The California Highway Patrol is currently processing applicants with a voice stress exam.
Does anyone know how accurate it is compared to the standard polygraph?
-steve
#nosmileys
Steve,
Neither polygraphy nor CVSA have been demonstrated by competent scientific research to operate at better than chance levels of accuracy under field conditions.
The main utility of both polygraphs and CVSA for the agencies that rely on them is as interrogatory props. "This scientific machine says your answer wasn't completely honest, Steve. There's something you haven't told me. I can't help you unless you are completely honest with me..."
Naive and gullible applicants who believe that these gadgets are truly capable of detecting deception sometimes make disqualifying admissions that they might not otherwise have made. But truthful applicants are also wrongly branded as liars in the process.
Chapter 11 of David T. Lykken's
A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd ed., Plenum Press, 1998) is devoted to voice stress analysis. He concludes:
QuoteThere is no scientifically credible evidence that the PSE [Psychological Stress Evaluator], the CVSA, the Mark 1000 VSA, the Hagoth, the Truth Phone, or any other currently available device can reliably measure differences in "stress" as reflected in the human voice. There is considerable evidence that these devices, used in connection with standard lie detection test interrogations, discriminate the deceptive from the truthful at about chance levels of accuracy; that is, the voice stress "lie test" has roughly zero validity. One business enterprise to learn this, to their cost, was the high-tech house of prostitution mentioned in an epigraph to this chapter. According to a 1979 story in the Chicago Sun Times, an undercover agent for the Cook County sheriff's vice squad was required to submit to a PSE lie test when he visited the house posing as a client. The test questions had to do with whether he was connected in any way with the police. To his surprise, the agent passed the test and was granted client privileges. The PSE was confiscated in the ensuing sheriff's raid but the news report does not reveal what finally became of it. Let us hope the Cook County sheriff is not using it to interrogate criminal suspects....
It's been almost 10 years now since I was arrested for a crime I did not commit. It was a relatively minor offense, and so I willingly accepted a voice stress test to "prove" my innocence. (The police would not accept the word of my wife and family that I was at home at the time of the crime.) I didn't even get a lawyer at the time, I was so convinced the case would be over quickly. The guy who gave the test said I failed it. I asked to take it again. He said I failed it again. Then of course I had to hire a lawyer. After spending $7,000, the case was finally dropped. Interestingly, the bargaining chips my lawyer used was a polygraph test I took by the best polygraph technician in NY state and the fact that I had once had a top secret clearance from NSA. It said I had been telling the truth all along! Go figure.
I have to take a voice stress test. Someone already told me it is baloney, but does anyone have any hints how to pass i.e. like the poly, does one alter ones voice during control questions? And if one did, what is considered a deceitful sound? Just different from the uncontrolled questions? Or just answer everything the same? Thanks, Rose
Rose,
If at all possible, you should refuse to submit to any CVSA "test." Especially if you have been accused of a crime. If you are innocent, you run a significant risk of being falsely branded a liar. Other than this advice, I would give you the same answer I gave to "Mikeforce" in an earlier thread (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=81.msg265#msg265):
Quote
I'm not aware of any technique for modifying one's voice that would ensure production of a "truthful" CVSA chart. One CVSA examiner has suggested that adopting an "I don't give a shit" attitude (pardon the vulgarity) seems to help increase one's chances of passing.
In addition, the behavioral countermeasures for polygraph interrogations described at pp. 69-74 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml) (pp. 83-88 of the PDF file) would apply to interrogations in general, including CVSA interrogations.
George, I have to take it for this job. One thing I have a question about is you said to use the same measures for a polygraph. How would you do that with the voice? On control questions make your voice sound different? Waivery? Stronger? Louder? Hoarser? I was told just to stay calm and that the voice stress test is nothing but a "hoax" so to speak...not secret factor in the voice they can see but is undetectable to the ear...???? Thank you...
Rose,
The "behavioral countermeasures" to which I referred you have nothing to do with altering your voice while answering the "control" questions. They are concerned with your attire, grooming, eye contact, etc. See the pages I referenced for details.
