Polygraph test coming up

[quickfix]

Note that quickfix has provided no evidence that he can actually detect polygraph countermeasures.What is happening nowadays is that polygraphers are making many countermeasure accusations, and sometimes they get admissions. It seems that most admissions are to what are sometimes called "naive" countermeasures -- things done by individuals unfamiliar with polygraph procedure in the belief that it will help them to pass, such as breathing slowly or thinking calming thoughts. Federal polygraphers will take such admissions and report them as "confirmed" countermeasure cases.Admissions from individuals who have read Doug Williams' manual or AntiPolygraph.org's book are comparatively rare.

George:  you know as well as I do that posting confirmed CM cases on a website would violate the provisions of the federal Privacy Act.  My agency has in fact obtained numerous CM admissions from those who admitted they attempted CMs based on reading either TLBTLD, and buying Doug's garbage.  Others, as you mention, did so without the "benefit" of either.  BTW, where is YOUR evidence that we CAN'T detect "properly-employed" CMs?  Do you have the charts?  Names of those who successfully employed CMs?  Show us!  Prove we can't detect CMs!

So, let me emphasize this - I DON'T TEACH SO-CALLED "COUNTERMEASURES" - I simply teach people how to ALWAYS PASS by knowing how to show a perfect "truthful" polygraph chart! 

You can call it whatever you like, Doug;  it's a deliberate attempt to manipulate the outcome of a PE in favor of the person being tested.

Clearly, an ongoing countermeasure challenge series would shed some much needed light on this (seemingly forbidden) topic. Unfortunately, though, the polygraph industry cheerleaders apparently prefer to keep on whistling past the graveyard... 

Mr Mangan:  this type of game show/reality tv mentality is precisely why you were trounced in the APA election.  Imagine, a "polygraph challenge" with prizes!  Really???  You sound utterly ridiculous! 

[George W. Maschke]

George:you know as well as I do that posting confirmed CM cases on a website would violate the provisions of the federal Privacy Act.My agency has in fact obtained numerous CM admissions from those who admitted they attempted CMs based on reading either TLBTLD, and buying Doug's garbage.Others, as you mention, did so without the "benefit" of either.BTW, where is YOUR evidence that we CAN'T detect "properly-employed" CMs?Do you have the charts?Names of those who successfully employed CMs?Show us!Prove we can't detect CMs!

quickfix,

Actually, there is a way that data from confirmed countermeasure cases could be published without violating the Privacy Act. It is my understanding that various federal agencies routinely "sanitize" polygraph charts and examinee statements from "confirmed countermeasure" cases and send them to NCCA. So the Privacy Act does not prevent such data, or research based on it, from being published.

The evidence that the polygraph community doesn't have a reliable method of countermeasure detection is that no documentation of such a method is to be found in any of the polygraph literature.

The existence of Operation Lie Busters also suggests that the federal polygraph community lacks confidence in its claimed ability to detect polygraph countermeasures.

[quickfix]

George:  yes, you are correct in that confirmed CM cases are sent to NNCA in a sanitized version;  They are sanitized for NCCA at NCCA's request for very specific reasons;  it does not mean they may be released to the public.  NCCA is a governmental agency under DOD (DIA), not the public or a private citizen.

The evidence that the polygraph community doesn't have a reliable method of countermeasure detection is that no documentation of such a method is to be found in any of the polygraph literature.

What does that mean, "the polygraph community"?  That's your evidence? That the "polygraph community" has nothing in writing?  How do you know?  Very lame George!

[Dan Mangan]

quickfix, let me reiterate that the polygraph challenge series would require a significant amount of prize money, not "prizes" as you depict the term in a TV game show context.

To be sure, this would not be a "stage event" -- conditions would be as realistic as possible all the way around.

Each challenge would involve a mock crime that is video recorded. Testing would be done privately, but exhibited on CCTV to seminar attendees and simultaneously recorded for future reference.

Why the need for prize money? The overarching prerequisite for countermeasurre success is motivation, and money can be a great motivator.

It is my opinion that the CM challengers would beat the randomly chosen polygraphers about fifty percent of the time, but I wouldn't be surprised it it were more.

[Doug Williams]

So, let me emphasize this - I DON'T TEACH SO-CALLED "COUNTERMEASURES" - I simply teach people how to ALWAYS PASS by knowing how to show a perfect "truthful" polygraph chart! 

You can call it whatever you like, Doug;  it's a deliberate attempt to manipulate the outcome of a PE in favor of the person being tested.

No, it is an attempt by the person being tested to avoid being falsely accused of deception!

[quickfix]

quickfix, let me reiterate that the polygraph challenge series would require a significant amount of prize money, not "prizes" as you depict the term in a TV game show context.To be sure, this would not be a "stage event" -- conditions would be as realistic as possible all the way around.Each challenge would involve a mock crime that is video recorded. Testing would be done privately, but exhibited on CCTV to seminar attendees and simultaneously recorded for future reference. Why the need for prize money? The overarching prerequisite for countermeasurre success is motivation, and money can be a great motivator.It is my opinion that the CM challengers would beat the randomly chosen polygraphers about fifty percent of the time, but I wouldn't be surprised it it were more. 

Mr Mangan:  prize money or prize, makes no difference.  A mock crime is in fact a staged event; there are no real consequences to being detected using CMs in a staged-event polygraph.  Without a genuine F3 effect, this type of nonsense has no value.  Winning prize money is not a motivator;  avoiding prison or being disqualified from a job application is; real-life events with real-life consequences if caught using CMs.  That is the reason your idea is completely idiotic.

[Dan Mangan]

quickfix, if we use your logic, then all polygraph analog (laboratory) studies should be deemed worthless.

That would include Dr. Rovner's study which suggests that access to countermeasure information does not appreciably affect polygraph accuracy.

I think the reality of the matter is that the polygraph establishment is scared to death of being humiliated by informed and motivated individuals artfully applying countermeasures -- and beating the vaunted liebox like a drum.

Such an outcome wouldn't be good for bu$ine$$.

[Ex Member]

A mock crime is in fact a staged event; there are no real consequences to being detected using CMs in a staged-event polygraph.Without a genuine F3 effect, this type of nonsense has no value.

How does the potential for consequences affect the ability of the examinee to execute, and the polygrapher's ability to detect, countermeasures?

[Mrs October 2014]

Well I used dougs Manuel and it's helped me a lot I'm telling the truth and I would hate to take a polygraph test knowing I told the truth but fail it anyway... So thanks doug and thanks too the anti polygraph folks