Sharing My Polygraph Experience

[1904]

I took my CVSA exam this morning and after 2 weeks of extreme nervousness, I can say that I passed with flying colors, without using ANY countermeasures whatsoever...  No breathing techniques used at all. I can't believe how easy that exam was. It's amazing what a joke it really is.  I can say with confidence that no one should have any trouble passing this exam!  

Excuse the editing.

Breathing CM's wont help you one iota in a CVSA test.
Not one of the Polygraph CM's will help you in fact.

When taking a CVSA test, the examiner may instruct you to wait till he signals you to answer.
If he does, then he's quite sharp and what you should do is wait a second longer before you answer.
If he does not (signal when to answer) then wait approx 2 secs before you answer - that way your
Flight or Fight response would have diminished somewhat.

But, the biggest problem remains that 'situational stress' does not equate to 'deceptive stress'.
Quite possibly you had nothing serious to conceal.

[stoppolyabusenow]

Yes, I don't need to know how to do zodiac readings or palm reading to know that they are bunk.  It's the same with the polygraph, all you have to know is how it works to know that it doesn't work.  It measures physiological responses and that is not a lie detector.  And don't forget, many of us know for sure that it doesn't work because I know I'm telling the truth and if the machine or the operator says I'm not, I know it doesn't work.  One polygrapher said to me, "How can you know the polygraph doesn't work?"  I said, "Because you dipshit, you/it say I'm lying and I know that I'm not, therefore I know for sure that it doesn't work."

[Sergeant1107]

 And don't forget, many of us know for sure that it doesn't work because I know I'm telling the truth and if the machine or the operator says I'm not, I know it doesn't work.  One polygrapher said to me, "How can you know the polygraph doesn't work?"  I said, "Because you dipshit, you/it say I'm lying and I know that I'm not, therefore I know for sure that it doesn't work."

I have written similar sentiments on this board many times.  I know the polygraph process is not accurate because I was telling the truth and answering all the same questions the same way on all four of my pre-employment polygraphs.  I failed three out of the four.

Some of the polygraph examiners on this board respond to my story by calling me a liar, and then claiming to "prove" mathematically that the polygraph is accurate.  Then they tell me my experiences don't mean anything.  They have written that I have psychoses that prevent me from being accurately polygraphed, and that I am stupid for expecting a different result on any of my subsequent exams after failing the first one.  They are also completely comfortable jumping to the (erroneous) conclusion that because I refer to my polygraph experiences as a "story", I am obviously not telling the truth and am not even a real cop.  

It seems they are not familiar with Occam's Razor.  If I tell the truth on a test which is purported to detect deception, and the test result is that I am lying, the simplest explanation is that the test is not accurate.

I'm sure that examiners can come up with loads of possible excuses as to why a truthful person could fail a polygraph.  If the polygraph was a valid method of detecing deception then truthful people would pass, and deceptive people would fail.  That simply doesn't happen with enough regularity.

[Barry_C]

I know the polygraph process is not accurate because I was telling the truth and answering all the same questions the same way on all four of my pre-employment polygraphs.  I failed three out of the four.

I know polygraph works because I took three and passed them all.

Some of the polygraph examiners on this board respond to my story by calling me a liar, and then claiming to "prove" mathematically that the polygraph is accurate.  Then they tell me my experiences don't mean anything.  

Stop playing the victim, and start paying attention.  Do you have a college education?  Did you ever study statistics or research methodology?  People have only pointed out what you should already know.  You've got to separate fact from emotion and be objective.  The data is what it is.

Nobody has ever said your experiences don't mean anything.  They aren't scientific data, but they have meaning.  They motivate you to be here.  They motivate you to err.  They blind you from reason.  They have much meaning.  If you are telling the truth, and I don't know one way or the other - none of us (save you) do - then they only attest to the fact that polygraph isn't perfect.  Find a test that is.

Is the interview?  Is the written test?  Is the psych?  Pick any employment hurdle along the way and you'll find problems.

It seems they are not familiar with Occam's Razor.

Yes, we're familiar, and we've conceded the test isn't always accurate.  The question is, does it give us more information in the long run.  That's where the math comes in, and the answer is yes, if done correctly.

[notguilty1]

The problem with poly's are also that if the falsely accused, unless somehow proven innocent by other later evidence are  still considered guilty based on the poly results. Therefore counting those results as "accurate", and the accused .....GULITY.
I think that the fact that people with "agendas" get on here to "poke fun at George and others" is a further argument of the failed validity of poly's.
Would you rather have a science that is never questioned even though there are SERIOUS flaws in it?
If the science was good and proven there would no need to "poke fun" or disagree.
I think DNA testing may be a good example of a scientific and court approved test that not many are fighting though I cannot be sure of that.

[EJohnson]

The problem with poly's are also that if the falsely accused, unless somehow proven innocent by other later evidence are  still considered guilty based on the poly results. Therefore counting those results as "accurate", and the accused .....GULITY.
I think that the fact that people with "agendas" get on here to "poke fun at George and others" is a further argument of the failed validity of poly's.
Would you rather have a science that is never questioned even though there are SERIOUS flaws in it?
If the science was good and proven there would no need to "poke fun" or disagree.
I think DNA testing may be a good example of a scientific and court approved test that not many are fighting though I cannot be sure of that.

Plenty of people are fighting against DNA testing, and there are websites that are advocating a more measured weight given by courts regarding DNA evidence. Like any test, there are serious errors. As more and more of the DNA test errors are coming to light, we will see a backlash against that modality of testing.
http://www.scientific.org/articles/JFS%20excerpt.htm

[T.M. Cullen]

Plenty of people are fighting against DNA testing, and there are websites that are advocating a more measured weight given by courts regarding DNA evidence. Like any test, there are serious errors. As more and more of the DNA test errors are coming to light, we will see a backlash against that modality of testing.


Yes, but at least DNA testing is "scientific".

Sure there are errors in any test (scientific or pseudo-scientific).  But can you honestly put Polygraph testing in the same category as  DNA testing, or HIV testing in terms of scientific validity?

Can you imagine coming up with a HIV test which:

1.  Can't really tell for sure whether you have HIVs?

2.  Routinely labels healthy people as "aids carriers"?

P.S.  I changed my moniker, per your request.  Happy?