After your CVSA "test," you might consider posting a message in a new thread to share your experience for the benefit of others.
O.k., I will tell you what happens. I will also try to read what you referred to. Thanks, Rose
I have a question. If polygraphists believe that the polygraph is accurate, why is it they believe that CVSA is "less than chance" regarding accuracy? Is CVSA a financial threat to a polygraphists income? I know alot about the polygraph and am thoroughly convinced it's nothing more than a mind game... I suspect the CVSA is also. Peoples lives potentially being ruined for their own job security? Polygraph examiners spew an "integrity is everything" doctrine all the time, especially with one another. Who are they trying to convince, themselves? I think the best way to bring about the end of both polygraph and CVSA is to enhance the finger pointing against each other, let the courts get involved and watch the crumbling begin. ;)
QuoteI have a question. If polygraphists believe that the polygraph is accurate, why is it they believe that CVSA is "less than chance" regarding accuracy? Is CVSA a financial threat to a polygraphist's income?
BINGO. . . Burger,
It is apparent that the polygraph industry feels threatened by CVSA--and for good reason. While neither is a reliable means of determining whether or not someone is telling the truth, CVSA has several advantages over the polygraph.
1) Cost: Opting for CVSA allows an agency substantial savings over polygraph. The units cost roughly $1,000 as compared to $10,000 or more for a modern computerized polygraph. Furthermore, CVSA examiner training is cheaper, primarily because of the short time period required. CVSA examiner training is only one week long (as opposed to 8-10 weeks for polygraph school).
2) Susceptibility to Countermeasures: There are no known reliable ways in which an examinee can manipulate the results of CVSA to create a favorable outcome. Polygraphy, on the other hand, is easily defeated by simple countermeasures.
3) Value as an interrogation prop: Polygraphy is plagued by a well-deserved reputation for unreliability. A substantial amount of even the most unsophisticated subjects know this and can counter an examiner's accusations by reminding him of the "test's" unreliability. CVSA, on the other hand, is a relative unknown. Examinees are less familiar with it, and less likely to know that it has never been proven to be more accurate than chance in a peer-reviewed study.
The old cliché "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones" seems particularly apt here. The polygraph industry has no legitimate authority to be attacking another "technology" for lack of accuracy when its own craft
has yet to produce better than chance accuracy in a peer-reviewed study under field conditions. The disparaging remarks about CVSA being made by polygraphers are being made for no purpose other than to protect their own fraudulent art.
Quote from: Gino J. Scalabrini on Jun 01, 2001, 10:57 PM
BINGO. . .
It is apparent that the polygraph industry feels threatened by CVSA--and for good reason. While neither is a reliable means of determining whether or not someone is telling the truth, CVSA has several advantages over the polygraph.
1) Cost: CVSA examiner training is cheaper, primarily because of the short time period required. CVSA examiner training is only one week long (as opposed to 8-10 weeks for polygraph school).
2) Susceptibility to Countermeasures:
3) Value as an interrogation prop:
4)The old cliché "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones" seems particularly apt here. The polygraph industry has no legitimate authority to be attacking another "technology" for lack of accuracy when its own craft has yet to produce better than chance accuracy in a peer-reviewed study under field conditions. The disparaging remarks about CVSA being made by polygraphers are being made for no purpose other than to protect their own fraudulent art.
Gino,
Some very interesting facts that you have presented here
1) It's quite scary to learn that a guy with one week of "training" can tell that your voice sound patterns are indicating "deception". On the other hand, the polygrapher undergoes 8-10 weeks of training and is branded an "expert" on the physiology of the human body. Another thought is how many of these guys have been to college anyway? probably very few. They are able to prove "deception" by the slightest "deviation" of your breathing patterns and blood pressure and sweat activity in your fingers or by variations in your speech patterns.
It takes a medical student 8 years to learn the function of the human body, then they must spend an additional 2-5 years as an intern and resident learning their specialty.
Can it be that a polygrapher is more expert on human physiology after 8-10 weeks than someone with 8-10 years of medical education and 2-5 more years of post graduate work?
