countering the polygraph

[AM-]

Hello,

   I was wondering if you have to do your breathing like it says in the lie behind the lie detector, as well as doing the biting of the tongue during control questions?  Is it possible to just breath asyou always do but just bite your tongue on the control question? or do you have to also be doing the breathing throughout the whole test.  I was also wondering if it is possible to just remain calm when you answer a stressful question, without throwing everything out of wack so that the polygrapher thinks your lieing.  Finally, If the polygrapher see's a part in the test where you spiked, and he thinks you might be lieing... he really has no proof that you are right, so if you deny it and dont admit to anything might he just let you go as possibly just being a little nervious on that one question....?   sorrry about all these little questions, any help given would be appreciated

[Skeptic]

Hello,

  I was wondering if you have to do your breathing like it says in the lie behind the lie detector, as well as doing the biting of the tongue during control questions?  Is it possible to just breath asyou always do but just bite your tongue on the control question? or do you have to also be doing the breathing throughout the whole test.

AM -- you want to control your breathing to avoid any "reactions" on relevant questions, and to enhance overall "reactions" to control questions.

I was also wondering if it is possible to just remain calm when you answer a stressful question, without throwing everything out of wack so that the polygrapher thinks your lieing.

Certainly, it's possible -- it depends upon the person.  Which is one reason the polygraph isn't terribly reliable.

Still, a better approach, especially once you know the trickery behind the polygraph, is to enhance your reactions to control questions.  If you fail to do this, as a person "in the know" you may end up reacting more to questions you know are important (the relevant ones).

Finally, If the polygrapher see's a part in the test where you spiked, and he thinks you might be lieing... he really has no proof that you are right, so if you deny it and dont admit to anything might he just let you go as possibly just being a little nervious on that one question....?   sorrry about all these little questions, any help given would be appreciated

It would be nice if polygraphers acknowledged the flaws in the instrument, but if you have a strong reaction to a relevant question (as opposed to a control), they would probably score it as "deception indicated" and you'd get a follow-up interrogation for it.

But I sure as heck wouldn't start making admissions at that point -- they could be taken out of context, twisted, etc.  Assert your truthfulness firmly, and if it isn't enough, then (at your discretion) end the session.  A post-test polygraph interrogation is really not a fun experience.

Skeptic

[AM-]

so then by biting your tongue on a control question, that makes a bigger spike then if your telling a lie ?

[Skeptic]

so then by biting your tongue on a control question, that makes a bigger spike then if your telling a lie ?

biting one's tongue, constricting one's anal sphincter muscle, even doing complex math or thinking of something exciting all tend to produce increases in blood pressure.  By all accounts, it doesn't take much for that increase to be significant -- more than significant enough to produce a bigger spike on control questions than any reactions you might have on the relevant ones.

You might want to read some of the accounts on this site regarding people's experiences with the use of countermeasures.

Skeptic

[Public Servant]

Skeptic,

This does not sound like an innocent person trying to ensure they pass.  If you re-read AM's first post it seems to be looking for a deceptive person to avoid detection and, if caught, an excuse to avoid the truth.  The post does not even specify whether this a screening exam or a criminal specific exam.  Who knows, this could be a felon trying to get away with this crime so he can continue to victimize persons like you, me, or our families!!

AM,

Feel free to correct any of these inferences.  Just pointing out, as always, ethical flaws with this site and its proponents.  

Another ethical flaw to the advice here, would be the good possibility that your attempts at countermeasures will be detected.  And then, if you were actually honest, you have destroyed your credibility.  If this is a screening exam, it is more than enough to disqualify you.  If it is a criminal case, you ruin a good opportunity to eliminate yourself from suspicion.

NO ONE CAN TAKE YOUR INTEGRITY BUT YOU!!!

One more thing is for sure. The answer to the question below is "NO!":

Finally, If the polygrapher see's a part in the test where you spiked, and he thinks you might be lieing... he really has no proof that you are right, so if you deny it and dont admit to anything might he just let you go as possibly just being a little nervious on that one question....?  

[George W. Maschke]

Public Servant,

You write in part:

Another ethical flaw to the advice here, would be the good possibility that your attempts at countermeasures will be detected.

Actually, no polygrapher has demonstrated the ability to detect countermeasures of the kind described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Nor is there any evidence that actual countermeasure use increases the likelihood that one will be accused of using countermeasures.

