Is it 'normal' to have to come back for another CVSA? ('Lie detector')

[Uncontested]

They asked me the questions left the room.. came back.. said that i reacted to some of them.. asked them again.. I answered again.. Then they said I was 'still reacting to 1 of the questions' so I would have to come back another day with a different interviewer..

So is this normal with 'lie detectors' or not, are they just trying to make me sweat?

edit: this is for being hired as a LEO.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Only the person administering the test can answer that.

Look at it this way - at least they didn't tell you NOT to come back at all.

[Roger Dat]

At least they are letting you come back. If you failed that section twice in the same poly with my agency you would be out.

[Uncontested]

Thats why this bothers me because I was 100% honest ugh..

[FBINA188]

Only the person administering the test can answer that.

Look at it this way - at least they didn't tell you NOT to come back at all.

I agree ...

Thats why this bothers me because I was 100% honest ugh..

Well, if you're being honest, then clearly one of your answers does not fit the criteria that the agency/examiner are looking for.

Go back and see what happens the next time and let us know.

[retdetsgt]

Thats why this bothers me because I was 100% honest ugh..

That's the problem with voodoo science. Your reaction probably had nothing to do with the answer you gave.

It was probably inconclusive. Don't let it rattle you. Go back and try not to think about the fact they're using a machine.

[mobrien316]

Well, if you're being honest, then clearly one of your answers does not fit the criteria that the agency/examiner are looking for.

Or...

Since even the manufacturer of the CVSA has admitted in a court filing that its device is incapable of detecting deception, it is highly likely that the operator of the CVSA is simply making an educated guess that you are being deceptive about something. Like any other educated guess, it's likelihood of being wrong is a factor which includes the operator's training and experience, the input from the examinee, and the inherent accuracy (or lack thereof) of the machine.

[FBINA188]

Or...

Since even the manufacturer of the CVSA has admitted in a court filing that its device is incapable of detecting deception, it is highly likely that the operator of the CVSA is simply making an educated guess that you are being deceptive about something. Like any other educated guess, it's likelihood of being wrong is a factor which includes the operator's training and experience, the input from the examinee, and the inherent accuracy (or lack thereof) of the machine.

While that may be true, if that's the guy they hired to give the examinations, and that's the machine he uses, then the department will use the results that he provides them ...

[mobrien316]

While that may be true, if that's the guy they hired to give the examinations, and that's the machine he uses, then the department will use the results that he provides them ...

I agree completely. But that doesn't mean one of the applicants answers is unacceptable to the agency, it just means the operator of the CVSA is making an educated guess that the applicant is being deceptive about something.

If the applicant is left with the impression that one of his answers is unacceptable he would logically conclude he needs to change one of his answers in order to pass. If he was answering all the questions truthfully (as he indicated he was) that would be a mistake.

[FBINA188]

I agree completely. But that doesn't mean one of the applicants answers is unacceptable to the agency, it just means the operator of the CVSA is making an educated guess that the applicant is being deceptive about something.

True, but the agency will accept the operators report at face value, and will not take the extra step to clarify what the real issue was.

If the applicant is left with the impression that one of his answers is unacceptable he would logically conclude he needs to change one of his answers in order to pass. If he was answering all the questions truthfully (as he indicated he was) that would be a mistake.

Agree ...

[Cat_Doc]

Disregard.

[Uncontested]

Disregard

[acreature]

Well, I hope you didn't act like that during the testing.

[retdetsgt]

Just as well. You wouldn't have passed the psych probably.

[Uncontested]

I wouldn't have passed the psych why? Because I'm mad about a computer program saying I was lying about never being arrested?

I was an Infantry Grunt in the Corps and did my 4 years honorably and got out as an NCO, never even had a fucking page 11 entry.

I'm not some lowlife bum. I've never been arrested, or ticketed in my life. I've never used drugs, the worst I've ever done was underage drinking. And now a computer program calls me a liar and now I'm going to get rubber stamped "Denied" on the rest of my applications and I'm not supposed to be pissed?