2) There is no way to counter something that has no scientific or research evidence of it's value. The company who made it will say anything as long as people will buy their sales pitch and the product.
As for the polygraph, well everyone who reads this message board knows the story.
3) If everyone knew they were worthless props, WATCH OUT!!! Any claim of accuracy or reliability or worthiness is GONE. Then these people are really back to square on.
4) Let the games wage on. The house of cards is about to tumble!!!!
Fred F. ;)
I Took a CVSA on Thursday, Because a Superior Threatened Me about a month ago. I was told that these are almost 100% accurate. I know what was said to me in that office and I did NOT Lie. Yet The Proctor Said The "Cold Call" was that I showed Deceit?? WTF?. Now what?. It sounds Like someone is covering someones butt. and it happens to be the Florida Inspector Generals office too. they said they would now down-grade the investigation, and now its two peoples word against mine. I have never been so Embarrassed in my life. I told The Truth and It called me a Liar. ???
Forget about that CVSA stuff. Contact the APA and find a polygraph examiner in your area immediately. Take a polygraph examination to verify your truthful answers.
Lee,
CVSA (like polygraph "testing") is a fraud. I think you should seek a consultation with an attorney experienced in Florida labor law regarding your situation. You might also consider contacting local reporters and taking your story public. In addition, feel free to post details of your case in a new message thread in this forum, if you feel comfortable doing so.
Regarding "George's" advice that you take a polygraph "test," I suggest that you download and read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml) before you submit to yet another pseudoscientific lie detector "test."
::)Please see my new thread about my CVSA experience. I am sorry but Gino is dead wrong. Besides another girl at work told me that her answers came out all truthful even on controlled lie questions and she is about the most unsophisticated, unmanipulative people in the world, either that or according to a CVSA examiner, she is the world's most dangerous psychopath! Rose
"Besides another girl at work told me that her answers came out all truthful even on controlled lie questions"
Rose, I advise you to go do some research and you would see the logical fallacy in your statement. A "control question" is a question that someone lies on. In other words, the polygraph examiner won't continue the test until he is sure you lied on the control question. He does this to compare your "lied" reaction to that of your "truthful" reaction on the relevant questions. If you did "truthfully" answer the control question then you would fail or get "inconclusive" results at best. Go research, than come back to your conclusion then.
QuoteI am sorry but Gino is dead wrong.
Rose, please specifically explain exactly what you believe that I am "dead wrong" about....
I need some help. I have been with the department of corrections in my state for over 10 years with no problems until recently. An ex-inspector made Captain and she and I went out together a couple of times. I was interested in someone else and after she found out she began retaliating against me. I suddenly found myself the subject of numerous investigations by her former colleagues ( inspectors ) for things that that others weren't investigated for. This occured after I filed a complaint against her for putting toothpaste on my car. A inspector she then started going out with was assigned to one of my cases. He encouraged a nurse who had an ax to grind to take a CVSA test after she cooberated an inmate's allegation that i beat and choked him. Not surprisingly, he informed me in a taunting manner that "she passed with flying colors." Unbeknownst to him, a videotape of the entire incident was in evidence somewhere else and was produced after I e-mailed the head of corrections in our state explaining this situation. The video totally refuted the allegations and it was clear i had done nothing wrong. How did she pass this test then? Now, this same inspector had three disgruntled employees take CVSA test's saying I cursed them. Guess what?!!! They passed according to his excited proclamation. I now face discipline because of the administrative rules allowing allegations to be substantiated due to results of a CVSA. I need help.
Quote from: fred on Jul 23, 2001, 11:26 AM
this same inspector had three disgruntled employees take CVSA test's saying I cursed them. Guess what?!!! They passed according to his excited proclamation. I now face discipline because of the administrative rules allowing allegations to be substantiated due to results of a CVSA. I need help.
Fred,
You stated that you have already e-mailed the head of your agency. Did you get a reply? You need to contact this person again and if possible, arrange to meet with them or one of their staff members.
