I keep seeing persons who have taken more than one polygraph test submitting information on how to beat the polygraph. I have taken two polygraph examinations over the past 5 years and not had a problem. I was truthful and confident in my answers to all questions. I keep seeing things about counter measures and am not sure why I would need to use them as long as I am truthful. Can you explain why they are necessary and if used what is the purpose if you are truthful. The postings I keep seeing are persons who have not only taken one test, but multiple and not passed. Not sure what is going on with that, sounds kinda like someone is not honest or there are lots of bad polygraph examiners out there.
thevet2
Have you read "Breathing Reactions" under the Polygraph Policy. Read it then comment.
If you believe Wonder Woman's magic lasso is infallible, then I guess you would believe in the polygraph. Both were invented by the same man.
Sorry. My mistake. It is Polugraph Procedure
Quotesounds kinda like someone is not honest or there are lots of bad polygraph examiners out there.
The possibility that some of the persons who post here are not honest is quite plausible. I would also agree that there are numerous bad polygraph examiners out there (all of them in my opinion). Not because the examiners are necessarily bad people but because they have placed belief in this skewed "science."
I am pleased that you have encountered little difficulty in "passing" previous polys to which you and your behaviors have been subject. The purpose of countermeasures is to aid truthful examinees from being labeled and deemed dishonest. A dream torn to shreds leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. I speak from experience in this regard. To have one's ambitions ripped away based on arbitrary and subjective testing is disheartening to say the least. From my experience in the polygraph/interrogation seat I most certainly suggest employing countermeasures. I am no angel, however I sleep well knowing that I was honest and this system of "weeding-out" has mislabeled me and countless others. Every other method of testing I underwent had a standard (physical agility, written testing, background interview). The polygraph was the one which held no standardized testing format. It was at the discretion and interpretation of the polygraph artist and the polygraph artist alone. That is why I choose to do all that I, as an individual, can do to accomplish an end to this mockery of science.
thevet2,
If you took two polygraphs in the past five years, told the COMPLETE truth about EVERYTHING and passed both times you should consider yourself lucky. You were probably given the benefit of the doubt. The tests are SUBJECTIVE. If you have so much confidence in the polygraph's accuracy, what are you doing researching it online? You should have nothing to worry about, right? That's what I thought, too. Until I told the COMPLETE truth about everything and failed. Sooner or later you may not be as lucky and find yourself on the other side of the fence, knowing full well what the people on this site are talking about. It would be wise to conduct more research on the subject if additional polygraphs are in your future.
QuoteCan you explain why they are necessary and if used what is the purpose if you are truthful.
The purpose is to prevent a false positive outcome (read: the test outcome is that one is lying when in fact one was truthful). This is necessary because polygraph "tests" have not been shown to have better than chance accuracy in peer-reviewed studies conducted under field conditions.
QuoteI have taken two polygraph examinations over the past 5 years and not had a problem.
Your mistake here is extrapolating your own experience to everyone else. Tests of deception conducted with a coin flip would have roughly half of those "tested" concluding that the test is nothing to fear as well. Getting a heads result twice within five years is certainly within the realm of statistical probabilities as well.
QuoteNot sure what is going on with that, sounds kinda like someone is not honest or there are lots of bad polygraph examiners out there.
In actuality, it is because that people are being evaluated with a non-scientific "test" that lacks any type of standardization that has not been shown to reliably determine truth from deception.
You assume that I lucked out? How about I told the truth and passed. This forum seems somewhat skewed and not sure that is total truth. I do sympathize with those who have told the truth and then been accused of lying. I would be angry if that happened to me I am sure. To say that all polygraph examiners are liars and are out to get you would be false also. The examiners I have delt with are good men and have good morals. I do see them on occassion one on one and find them to be good men. Again, I am sure there are bad examiners and I have also encountered bad police officers. I would be out of my mind to suppose that all police officers are crooks because of a minority and I believe we are talking about a minority of polygraph examiners that are "Bad Apples".
