Polygraph

[gijoeyl33]

thats just not an intelligent statement at all, so id asume its also unethical to read a book about the oral interview, or the written test,.,..yup absulutly, go into everything about the process blind, dont read any books, and be unemployed while the person next to you has a job because reading is wrong and unethical

Keep telling yourself that...while you are at it, tell that to a department you apply to that uses the polygraph, and then let me know what they say.

[metallicat]

Reading isn't wrong, I didn't say that...that website offers ways to deceive a polygraph by using COUNTER-MEASURES; reading about oral interviews is not a counter-measure designed to undermine the desired effect of an exam.

[ousoonerfan3]

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with George's site. Educated, intelligent people ask questions and want to learn about how things work. I have read most of the material on his site, including how to employ countermeasures. I did this not to learn how to "beat" the machine, but to know how the machine works, and what it can and can't do. I have also read some "pro-poly" sites that say George is an idiot. I have read all their info about polys too. I want to know all I can about the box and examiner as they are part of the hiring process.

I feel It IS similar to studying for an oral board. I have done this too. I have read the books that give you answers to common questions asked. I have read books on pre-employment interviews to know what type of answer the interviewer is looking for when they ask a certain question. Does this make me a less than desirable candidate because my answer, even though it is of my own creation, also contains additional information influenced by my research? Of course not. A thorough, well researched answer is always preferable.

Therefore, does it make me an unethical person, a deceptive person, because I know how polys work, and know how to beat them? No, it doesn't. Do I intend to use countermeasures when and if I am ever polygraphed? No, I don't. Do I feel more comfortable about the whole concept of how a poly works, and what it does and does not do? Definately. Knowledge is power.

[cecilVA]

First off.....Tx Kid, don't sweat the test (pun intended ;) ) As long as you are open and honest you'll do fine. Some examiners do get confrontational but thats only part of the testing, don't let it get to you and don't lose your cool. Is it possible you can fail it even when telling the truth? Yes of course its possible. But that is the risk through the entire hiring process. The oral board may not like your answers, the background investigator may find something and misunderstand the circumstances, etc. etc. etc.

Here is the problem with going to that site to prepare to take a polygraph. Its basically like going to the NRA for information to write a book on the advantages of gun control. Its biased!! I'm not saying its wrong by any means, but if you want to get information in order to prepare then you have to go to an unbiased source. I mean if you are going to write a paper on how horrible the polygraph is then by all means go to that site. And the examiner will ask you what prior knowledge you have about polygraphs (my examiner did when I took mine) and if you start talking about where you got the info then that will raise some red flags.

The polygraph is a way of life if you want to be in law enforcement. It won't be going away anytime soon, so all the whining and griping and posting of research from Dr. Whoever won't change the fact that if you want to be a cop you will most likely be taking a polygraph. If you have a problem with that then pursue another line of work. Plain and simple.

I always find it amusing that when people on LE forums post questions about an upcoming polygraph that people will always come out and start bashing the test. That won't do the person about to take the test any good!

[TX Kid]

Well, I took and passed my polygraph. Thanks to any and all who gave me good sound advice (ie- none of that anti poly ****, or "dont take it" crap) My test giver guy knew all about George Maschke or however the hell you spell it, and he said "He deserves to be dragged from his house, hooked to a tow truck, driven several miles then shot in the head" because he is getting people into the mentality that they can "beat" a polygraph using some techniques listed on anti-poly.com, and the test guy can see those countermasures on the charts. I never went there, and I would never lower myself to going there. The poly doesn't detect lies, only nervousness about the questions, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be nervous. I passed it with flying colors, and I took none of the negative advice with me to the test, only the support given by the more intelligent members of the forum, again, thanks to all of you positive people, I now am starting a career in public safety.

[TX Kid]

While on the subject of orals and polys together, I would like to state this: From what I have learned, the oral is to see how you do under pressure and to get to know you better. It actually does you good to study and prepare for them, it's like preparing for a raid on a dope warehouse, go in blind? No, I think I would look at all the information gathered first. I asked some questions, found out what some of your responses were, but used MY OWN TRUTHFUL responses in my oral, I didn't copy anyones or cheat or anything like that. I simply did my research.

