took the test

[SoontobeLE]

I took the test last week and I don't know if i passed or not. He asked me two sets of questions, told me that i responded to the question "other than what you have told me, have you had any thefts", asked why, and i replied (i don't want to disclose what i said for security reasons) ,then let me go with no other discussion.  This was a wierd test.  Only one or two control questions, NO stim test, lots of irrelavent questions ( month, date, year, name)NO post interrogation besides what i just said. He accused me of nothing, and said nothing about all the other questions.  I saw the chart, was smooth looking until the previously mentioned question, then a spike during, then smooth again.  I had no abuse from polygrapher, no accusations or tricks, no raising of voice.  Is this normal? what does everyone think? did i pass?

[anxietyguy]

You passed don't sweat it. You reacted to a control question (which is expected).

Anxiety

[Bill Crider]

He should have said you were NDI as well, the fact that he didn't is unethical.

this is not necessarilty true. The FBI, for example, doesnt tell you anything because the results have the be reviewed at HQ and an examiners opinion may not stand. Tho my experience was if you press them a little they will tell you if they think you "failed", but its not an issue of being unethical.

[longtimelistener]

I had a poly about 6 months ago and assumed I had passed because they didn't require me to come back the next day to take the test again.

Is this a safe assumption or is it possible that I could have failed the poly, even though they didn't require me to come in and test again?  In other words, isn't it true that if you fail the poly on your first try, they give you a second opportunity?

I'm only doubting myself now because I don't specifically remember the polygrapher telling me that I "passed" the test, only that I was done and didn't have to come back for further testing.

Any ideas...?

[SoontobeLE]

Well, its possible i just got lucky with a good examiner, as i said, i recieved no abuse, yelling, accusations or anything.  I thought i was treated more than fair.  The examiner did try to establish dominance, but that is part of the job.  

 I want to say that I found the examiner was paying more attention to how I was acting and my demeanor then anything else.  I believe that my examiner was convinced I was being truthful before the test began.  I really would recommend paying lots of attention to the behavioral section of the manual to anyone taking a polygraph test in the future.  I kept vigil of the way i was replying to questions, always answering in a very final way. My advice to anyone would be to be confident, sit up straight, look the examiner in the eye and answer questions firmly and without a doubt.  I believe I took the test in the pre-test interview rather than the polygraph exam itself.  

 I would like to thank the creators of TLBTLD for helping me and providing information to prevent me from a bad test.  I think without the knowledge of the "trickery" that examiners use, I would have been very nervous and scared, but knowing the game, I was rather comfortable.

By the way, I PASSED. Much thanks. I am a normal person, and a real life person, not a spokesperson, and I passed using the knowledge of TLBTLD.  You can do it to, just study hard.

[polyfool]

Mentioning you "hit" to the control questions was your post test. He should have said you were NDI as well, the fact that he didn't is unethical.

If it was a pre-employment, a stim test is not required in a pre employment format in some cases. I can tell you, if it was your first polygraph you ever took I would have done a stim test. Then again, I belive in giving people a fair test that will benifit them not hang them.

Note: Most false positive results aren't because of the polygraph its self. It's because the examiner is not following standards, is taking shortcuts, or is otherwise lazy or unethical.

A Polygraph examination is only as good as the examiner, his pre test, insturment, and format being used.

I won't hide that I am an examiner and am proud of what I do and the good custumer service I provide.

I can honestly say that no mater how my examinee leaves my office (DI or NDI) that examinee always says "That guy bent over backwards to treat me fair". Well except for the one bonehead that read the Williams
"book". I hope he gets his money back.

I set my controls properly, there is never a single exam that lasts less than an hour and a half, and in most cases I spend more time with the real nervous examinee's.

Most of that time is spent in pretest where my goal is to set great controls for the non deceptive person, and calming the examinees so the controls work correctly as they should.

should someone fail I like to talk to them about the possibility of an outside issue that may be bothering them.

If the examiner does a piss poor job, the result will be piss poor too.

Don't lump all examiners in one group. Some of us out here are doing good work.

I would like to think I am one of them.

Two Space Shuttles blew up in my life time. Does that mean that space travel should stop?

Bad Doctors kill people every day. Does that mean we should out law the medical feild?

Cops also kill, beat and fabricate evidince everyday. Does that mean we should do away with all law enforcment?

No.

You weed out the bad ones some how or another. There are false results that do happen, but we live in a time that people with cancer and aids are misdiagnosed. It happens, but it does not mean that caring examiners don't do everything they can to make sure that our examinees don't get a fair test

ODIN,

It's a nice change to have an examiner post on this site without first pretending to be someone else and hiding his true motives. Welcome to the discussion. However, I must take issue with a portion of your post.
 
Your comparison of space shuttles exploding, bad docs and rogue cops to false positive polygraph results seems a bit short-sighted. I've also seen two shuttles blow up during my lifetime. However, I also remember shuttles being grounded for years, thorough investigations, intensive testing and improvements made to the space program to prevent the same mistakes from happening again.

In regards to bad docs, there are ways of dealing with them. They are licensed by medical boards that have the power to yank their licenses to practice medicine if they show a flagrant disregard for the health and safety of their patients. There are also malparactice suits that hit them where it hurts.  

As far as rogue cops are concerned, their unethical behavior can be uncovered through investigations and they can be sanctioned accordingly by their departments and/or taken off the force.

How in any way do these examples compare to polygraphy? Space travel, medicine and law enforcement are all based upon valid scientific principles--well established truths. Polygraph screening has been declared invalid and unreliable by the National Academy of Sciences. There is no scientific basis for it. Even polygraph testing in criminal investigations is on shaky ground at best as their results are rarely ever admitted into court as evidence.  