Quote from: polyfool on Mar 29, 2005, 12:22 PMthevet2,
If you took two polygraphs in the past five years, told the COMPLETE truth about EVERYTHING and passed both times you should consider yourself lucky. You were probably given the benefit of the doubt. The tests are SUBJECTIVE. If you have so much confidence in the polygraph's accuracy, what are you doing researching it online? You should have nothing to worry about, right? That's what I thought, too. Until I told the COMPLETE truth about everything and failed. Sooner or later you may not be as lucky and find yourself on the other side of the fence, knowing full well what the people on this site are talking about. It would be wise to conduct more research on the subject if additional polygraphs are in your future.
I am not researching how to beat the polygraph, I was told about this sight by two candidates I refered to employment services in my department. They told me about the sight and that they had used the counter measures and been confronted with their counter measures. They now have to wait another two years to reapply and try again. I am not researching how to beat the system, looking at why they were unable to pass and maybe get others to see that this does not always work. I have not seen a post that tells of anyone that passed a polygraph using counter measures while telling lies. I have not looked at all the posts on this site, so maybe there are persons that have used the counter measures and passed while telling lies.
Maybe you are a polygrapher? ;D
thevet2,
The diagnostic outcome of CQT polygraphy (in particular with polygraph screening applications) is not about good or bad examiners--it is about poor procedure. From the point of view of diagnostic validity, the outcome is the same for either , i.e., poor procedure in the hand's of a good/competent examiner leads to the same result as a poorly designed procedure in the hands of a bad polygrapher---neither is valid. Make no mistake about it--that which is uniformly flawed is the procedure used, and no positive qualities or skills of the examiner can overcome this fatal defect. Polygraph screening is mere quackery and does NOT work as a diagnostic test. It should be pointed out though that (as has been mentioned by others) because that which is being addressed is a binary event, i.e., someone is either being deceptive or truthful about some issue, a polygraph test or a flip of the coin will result in a correct answer with some frequency, not through sound diagnosis, but through the laws of random probability.
QuoteI have not seen a post that tells of anyone that passed a polygraph using counter measures while telling lies.
I seem to recall a few posts in which the author claims employing countermeasures while being deceptive and being judged truthfull. Unfortunately I am unable to direct you to those posts. I have seen posts which claim countermeasures aided truthful examinees from the seemingly common false-positive associated with broad spectrum tests.
QuoteI was told about this sight by two candidates I refered to employment services in my department. They told me about the sight and that they had used the counter measures and been confronted with their counter measures. They now have to wait another two years to reapply and try again.
It is unfortunate that you referred two liars to your own department. By your statements, it appears that the two individuals attempted countermeasures to cover lies. If they did not meet minimum qualifications neither should have been referred or made application. Why would you refer two such persons to your own department? ???
from another of your posts:
QuoteYou assume that I lucked out? How about I told the truth and passed.
Lucked out? Yes. We have matching statements in the last sentence with exception to the last word. My statement would read, "How about I told the truth and failed. This "testing" is flawed and unjust.
I have gotten the message. You do not trust polygraph or the procedures. I will not make any further statements because I do not have the knowledge base it appears you have. If I have offended, I do apolagize. I do feel that I was treated good and the results were correct, if that is a coin toss, then so be it. It worked for me, not against me. I again will state that the individuals testing me were good men and treated me with respect. I cannot speak for others, only myself. It is apparant that I am on the outside in this forum and therefore will not be back. Good luck to all.
well then I hope I get an examiner as good as you had. I take a poly in a week for and my background day before.
take a pd poly sry
QuoteI will not make any further statements because I do not have the knowledge base it appears you have. If I have offended, I do apologize.
TheVet, there is no need to apologize. This is an open forum and we welcome everyone's opinion, regardless of view.
If you get a few free moments, I suggest taking a look at the free e-book
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, which is available for download here on this site. It explains the polygraph process in full (and the trickery behind it).
