hey

[TestMan]

[glb]Not going to do any breathing exercises.  I am going to go in without knowing what breathing pattern I should have to pass the test.  I will just late nature run its course.
 
Is this polygraph as bad as others or a bit easier specially since im younger? [/glb]

This means that the reason for this post was not to find out if the polygraph test was easy to cheat but rather to put this individual at ease about the process.  I think he just stumbled on to a site of wrong-doing and no one at the NSA will hold this against him.  Stop trying to fill fear in this person.  Just do the right thing Anonymous and go to the site he described.  Atleast there is some honest people there.

I would be scared if the first site I came accross about polygraphs was about how they are so bad.  I would almost be scared in to tricking it myself but you should go the honest path like you said and everything will be fine.

[beech trees]

 I think he just stumbled on to a site of wrong-doing and no one at the NSA will hold this against him.

How is antipolygraph.org a 'site of wrong doing'?

[Anonymous! :)]

hey

sorry about starting this topic if you want to close it you can.  I see it is turning in to a flaming fest

I decided I will just go through the test being completely honest.  Thanks for the information anti-polygraph but I feel I need to go with my gut here.  This site is good to see the other side of the polygraph test that I may of not thought about until I visited.  Its just sort of funny because the date is wrong and my age is off a bit.  I just was wondering about how they treated younger folks etc.  So no need to really stick up for me there TestMan, although thanks.

This site is good to see both sides of polygraph tests but I am going to have to go with the other side.  I don't feel its moraly right to go ahead and cheat on a polygraph test.

Thanks guys, if this topic is getting to heated you can delete/close it or what not

[Marty]

Anonymous,
Good luck on the 12th. It is to be hoped that the NSA polygraph unit will not fail you out of spite for having educated yourself about polygraphy.

Most of your comment I agree with but I think this last thought demonstrates a certain jaundiced view that is likely wrong. Polygraphy "tests", like a few other psych tests, work more poorly if the subject understands the actual theory of the test. Polygraphers do what they can to obfuscate but this doesn't mean they want examinees to fail simply because they read this site.

BTW, Ian Rowland's Cold Reading techniques were incorporated learned and executed by M. Shermer in an interesting demonstration of the power of the psychological manipulation - details in current issue of "Skeptic."

-Marty

[Marty]

hey

I decided I will just go through the test being completely honest.  Thanks for the information anti-polygraph but I feel I need to go with my gut here.

I quite agree with you. That would also be my decision were I in your shoes. The fact that the polygrapher will lie to you (albeit, to increase the odds of the poly working) is no reason to lie yourself. Just like if I found myself working for liars I would raise hell and/or quit before buying into the culture and rationalizing.

-Marty

[Guest]

Like George said you are probably already nailed by your polygrapher.

Maybe.  Anonymous doesn't need to worry about anonymity.  I have examined many persons who have told me they have visited this site.  After we discuss and laugh about their experience here we conduct an exam with no problems.  Visiting this site is not grounds for disqualification, using countermeasures is!  Just as any attempt to thwart the test would.

It is to be hoped that the NSA polygraph unit will not fail you out of spite for having educated yourself about polygraphy.

No worries George.

[Marty]

I have examined many persons who have told me they have visited this site.  After we discuss and laugh about their experience here we conduct an exam with no problems.

Really?  Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool  them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.

-Marty

[Canadian Crusader]

LOL

This thread is starting to sound like polygraphplace.

You examiners/liers are entertaining to read.

It is unfortunate that human nature would have most people believe your lies that "if you tell the truth and follow your examiners instructions everything will go just fine".

Why is it that we as supposed intelligent beings have to get kicked in the face and screwed by one of you polygraphers before we wake up?

I truely hope your "test" goes well Anonymous.

Please post back here with your results and experiences.  I hope you prove us anti-poly people wrong.

[Guest]

Really?  Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool  them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.

-Marty

[Guest]

Really?  Then how do you mitigate the situation if the examinee understands how CQT's are done? Are you so good you can fool  them in pre-exam selction of controls? Face facts, if knowledge were no problem, polygraphers wouldn't lie about controls as a matter of course. Polygraphers lie to minimize false positives. Deal with it.

-Marty

Sorry. I am new at this.  I didn't get my reply to the quote in.

Not all exams require CQs and yes I'm that good.  The anger in this thread is amusing.  Are some of you actually ticked he didn't follow your advise and counsel?

[Marty]

Not all exams require CQs and yes I'm that good.

Good. Are you honest enough to admit that other types of exams (outside of the CIT) are considered by most polygraphers to be inferior as they produce higher false positives? Why is not the DLT more often used? It seems few are trained in it.

-Marty

[Mr. Truth]

You can only suspect someone is using countermeasures; you have no definitive method of determining it otherwise, short of a confession from the examinee. That is a fact, plain and simple.

[Marty]

You can only suspect someone is using countermeasures; you have no definitive method of determining it otherwise, short of a confession from the examinee. That is a fact, plain and simple.

Confession is not the only way. CM's can be reasonably implied and the person DQ'ed for deception when an examinee claims no knowledge of CM's yet fails a CIT (GKT) on CM specific information, either by properly administered poly or by Drew's machine. However, I suspect this occurs rarely.

-Marty

[George W. Maschke]

Most of your comment I agree with but I think this last thought demonstrates a certain jaundiced view that is likely wrong. Polygraphy "tests", like a few other psych tests, work more poorly if the subject understands the actual theory of the test. Polygraphers do what they can to obfuscate but this doesn't mean they want examinees to fail simply because they read this site.

Marty,

My expressed hope that the NSA polygraph unit would not "fail" Anonymous based on his/her having educated him-/herself about polygraphy is based on reports of such things having happened to applicants with other agencies who admitted their knowledge of polygraphy, including, but not limited to, the case of CIA applicant Maureen Lenihan, which is mentioned in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. It is to be hoped that with knowledge of how the "test" actually "works" (and doesn't) becoming more and more widespread (and, perhaps, admissions to such knowledge becoming less shocking to polygraphers) that such knee-jerk reactions by polygraphers will become less common.

My expressing the hope that Anonymous would not be disqualified merely for admitting his/her knowledge of polygraphy was also made in the hope that those NSA polygraphers who read this thread would realize the wrongness of such conduct and not engage in it.

Situations such as Anonymous's do pose a larger ethical question for the polygraph community: how will you handle those who understand "the lie behind the lie detector?" Former American Polygraph Association president Skip Webb declined to answer this question when I put it to him some three years ago. It's about time the APA, which professes to be "dedicated to truth," provided a candid answer.

[Marty]

George,

Thanks for that clarification. I share that hope.

-Marty