Secondly, in all the examples you mentioned, there are avenues for righting the wrongs when mistakes are made--ways to determine truth and punish those at fault. In polygraph testing, these do not exist. There is no viable  recourse when examinees are falsely labeled liars and treated unfairly.

While I commend you for your professed sincerity in treating examinees with respect and fairness, might I remind you that  not all examiners are like you. You would not be so flip about false positive results if it were your a$$ on the line.

[gelb disliker]

Odin,


 doesn't your name mean in Norse the "god of war and death?"

  funny you should call yourself a "god"  can this be delusions of grandeur?
 
  in scriptures it states "Pro 26:5  Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes. "

  and "Pro 29:23  One's pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor. "


  something to think about.

[EosJupiter]

ODIN,

I do appreciate your honesty and candor, and do believe that you will be a valid and useful source for the opposition opinion on this website. If you can, can you tell us what level of  examiner you are ? IE LEO, FED, AGENCY ?  It helps me to know where and what your opinions are to be based on. Do keep it vague, as we do not wish you any harm from your employer. Again as I am very vocal and consistantly voice a strong anti-polygraph opinion, which is always my honest heartfelt thoughts, If your opinions are honest and valid, they will be considered and debated. My hot buttons are examiners that come to this website hiding out as a valid interested users, and then cause entirely wasted debates.  Welcome and be prepared !!!
.

Regards

[gelb disliker]

ODIN,

   touchy aren't you?   take it easy, we take the polygraph and its examiners to be mythical too.  Just like Odin, the Norse god of death and war!

[Skeptic]

I assure you that this examiner is very real.

Many things are mythical as far as I am concerned as well such as;

the statistics that the antigun lobby fabricate.

Global warming.

The foolish myth that every vote counts.

The myth that big oil isn't padding profits.

Who Killed Kennedy.

That elvis is dead.

That the REAL Paul Mcartny is alive.

and the UN, and is't so called agenda of peace.

Ok, so let's see.

You believe Elvis is alive, that all the science and evidence demonstrating global warming just doesn't exist, and that the UN's black helicopters are coming to get you.

And yet, you claim that it's the anti-polygraphy side that is leaving a bad impression.

"Odin", people like you pretty much do our job for us.
  I couldn't come up with this stuff if I tried.

But I do want to echo the comments above: at least you didn't childishly pretend to be something else -- which, unlike Shuttles not exploding in flight, is pretty much a rarity here for polygraphers.

[SoontobeLE]

this is funny, i started some kind of war, just wanted to tell people that there is hope when taking a polygraph test.  Sorry, jeez.   I just wanted to thank people for helping me pass the polygraph and get the career that I wanted and deserved

[gelb disliker]

ODIN,

  seems like an open mind is what you really have, try filtering some of the things that you open yourself up to.  seems like most of stuff coming out is babble, so far you aren't telling us anything any other polygraph examiner hasn't told us.
  I am sure you are the greatest polygraph examiner out there, if we aren't sure, we can always ask you!

 GIGO=garbage in, garbage out.

[Skeptic]

this is funny, i started some kind of war, just wanted to tell people that there is hope when taking a polygraph test.  Sorry, jeez.   I just wanted to thank people for helping me pass the polygraph and get the career that I wanted and deserved

Don't worry about it.  You didn't start it -- it's a long-standing thing.

The basic problem is that, instead of honestly discussing the polygraph, the vast, vast majority of the time polygraphers like to come on here and play games.  It's been going on for years.

Perhaps that's inevitable: every scrap of scientific evidence and opinion that's come out has uniformly pointed to the polygraph's unreliability and invalidity.  While the polygraph has some utility at eliciting confessions, the simple fact is it doesn't do what it purports to do: detect lies.  That threatens livelihoods, to say nothing of quasi-religious beliefs in the device and the process.

It's rather like trying to debunk claims of ESP, etc.  You really can't convince true believers that what they're seeing isn't evidence of ESP; even worse, many times true believers don't even have the basic tools necessary to make such a judgement (not to say that there isn't or can't be such a thing as ESP; just that overwhelmingly, evidence for such really isn't and trying to convince believers otherwise is pretty darned difficult).

So again, don't worry about it.  It was going on long before you, and will undoubtedly continue long after.  And congrats on getting past the polygraph!

[Skeptic]

Note: Most false positive results aren't because of the polygraph its self. It's because the examiner is not following standards, is taking shortcuts, or is otherwise lazy or unethical.

I'll simply note that the considerable available scientific evidence indicates that the polygraph itself, using established standards of determining deception, has a high false positive rate.  In the case of R/I-style tests, it's up to 80% or more.

A Polygraph examination is only as good as the examiner, his pre test, insturment, and format being used.

Any scientific instrument should be designed such that the person using it is taken out of the equation.  There should be standards such that anyone who follows those standard procedures (and can document this) can't influence the results.

When this isn't the case, it's a pretty good indication that the instrument is being used for purposes for which it isn't fit.

Please don't dismiss this easily.  There is a real tendency in the polygraph community to claim that properly-calibrated and operated polygraphy equipment just "isn't being used right" when it incorrectly indicates whether or not a subject is lying.  Yet, there is also a real inability to quantify exactly what's being done wrong.

Compare this with making an EEG or meteorological instrument.  The measurements are what they are.

Odin, I believe you that you try to do a "good job" when it comes to polygraph exams.  What I would propose, though, is that what you're trying to do is the impossible, and your care, while admirable, could be put to better use elsewhere.

[gelb disliker]

Odin,

  Give up your pseudo profession, join us in our fight against the polygraph, sleep better at night, know that you'll be a better person for it.  I assure you, that you will look into a mirror better and like who you see too.