[Public Servant]

See my recent post to the "challenge" thread.  It's a decision for AM.  Sounds like a gamble to me, since George's assertion comes from the failure of anyone to show him proof of countermeasures being detected.  Why would anyone provide this site, or anyone posting here, such proof?  --Or even documentation of success?  There has been plenty of success in recognizing examinee chart manipulation.  I guess you'll just have to take my word for it (or not -- no skin off my back) just as George would like AM to do on his behalf.

[George W. Maschke]

Public Servant asks:

George's assertion comes from the failure of anyone to show him proof of countermeasures being detected.  Why would anyone provide this site, or anyone posting here, such proof?  --Or even documentation of success?

Clearly, the polygraph community wants the public to believe that it has the ability to reliably detect countermeasures such as those described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. This is reflected in the representations of senior members of the polygraph community to the media, as well as to the National Academy of Sciences. Members of the NAS polygraph review panel were told that the U.S. Government has polygraph countermeasure studies, but that they are classified at the "secret" level. But when members of the NAS panel obtained secret security clearances and sought access to these studies, they were told that no such studies classified at the secret level had been completed.

If the polygraph community truly believes that it has a better-than-chance method for the detection of countermeasures such as those documented in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, and would have the American people believe this, then it ought to be able to provide some evidence therefor.

There has been plenty of success in recognizing examinee chart manipulation.  I guess you'll just have to take my word for it (or not -- no skin off my back) just as George would like AM to do on his behalf.

No, Public Servant. AM does not "just have to take my word for it." What Mr. Scalabrini and I have written in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector is well-annotated with references that skeptical readers may check. The same cannot be said for polygraphers' claimed ability to detect countermeasures.

[beech trees]

Skeptic,

This does not sound like an innocent person trying to ensure they pass.  If you re-read AM's first post it seems to be looking for a deceptive person to avoid detection and, if caught, an excuse to avoid the truth.  The post does not even specify whether this a screening exam or a criminal specific exam.  Who knows, this could be a felon trying to get away with this crime so he can continue to victimize persons like you, me, or our families!!

Well there he goes again. I guess 'presumption of innocence' was a concept they forgot to teach you in Fred's Polygraf Skool.

Feel free to correct any of these inferences.  Just pointing out, as always, ethical flaws with this site and its proponents.

Should properly read, "Feel free to defend yourself from groundless accusations I arbitrarily make here." And for the record, I'm just pointing out how you consistently think the worst in people.

Another ethical flaw to the advice here, would be the good possibility that your attempts at countermeasures will be detected.

BWOOP BWOOP BWOOOP  Bullshit detector!

Properly done, the kinds of countermeasures recommended and explained in The Lie Behind The Lie Detector are undetectable even by the most highly trained polygraphers. I know, because I used them.

The fact that I answered truthfully on many of the questions is irrelevant-- although the polygraphers here will clamour desperately that all I did was pass a polygraph because I was truthful, the facts that I manipulated my baseline breathing pattern throughout the interrogation, that I artificially produced physiological reaction during the ludicrous Stim Test, that I consistently constricted my sphincter and used vivid imagery during Control Questions seems to blow right past them in their attempts to legitimize the process I endured. The fact that I was truthful (except for those questions centering around 'have you been entirely truthful with me today') has no bearing on the question of why I passed the polygraph. I even sat upon expensive, highly touted sensor pads (one of which was directly under sphincter central). My polygrapher never knew what hit him. Neither will yours if you decide to employ countermeasures.

And then, if you were actually honest, you have destroyed your credibility.  If this is a screening exam, it is more than enough to disqualify you.  If it is a criminal case, you ruin a good opportunity to eliminate yourself from suspicion.

Does anyone else find it hard to choke down yet another finger-wagging discourse on ethics from a man who lies every single day of his life to the people he interrogates?

[Skeptic]

Skeptic,

This does not sound like an innocent person trying to ensure they pass.  If you re-read AM's first post it seems to be looking for a deceptive person to avoid detection and, if caught, an excuse to avoid the truth.  The post does not even specify whether this a screening exam or a criminal specific exam.  Who knows, this could be a felon trying to get away with this crime so he can continue to victimize persons like you, me, or our families!!

Public Servant,
First, welcome back.