I'm curious to hear your opinion of the process after learning the background behind it.
I have printed out the lie behind the lie detector. I cannot respond at this time, lots of reading material. Once completed I will try to respond in a sensible manner. I did look on this site and find several studies reported to validate the polygraph, and have not had time to read those either. May be I will support your conclusions. Have to do a lot of reading first and have limited time. Thanks for the advice.
Good luck on reading that material. Very exaustive, I would suggest that you also get some pro polygraph materials to make it fair and balanced. George seems to be very vindictive regarding any pro polygraph materials.
thevet2,
You might also want to check out the 2002 National Academy of Sciences report regarding government use of pre-employment polygraph screening. It's an independent, unbiased scientific study--also found on this site or through any search engine. Be leery of studies funded by the polygraph community--nothing but propaganda to further this junk science. Always consider the source--ask yourself what the entity has to gain from the study? You shouldn't feel bad about not knowing much about this invalid testing procedure. I didn't either until I took a poly, told the truth and failed. I would say most people, until they know better, believe the polygraph is accurate.
Posts in this message thread by "thevet2" and "checking" originated from the same IP address, indicating that they were written by a single author. It seems we have here yet another frightened polygrapher forging posts in an effort to disinform visitors to this website. This is curious behavior coming from a member of a profession that purports to be "Dedicated to Truth" (American Polygraph Association (http://www.polygraph.org) motto).
Other polygraphers who have played similar games include:
AnalSphincter/LoopyLuWho (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1352.msg15623#msg15623)
usarmyofficer2004 (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=2145.msg15328#msg15328)
PolySucks/Cancerman (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1717.msg13123#msg13123)
Policeman (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1614.msg12714#msg12714)
nopoly/POLYSCORE (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1908.msg14299#msg14299)
Zena/Boy_Wonder (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=580.msg3005#msg3005)
Quote from: checking on Mar 31, 2005, 09:17 PMGood luck on reading that material. Very exaustive, I would suggest that you also get some pro polygraph materials to make it fair and balanced. George seems to be very vindictive regarding any pro polygraph materials.
At least here ALL are welcome to post their views either for or against the poly. Here they can slam the posters against (including George) or slam the examiners. Unlike the "pro poly" sites where you would be banned if you disagreed with their views.
Just one example of things that make you go Hmmmm.
How come both sides can post here but only one side can post on the other? ???
Quote from: Administrator on Apr 01, 2005, 03:39 AMPosts in this message thread by "thevet2" and "checking" originated from the same IP address, indicating that they were written by a single author. It seems we have here yet another frightened polygrapher forging posts in an effort to disinform visitors to this website. This is curious behavior coming from a member of a profession that purports to be "Dedicated to Truth" (American Polygraph Association (http://www.polygraph.org) motto).
Other polygraphers who have played similar games include:
AnalSphincter/LoopyLuWho (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1352.msg15623#msg15623)
usarmyofficer2004 (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=2145.msg15328#msg15328)
PolySucks/Cancerman (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1717.msg13123#msg13123)
Policeman (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1614.msg12714#msg12714)
nopoly/POLYSCORE (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1908.msg14299#msg14299)
Zena/Boy_Wonder (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=580.msg3005#msg3005)
Was just re-reading the thread and saw your monitor note....
It does not surprise me, they have been doing that for a while.
I have not been around for a while just checking in...
Good job on the monitoring ;) Now I don't have to bother replying to the monkey with the wrench.....
I recently took a polygraph for employment with the FBI. I saw this site prior to taking the exam. I took my exam, and Passed. I was completely honest, and didn't have any problems answering the examiners questions. The questions were thoroughly explained, and each part of the exam was conducted in a professional manner. I am NOT an examiner, but after my experience with the polygraph, I must admit that it is not something to be worried about. I was extremely nervous about taking it as I had never done it before. Perhaps I was simply someone that the "good ole boys" that I've seen mentioned on this site wanted to join their organization, but to me, I believe honesty + a seasoned, professional examiner will result in success.