You are being systemically made a disgruntled, problematic employee by your ex, the Captain. However, you did state that you had no "write-ups" in your file prior to you breaking it off with your friend. If all documentation on record shows you have no unfavorable problems, this needs to be brought to the attention of the administrative personnel that run the facility you work at and at the Chiefs office.
The CVSA is being used to corroborate the false statements being made against you. These people are really trying to retaliate against you and get severe disciplinary action against you If you have noticed in other posts, the only evidence of the CVSA being "accurate" is the testing done by the MANUFACTURER! Were these other incidents witnessed by other officers?
Have you considered going to the Internal Affairs people in your agency? If what you are saying here is true, they will investigate and this may help clear you.
Good Luck
Fred F. ;)
The internal affairs are the very people on the witch hunt of me. They are called the inspector generals office. The female captain I wrote about is a former inspector who dated the inspector on my case. He is the one who is substantiating the allegations against me based on CVSA tests. He is also pressuring witnesses according to those who have been interviewed by him. If you have any information on studies questioning the validity of these tests, please advise.
QuoteIf you have any information on studies questioning the validity of these tests, please advise.
Fred, you will want to check out the following article from the American Bar Association's (http://www.abanet.org)
General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm Section Magazine. CVSA: Modern Technological Invention or "The Emperor's New Clothes"? (http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/tpg/palmatr.html)
As this article and Fred F point out,
CVSA has never shown better than coin-flip accuracy in any study other than the ones done by the manufacturer of the device. Any reliance on CVSA results is simply foolish. End of story.
You should contact an attorney in your area knowledgeable in labor law and consider taking legal action against this department.
Quote from: fred on Jul 26, 2001, 02:45 PM
The internal affairs are the very people on the witch hunt of me. They are called the inspector generals office. The female captain I wrote about is a former inspector who dated the inspector on my case.
Fred,
This situation has so much conflict of interest, I concur with Gino. In addition to securing legal assistance, you also need to contact the director's office
IMMEDIATELY!. Do you have documentation to back your statements? You already have said your "jacket" is clean after 10 years on the job.
If there are fellow officers to collaborate what is occurring you need to obtain written statements from them. Remember that documentation goes a long way in defending yourself.
Good Luck
Fred F. ;)
??? Gino, Are you aware that the article, "CVSA: Modern Technological Invention or 'The Emperor's New Clothes'?", is written by a polygraph examiner?
http://www.polygraphplace.com/docs/florida.htm
Quote
Verity Consulting
PO Box 14425
Tampa, FL. 33690
Contact: Dr. John J. Palmatier
813.493.3403
School - Canadian Police College (RCMP) '83
email: palmatie@pilot.msu.edu
Nevertheless, the information is useful and helps build confidence for those facing a CVSA exam.
Califmike,
I was actually unaware of this fact. Thank you for pointing this out. At the bottom of the article, Palmatier is described as a "polygraph researcher," but not as a practicing examiner. I wouldn't be surprised if this was left out on purpose (to obscure the apparent conflict of interest).
I suppose I was fooled by the absence of the usual rhetoric touting the superiority of polygraphy.
::) Does the CVSA have a post-test interrigation like the polygraph? I had a CVSA a few weeks ago and they was no post-test.
thanks!
John,
In both CVSA and polygraph "tests," a post-test interrogation is standard procedure if the examiner believes that the subject has answered the relevant questions deceptively. The absence of a post-test interrogation in your case is a good indication that you passed your CVSA "test."
Yes your right I passed the CVSA test! Thanks for all your info. You guys are right, this site works ::) Maybe i'm not confident with myself, but I bet a lot of people fail the CVSA and the background detective fails you because of your background not the CVSA to not have a lawsuit. Heres what did help for the CVSA::
1) be polite and confident
2) never say anything negative
3) after you take the test relax and read a newspaper or something, I bet they watch your demeanor after the test.
4) bottom line, if the examiner does not like you you fail. End of story.
5) never disagree with the examiner they are gods when you are in there. If she asks you to bark like a dog, then you bark like a dog.