The solution to the above problems is obvious:  the polygraph should not be a component of pre-employment screening, period, and should not be used to rule out suspects in criminal investigations.  With or without the advice from this or many other web sites/books/other sources, the polygraph simply isn't reliable enough to meet the needs of national security and law enforcement.

You may indeed be correct regarding AM.  I make no inferences beyond the fact that the polygraph too often finds the innocent deceptive -- a fact that runs counter to the spirit of our justice system.

AM,

Feel free to correct any of these inferences.  Just pointing out, as always, ethical flaws with this site and its proponents.  

Another ethical flaw to the advice here, would be the good possibility that your attempts at countermeasures will be detected.

This is a common boast made on this message board; one which no polygrapher has dared (thus far) to back up with a demonstration (see Drew Richardson's Countermeasure Challenge on the home page of Antipolygraph.org).  As I and many others can attest with first-hand knowledge, even the presumably best-trained and most experienced polygraphers cannot detect properly-done countermeasures.

There is simply no evidence that available techniques exist for detecting countermeasures with above chance accuracy.

Skeptic

[Public Servant]

Beech,

Well there he goes again. I guess 'presumption of innocence' was a concept they forgot to teach you in Fred's Polygraf Skool.

Yeah, and in Joe's school of Federal Law Enforcement, and Billy Bob State University, and Jimbo's School of Law.  Presumption of Innocence has NOTHING to do with whether anyone actually did it or not.  You're saying when a crime is committed, no one could have done it, because everyone is presumed innocent.  Some of your posts truly deserve the knucklehead award.  

I merely pointed out that AM sounded more like he was looking to conceal guilt than prevent false DI.  I have no gavel and gave no sentence.  But if it helps you feel better to
demonize me, then go ahead and vent.

[Public Servant]

Skeptic,

Thanks for the welcome.  For answer to your post please see the thread on the "challenge."

Regards

[TALON]

SKEPTIC, i noticed you mentioned "flaws in the instrument" here. i disagree, there aren't any. it does exactly what it's supposed to do. register reactions. it does. unfortuneately, to every one you have. the misconception is on the part of the users! am on your side, just thought i'd add to the forum.
                                                                         TALON

[Skeptic]

SKEPTIC, i noticed you mentioned "flaws in the instrument" here. i disagree, there aren't any. it does exactly what it's supposed to do. register reactions. it does. unfortuneately, to every one you have. the misconception is on the part of the users! am on your side, just thought i'd add to the forum.
                                                                        TALON

Hello, Talon,
Welcome to the board!

I stand corrected -- what I said and what I meant were two different things

In this context, I meant to refer to the polygraph as an instrument intended to determine truthfulness.  For such purposes, it is a clearly flawed instrument.

Thanks for the correction, and I'll offer one of my own: the polygraph at its most basic doesn't actually register reactions.  Rather, it measures pressure and electrical conductance, from which one can infer breathing rate and depth, blood pressure and heart rate, and skin conductance.  All of these bodily characteristics can be brought under a degree of conscious control, which means changes in them may or may not be reactions (to external stimuli, at least).

In the above, I'm honestly not trying to be a smart-ass.  I feel it's important to note that there are several things that can influence the readings on a polygraph chart, and reactions (involuntary changes due to external stimuli) are only one of them.

Regards,
Skeptic

[Twoblock]

Public Servant

Since all polygraph operators believe anyone who fails the polygraph or anyone who uses countermeasures are liars or trying to hide something in their past, I have some more questions because I am still trying to learn a thing or three.

It has been a while since I read the NAS report but, when they asked about counter-countermeasures, seems like I remember that they were told yes we do have counter-countermeasures but they are too secret to divulge. However, when pressed harder, the team was told "no we don't have counter-countermeasures. Which one is a lie?People there is definately a lie here. Shades of old "Red" !!! People of our government, being paid by our tax dollars, lies?? Polygraph those raskels.

You state that you can detect countermeasures at much better that chance. Some probably believe 100%. Why, then, are you on these boards telling prospective hires "go ahead and use countermeasures if you want to be DQd beacuse we WILL catch you? Why let your pussy out of the bag? Let them come on without any warning and be DQd. You state that you don't want this kind of person in your department. Is this a pre-stimmy lie?

Any of you care to comment on this point by point or do you wish to Washington D.C. one-step,(or ten) around it?

Breeze, do a good job on this and it might earn you an invitation to an Alaska moose hunt.