for the sake of the people who are often saved by their use. We use the best that our present technology has to offer and strive to make it more accurate. Polygraph is doing that.
What Mr. Webb fails to realize here is that while these important life-saving tests may produce errors, these tests are far more ACCURATE because they have been TESTED by SCIENTIFIC methods for accuracy. If the results from these tests are askew, then there are other methods such as biopsies and MRI and CAT scans to insure proper diagnosis.
So to put the polygraph on the same comparitive level with important testing like this is, as Mr. Webb would tell you "deceptive"
Good Work Wannabe
Fred F. ;)
Fred, thanks for your reply, I totally agree with your interpretation of Mr. Webb's responce.
I have provided him with my email and here the reply I posted:
QuoteMr. Webb,
I thank you for your very informative responce, my email is wannabe99@ziplip.com
please feel free to send any and all relavent material that you feel scientifically proves that polygraph is more reliable than chance.
respectfully
wannabe99@ziplip.com
I eagerly await the proof (as does the world) that polygraph is more than a mere coin flip itself :D
on the lighter side lol here is a quote from Mr. Webb I just read on his anti-cvsa webpage....
tell me does it sound like he is describing polygraph to you too?
QuoteFrom: webmaster
Category: VSA Operator
Date: 17 Aug 2001
Time: 16:26:44
Comments
It appears that you are simply repeating what this web site so clearly shows. There is no accuracy in voice stress analysis. The machine can only detect "stress" in the voice (even that is subject to question) and can not differentiate between deception and truth. The only way to tell is for an interrogator to try an obtain a confession. If he gets it...the machine was right. If he doesn't get the confession, then who knows. In other words its an interrogation aid not a lie or truth detector.
:D
Quotetell me does it sound like he is describing polygraph to you too?
Well said!
:-* This CVsa can be beaten....no, let's say you can achive positive results from one...see my other posts...I love these holyer than thou guys.....In authority they don't worry about test results affecting their jobs...wait till one of their children face "The Machine",...lol on them..have to admit their father lies... ;D