Admission by a polygrapher???

[polyscam]

littlesprout,
You and the examiner will will discuss and agree to the question(s) before the test. Obviously, your husband will also have to participate in the process. It sounds like a real simple issue. He either has or he has not. The more issues you add to the test, the less reliable the results become.

Best of luck,
Ted

This is a response from Ted Todd on the polygraphplace.com message board.  I find this comment quite interesting.  In a round about way it is an admission on Mr. Todd's part that broad based employment screens lack in accuracy and validity.

Thank you Mr. Todd for providing validation (from a practicing polygrapher) to the argument against polygraph employment screening.

[George W. Maschke]

Here is a link to the message thread in which Ted Todd posted his words of wisdom:

http://www.polygraphplace.com/ubb/NonCGI/Forum1/HTML/000342.html

Since Mr. Todd believes that "the more issues you add to the test, the less reliable the results become," perhaps he could explain why he continues to conduct admittedly "less-reliable" multiple-issue pre-employment polygraph screening "tests?"

In the same message thread, Barry C. (Barry M. Cushman, a polygraph operator employed with the Portland (Maine) Police Department), commenting on fidelity "testing," writes:

...The problem is reactions to questions in those types of tests are only tentative. That is, a person should not be considered deceptive on that type of exam alone, which means if he reacted to any questions you wouldn't really know if he was lying. You'd need to do follow-up testing on each question, which means more time (perhaps other days) and more money, since you can't expect an examiner to do all that work for nothing.

Perhaps Mr. Cushman would care to explain why reactions in pre-employment polygraph examinations would be any less "tentative?" Law enforcement applicants are routinely considered deceptive based on polygraph results alone.