6) The examiner kept talking about her stamp collection. So I was a instant stamp collector. :P
yes I am a god! hahahah
(//URL) :) ::) :P :P :P :P
Quote from: Gino J. Scalabrini on Jun 01, 2001, 10:57 PM
BINGO. . .
2) Susceptibility to Countermeasures: There are no known reliable ways in which an examinee can manipulate the results of CVSA to create a favorable outcome. Polygraphy, on the other hand, is easily defeated by simple countermeasures.
We have no CVSA unit, but we're playing with an HP 4395 Spectrum Analyzer and PC DSP card, and see clear artifacts for stressed and unstressed subjects saying Yes and No. We've digitally recorded a person artifically stressed saying "Yes" and "No", and that same person relaxed saying the same thing. Using a PC for playback and 4 separate keys, we can play back any of the 4 answers at will. There's no reason we can't put it in a key fob (car door opener sized audio player) and sell them.
The 4395 can also see the higher frequencies / stress elements over a regular telephone circuit. As long as you're doing this over the telephone, no one is going to know whether it's you or the key fob answering. We can also get the DSP card to output just the higher frequencies, or to provide a minimum noise level of the higher frequencies to provide a lower S/N for CVSA machines. There's also no reason we can't add the higher frequencies in a key fob to activate at will.
RR
Rescue_Ranger,
I recently had occasion to observe a CVSA operator conduct an examination and I was able to view the screen of the CVSA laptop.
After each answer given, a graph appeared that bore many similar features to a frequency-domain representation of a voice signal. Is it simply an FFT (or FFT plus some added filtering) of the voice signal? I ask because you made reference to an HP Spectrum Analyzer in your post, so I assume you must have some signal analysis background (as do I).
If the backbone of CVSA is indeed the FFT, the CVSA industry is even more back-handed that the polygraph industry. It would then mean that a truthful "yes" or "no" is assumed to appear more sinusoidal, like a "pure tone", and not have any additional frequency components. There's absolutely no reason at all to believe that a truthful response couldn't have these additional components. WHAT A SHAM ALL THIS IS!!!!
I am the founder of a small, vocal, Freethinker/skeptical group here in the South and our local police station (city population 55,000), have purchased one or more of these CVSA programs. From what I have seen so far it appears to be nonsense. I am researching an article for our local paper and for a lecture I am giving this weekend. I hope to interview the police about the device, perhaps tomorrow. I need some really good, the best, info roasting this stuff so I can do a good job of drawing attention to this waste of money.
I emailed the "National Center for Truth Verification" who I think they bought them from ($10,000 a pop plus $1,600 per person per week for training). I asked them for any scientific, peer-reviewed evidence that their devices work, and asked them what they claim for accuracy. They have not responded. Our city is having a bit of a budget crisis and I am a little pissed that all this money has been spent on this nonsense.
Any help is appreciated. Thanks, Darrel
ph. 479-442-6738
My email is dardedar@aol.com
The CVSA is an overpriced prop for interrogations. To my knowledge, there is no peer-reviewed research available regarding CVSA, and the only studies purporting to support its validity as a lie detector come from the manufacturer.
The best source I could refer you to is David T. Lykken's book, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd ed., 1998). Chapter 11 deals with voice stress analysis.
On the Internet, you'll find details of some studies conducted by the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute on the following website:
http://www.voicestress.com
It's amusing that the operator of the above site promotes the competing pseudoscience of polygraphy.
I'd be interested to hear how your presentation goes!
F+, you're correct. Whether they're using FFT, IFT or DFT, the bottom line is it's pretty easy to look at and for additional 'stress' components. I also think they're susceptible to high Signal to Noise, another interesting alternative.
Question to future CVSA subjects: Would you pay $40 for small device that lets you control the output of a CVSA?
(need ~ 100 interested parties, or lower price for more units)
RR
Posted by: False +
I recently had occasion to observe a CVSA operator conduct an examination and I was able to view the screen of the CVSA laptop.
yep pay $ 40.00 bucks just for the fun of it....and would hope it works...lol :o