A thought for the antis regarding Countermeasures

[Drew Richardson]

Pailryder,

If you render a NDI opinion for a polygraph examination in which the examinee employed countermeasures you are correct if: (1) none of your relevant issues/questions included the use of countermeasures during that exam, and (2) the relevant issues/questions you did address through your exam were answered truthfully.  Your question is neither difficult nor philosophical but merely definitional in nature.

[pailryder]

Drew Richardson


Although I have never demonstrated any ability to do so, if I call this same test NO for suspected employment of CM, is that also a correct call?

[Drew Richardson]

Pailryder,

With both the main event (the determination of truth and falsehood regarding relevant issues) and the use of countermeasures, you are faced with a binary event: (1) the examinee, to the first approximation (absent misspoken testimony and misremembered facts), is either telling the truth or lying on any given relevant issue and (2) the examinee has either attempted/employed countermeasures or he/she has not.  

Your opinion rendered in most situations (absent a pre-test confession or a particularly uneducated and clumsy attempt at countermeasures) is little more than a guess with both of the tasks before you.  I say this realizing that there is an appearance of objectivity and scientific determination with the utilization of scoring systems employed with the former task.  

And finally returning to your question...in a common sense connotation, given the tools available to you, a rendering of no opinion is probably the only sane (justified) opinion that you can render with either of the two aforementioned tasks in a typical lie test.  That having been said, nothing is resolved with such an opinion, and, in the case of many screening exams, there are clear and demonstrable negative consequences for the examinee that is saddled with any opinion other than a NDI determination.

[pailryder]

Drew Richardson

Indeed, in many specific issue exams there are clear and demonstrable negative consequences for the examinee that is saddled with any opinion other than a NDI as well.  

Given my limited understanding as a non scientist and my preference for a common sense connotation, I wonder if use of CM by a truthful subject to avoid a False Positive result, could result in a NO, with negative consequences.  But of course I am aware that neither I nor any other examiner has ever demonstrated any ability to identify CM.  

[Drew Richardson]

Pailryder,

You raise the great conundrum for the innocent examinee.  In reality it is just a variant of the oft spoken of situation of pay your money and take your choice.  It is largely a risk/benefit assessment with one additional twist.  

This examinee, realizing that he is burdened with subjecting himself/herself with an inaccurate diagnostic test of his truthfulness and realizing that he has the ability to manipulate polygraph tracings, can do one of two things: (1) answer relevant questions truthfully in the absence of countermeasure utilization or (2) answer relevant questions truthfully and apply countermeasures.

The identified risks and benefits are the same for both.  The risk is a determination of any opinion other than NDI (DI, Inc, NO, countermeasures used) and the benefit is a determination of NDI.  

The choice for the examinee is determined by two things: (1) his/her personal assessment of the risk/benefit probability ratio for each of the two alternative strategies and (2) a desire or ambivalence towards having an added and personal role (applying countermeasures) in affecting an outcome having significant impact on one's future.

Although I have enjoyed our brief and respectful exchanges, I must return to other matters.  

Best Regards...

[Lethe]

Lethe

Thank you for a through and thoughtful reply, but was your answer yes or no?  Is NDI the correct call for a truthful using CM?

It is impossible to answer this question of yours without you defining what a "correct call" is.  If you have a valid definition, my answer would probably become obvious.  But come up with one and I'll let you know whether your call was correct or not.

But I don't think you're asking the right question.  You need to dig deeper; don't just think about what call is going to bring you the most prestige among your fellow pollies or which will most enhance your reputation and money-making ability, or even your self respect.  Dig down to the bedrock: which call is in the best interests of society?

I would say, and am prepared to defend, the proposition that no possible outcome in that situation is good for society: like nuclear war, you only win if you don't play.  Of course, not playing with the polygraph would be bad for your prestige and wallet, so I don't expect you to agree with that proposition.  But lets look at all possible outcomes.

Well, first, the situation is as follows: a truthful examinee is being pollied for a position of trust for which he or she is qualified.  The examinee, knowing how the polygraph works and that the polygraph is unlikely to be accurate in his case because of said knowledge, attempts CM.  Possible outcomes are:

(1) Subject ruled truthful
(2) Subject ruled deceptive
(3) Subject ruled to be using CM
(4) No conclusion possible

Now, the consequences for (2), (3), and (4) are virtually identical: the subject does not get the position and significant government resources have been wasted.  Additionally, the subject may become bitter at the farce that he has been put through and the job may go to a less-qualified person (if the next guy was more qualified, he would have been hired in the first place ahead of the initial subject).

Outcome (1) at first appears to be good, or, at least, neutral.  I admit that it is the least bad outcome, but it still results in considerable waste of taxpayer resources (just think about how much money you suck out of society for every test).  

Additionally, the main value of the polygraph to the government vis-a-vis people they need to control employees is not in detecting deception, but in deterring bad behavior in the future.  If the person uses CM and passes (even if he was truthful on the relevant questions, as he should be), it would be natural for him to credit his passing not to his truthfulness (on the relevant questions) but to his use of CM.  He may thus think that he can beat the polygraph in the future if needed and thus it's deterrent value is close to 0.

[Lethe]

Well, it's been a week now and no response.  I wonder if any poly will be able to defend his profession and indicate how society benefits from their actions in the situation indicated in my last post.  My guess is, probably not: they're too used to getting their own way without having to argue about costs and benefits.  Their ability to present a rational argument has atrophied.  

They are victims of the polygraph too, let us not forget.  Just like a rabid dog is a victim of the virus.  However, that doesn't mean that the dog doesn't need to be put down.