Polypasser
Unless your the other 50% (I find it hard to believe that 50% of people that take the poly for the FBI are being deceptive) that fail the poly for the FBI. Do a seach and read some of the horror stories. Yes honesty is the best policy, but guess what sometimes that is not enough.
Polypasser:
I am glad that you did not have a bad experience with the polygraph unlike the countless others who have posted otherwise on this site. If I had sailed through my poly after telling the truth, I would still think they work, too. However, the truth is, they do not work.
I thought honesty was the best policy before I took an FBI polygraph. As far as "professional" examiners are concerned, I don't know about that as I've never encountered one.
Quote from: polypasser1231 on May 14, 2005, 05:57 PMI recently took a polygraph for employment with the FBI. I saw this site prior to taking the exam. I took my exam, and Passed. I was completely honest, and didn't have any problems answering the examiners questions. The questions were thoroughly explained, and each part of the exam was conducted in a professional manner. I am NOT an examiner, but after my experience with the polygraph, I must admit that it is not something to be worried about. I was extremely nervous about taking it as I had never done it before. Perhaps I was simply someone that the "good ole boys" that I've seen mentioned on this site wanted to join their organization, but to me, I believe honesty + a seasoned, professional examiner will result in success.
Polypasser
Were you asked if you researched the polygraph prior? Were you honest with that question?
No, I was not asked whether I had researched the polygraph or not, simply whether I had been through one before.
well, poly, i was in the same boat as you and I failed 4 straight FBI exams. I am glad you passed but I think a lot of people are being incorrectly denied employment for which they qualify.
I would have to agree. I don't believe it's that fair, I was simply lucky that the machine found me to be honest. I didn't have anything to hide, but I'm sure if circumstances were changed only slightly (i.e. diff. examiner) it may have been different (that shouldn't be the case though).
-polypasser
Quote from: thevet2 on Mar 29, 2005, 11:29 PMYou assume that I lucked out? How about I told the truth and passed. This forum seems somewhat skewed and not sure that is total truth. I do sympathize with those who have told the truth and then been accused of lying. I would be angry if that happened to me I am sure. To say that all polygraph examiners are liars and are out to get you would be false also. The examiners I have delt with are good men and have good morals. I do see them on occassion one on one and find them to be good men. Again, I am sure there are bad examiners and I have also encountered bad police officers. I would be out of my mind to suppose that all police officers are crooks because of a minority and I believe we are talking about a minority of polygraph examiners that are "Bad Apples".
So, if the polygraph is so good and so accurate, why is it inadmissable in a court of law? Surely, if the polygraph is as accurate and as good as you claim it to be, then a court of law would have no problems whatsoever in allowing the results of a polygraph exam as evidence in a court of law, would you think? Or is it because a court of law knows that the polygraph isn't as accurate and good as you claim it to be and because as such, makes polygraph results inadmissable as evidence.
It's interesting to me that whenever someone reports that they were 100% honest and "passed" their polygraph, the pro-polygraph community often professes belief in and endorses their story. That person is assumed to be truthful and their story is then held up as an example of why the polygraph is such a useful tool.
However, whenever someone claims they were 100% honest and "failed" their polygraph, they are often accused of withholding information, or attempting countermeasures, or outright deception.
If one is trying to determine the value of something, it seems clear that you would have to consider all the available evidence in order to render a fair judgment. Selecting the evidence that agrees with your opinion and disregarding any evidence that doesn't is patently ridiculous.
Aside from variations of the "you must have had a bad/unprofessional examiner" response no one in the pro-polygraph community seems willing to even attempt to address the ever-growing amount of anecdotal evidence that examinees can be 100% truthful in every aspect and still "fail" their polygraph examination. Why is that?
Any response by a polygraph examiner would be appreciated.