Now, polygraphs on the other hand, are designed to see if you are willing to hide anything or not. I say hide and not "tell the truth" because for instance, if asked if you were ever around pot and you say, yeah i did some a few times in high school, but you were really a big time pothead, you did tell the truth, but not the whole truth, and that is deception. Technically, all you people who are telling the truth may not be telling the whole truth. I had no reason to worry about anything b/c I have never ever done anything wrong my whole life, i've basically been dedicated to becoming a cop my whole life, and even I was nervous during my polygraph. The tester should note the levels of sweat, heartbeat etc and know if they change enough to show deception or not. If you fail, I honestly think you had something to hide. And I feel this way because the polygraph wouldn't be used so much if it were that innaccurate. Don't say they are not used in court, they actually can be in the State of Texas anyway, but both sides have to agree on it. Basically, If you failed you were hiding something, and that is the bottom line IMO.

[razdaz]

If you just control your breathing, concentrate on something in the room like a spot on the wall, and just think about one thing, hopefully something pleasant, you will do fine on the polygraph.

Oh yeah, don't lie.

[gijoeyl33]

TX KID............you will see a whole new light to your statment about hiding something if u fail your polygraph and were completly honest. Even if they were 99% accurate which isnt even close. The fbi gets 20,000 applicants a year. One percent of 20,000 is too many to be wrongly accused. Even polygraphers admit to the inaccuracy of the test, thats why it is prohbited for pre employment use in other occupations. It has been admitted in testomony to congress they only use the test TO WEED OUT APPLICANTS.

[metallicat]

TX Kid, I commend you on not using counter-measures to pass your polygraph, and I offer my congratulations to you...good job!

[TX Kid]

Thanks, I just told the truth. If it really is true that a whole bunch of people fail these things, sorry. I stand my ground when I say all you have to do is tell the truth, don't hide anything (admit to everything, EVERYTHING, beforehand [I even told him about running stop lights]). It may be that people have medical problems or something that affect the test and don't mention or know about them beforehand. I just had a heart operation and I did fine. It might be true that polygraphs don't work. I just don't believe that. Of course if I failed I would say I told the truth. Then again, only God and myself would know that, so nobody can say for sure.

[CO.Dep]

In my opinion the poly could go either way when you take it. I have taken two polys and one CVSA. I passed all three with no problems. What I can tell you is that the results are entirely up to the person giving the test. The actual machine is just a guide for the poligrapher. It has been kind of funny taking these tests. In all three cases the poligrapher pulled a "hmm...the response to this question looks a little funny". In all three cases I told the truth entirely during the test so I knew that it was bull$hit. I believe that it was just a ploy to attempt to pull out more info from me. But I had nothing more to tell so I just sat there and repeated what I had told them before.

I do believe that telling the truth is the best policy, why take the chance. Also, counter-measures will not cover up a good background investigation.

As for George...you guys have to look at the big picture. Here you have a guy with a web page. He wants people to go to his web page for whatever reason. He cruses police forums and disputes the poligraph whenever he has the chance. In addition he cuts and pastes his web site on his posts. Agree or not you go to his web site to do a little research. With that you have contributed to his site with another hit. Personally, I could care less if he post on how to beat the polygraph. I have known people who out right lied on the poly and still had past. What I believe in is the hiring process of the police department. I believe that through some stage in the hiring process, the truth will come to light.

I also think that the poly or CVSA should be in the process. If I was a b/g wanting to be a cop I would much rather go with the agency with out the poly than with one. The threat of it will discourage people from applying.

[Swat101]

well?.. can you cheat the lie detector

[George Maschke]

well?.. can you cheat the lie detector

Yes, there is a consensus among scientists that polygraph "tests" can be beaten by augmenting reactions to the "control" questions. Although polygraphers frequently claim that they can detect such efforts, no polygrapher has ever demonstrated any ability to reliably do so. In addition, a polygraph countermeasure challenge by Dr. Drew C. Richardson, who before his retirement was the FBI's top scientific expert on polygraphs, has gone more than two years without any takers.

[K9 Police]

I have been thorougly impressed so far that this has not turned into a flaming war, and I hope that it is not about to begin. On other law enforcement forums, debates regarding the polygraphs have been forbidden (and usually a member or two banned) because personal opinions become personal attacks. I will be even more impressed if this continues without that type of activity.

K9

[TX Kid]

I sure hope my thread doesn't turn into a flame war. It's gone off topic a few times, that's about it. It has been very helpful though!