Quote from: Sergeant1107 on Jun 25, 2005, 01:48 PMIt's interesting to me that whenever someone reports that they were 100% honest and "passed" their polygraph, the pro-polygraph community often professes belief in and endorses their story.
Please understand why polygraphers often do this. Sure it is disingenuous, but polygraphers don't say this because they enjoy lying or otherwise messing with you, but to increase the accuracy. They don't expect you to not lie as a result of this admonition. What they are looking for is an increased response differential between control Q's and relevants. An examinee who is NDI on a relevant is expected to react less to the relevant by an increased belief that the polygraph will correctly detect he is not lying. That same examinee is expected to fear the control question more, believing (falsely) he may be disqualified if found deceptive on the control.
The increased public knowledge of how the polygraph works may be more of a threat to whatever accuracy it has than the knowledge of specific countermeasure technique.
marty
Quote from: Marty on Jun 25, 2005, 06:04 PM
The increased public knowledge of how the polygraph works may be more of a threat to whatever accuracy it has than the knowledge of specific countermeasure technique.
I don't disagree with this. In what way would it hurt whatever accuracy the polygraph already has? Increasing the number of Inconclusives and to a lesser extent, False Positives?
Just never ADMIT to anything DURING the exam that you did not admit to in the pre screening or on your application. If you don't ADMIT they can still fail you but on what basis? Then they are opening themselves up to lawsuits. The problem is MOST people ADMIT to things during the exam when they are accused of lying or being deceptive.
:-/ why in the first place would you allow yourself to be polygraphed anyway? if its for a job, then there are other jobs that you can go to. a polygraph is just some made up mumbo-jumbo to scare you into "telling the truth" the truth afterall is really relative to what you see and what you fear. its all on you, not what someone wants to sell you.
Why fear the poly?
Well... depends on how much is at stake when you are subject to taking one.
My experience over the past 10 years has been the following:
Lied -- Failed
Lied -- Passed
Truth -- Failed
Truth -- Passed
Very few of the twenty or so polys I have taken were in the first two categories. Most times I have told the truth. If I had not found one very hghly regarded polygrapher with whom I have no problem passing *sic*, then I would likely not be alive to write this post. Now you couldn't PAY me to see another polygrapher when I am forced to take one.
Even given that the polygraph is a load of hooey, who gives you the test makes a load of difference. The reason I say that is because there are some who are in it for the money. If they are aware that you may have to re-take a poly as a result of "failing" one, then that type of polygrapher will find your results to be of the non-passing variety and will also have a policy of charging you for each time you take the test. With the rest...well, let's just say it is a crap-shoot. "Ya pays yer money an' ya takes yer chances." As long as you are not guilty of anything (or ADMIT to any guilt (and for God's sake don't ACT guilty unless you want to get HUNG!)), maybe you will come out okay. Acting as though you have a guilty conscience will get you a 'deception indicated' every time, no matter whether you tell the truth or not.
Quote from: PailR on Jul 10, 2005, 02:47 PMWhy fear the poly?
Very few of the twenty or so polys I have taken were in the first two categories.
"Twenty or so polys..." That sure is a lot of polygraph exams. I mean, are you sure?! How is it you have taken that many? Isn't that like have twenty root canals?, or twenty open heart surgeries? I mean, Damn! that is more tests than I have ever heard of anyone having to take, even registered sex offenders.
Nonombre
Nonombre,
I would surmise that you don't work for a federal agency. Correct?
Also, as a polygraph examiner you should have been subjected to more than 20 as part of your training. Therefore it is not unheard of.
Please check yourself before referring to similarities between your profession and those of the medical profession. They are NOT the same and should not be compared as such. I regularly hear comparisons between the funeral industry and auto sales. Again not the same. The funeral industry would more fairly be compared against the hotel industry as service is what is provided. Find a more suitable comparison. You are not a doctor so do not portray yourself as such.