A question about the polygraph exam.

[Sullio]

I'm not there yet, but it's coming up before too long. Here's my issue: While in college, I did my senior thesis on the validity of the polygraph examination. Not as it pertains to law enforcement, just in general. Basically, I have a very intimate knowledge of polygraph procedures and instrumentation. I know how they work and why.

Without divulging too much information, I don't think the polygraph would be valid for me. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing to hide, but because of my knowledge on the subject, I think it would be fairly useless to test me.

I know that a lot of agencies, both law-enforcement and not, will give you a waiver for the test if you explain that you know exactly how polygraphy works. Do you think police agencies are like this too?

Like I said, it's not a big deal. I have nothing to hide, I'm just wondering how a background investigator would handle testing someone who knows exactly what he's doing and why.

[drkknght]

No you will not get a waiver. If you have nothing to hide than do not worry about.

You are not any better than anyone else. Does not matter how much knowledge you have or don't have.

[Sullio]

No you will not get a waiver. If you have nothing to hide than do not worry about.

You are not any better than anyone else. Does not matter how much knowledge you have or don't have.

Ok, I wasn't worried, just wondering if anyone had encountered anything similar, really.

I certainly don't think I deserve to get a waiver, I'm just curious as to how he will handle it. I think it's standard protocol for a BI to ask what you know about polygraphs and such, so it's a bit of concern. But nothing in my background will be an issue, that's for sure.

[drkknght]

If they ask then tell them and if they don't ask don't tell. It should not be a problem either way.

[Sullio]

Fair enough.

[Instinct]

As part of the preparation for the polygraph, the examiner should ask you whether you have taken a polygraph before, and what do you know about polygraph examinations.

That is how mine began.

[Sullio]

As part of the preparation for the polygraph, the examiner should ask you whether you have taken a polygraph before, and what do you know about polygraph examinations.

That is how mine began.

Mine too, though it was not for a police job. At the time of that polygraph, I hadn't yet done all the research and writing on it I've done now though.

[mobrien316]

You won't like this, but here is my opinion:

If you tell the examiner that you have detailed knowledge of the polygraph he will assume you are going to use countermeasures. The best you will be able to hope for is an inconclusive.

If you don't tell the examiner you have detailed knowledge of the polygraph you are not only starting off your career in law enforcement with a lie of omission, but, if the examiner finds out you do have knowledge of the polygraph, he will accuse you of using countermeasures and you will fail.

If you are truly knowledgeable about the polygraph and aren't just blowing smoke, you are not a suitable candidate to be polygraphed. The polygraph only works on people who believe it is capable of detecting deception, which is something it has never been shown to do.

Unfortunately, if you tell this to your polygraph examiner, he or she will almost certainly assume you are trying to weasel out of being polygraphed. The only way to avoid this problem is if you are a polygraph examiner yourself, which I assume you are not.

Detailed knowledge of the polygraph invalidates the test - a person with detailed knowledge of the polygraph is aware that the polygraph is incapable of detecting deception and they will not be scared into making any damaging admissions. To be more precise, detailed knowledge of the polygraph eliminates the utility of the polygraph, which is limited to trying to get the examinee to make a damaging admission. As far as using the polygraph as a detector of deception, it is always invalid in that regard.

To the best of my knowledge, polygraph examiners assume that anyone (who is not a polygraph examiner) that admits to having researched the polygraph did so in order to learn how to "beat" the test.

[lax854]

You won't like this, but here is my opinion:

If you tell the examiner that you have detailed knowledge of the polygraph he will assume you are going to use countermeasures. The best you will be able to hope for is an inconclusive.

If you don't tell the examiner you have detailed knowledge of the polygraph you are not only starting off your career in law enforcement with a lie of omission, but, if the examiner finds out you do have knowledge of the polygraph, he will accuse you of using countermeasures and you will fail.

If you are truly knowledgeable about the polygraph and aren't just blowing smoke, you are not a suitable candidate to be polygraphed. The polygraph only works on people who believe it is capable of detecting deception, which is something it has never been shown to do.

Unfortunately, if you tell this to your polygraph examiner, he or she will almost certainly assume you are trying to weasel out of being polygraphed. The only way to avoid this problem is if you are a polygraph examiner yourself, which I assume you are not.

Detailed knowledge of the polygraph invalidates the test - a person with detailed knowledge of the polygraph is aware that the polygraph is incapable of detecting deception and they will not be scared into making any damaging admissions. To be more precise, detailed knowledge of the polygraph eliminates the utility of the polygraph, which is limited to trying to get the examinee to make a damaging admission. As far as using the polygraph as a detector of deception, it is always invalid in that regard.

To the best of my knowledge, polygraph examiners assume that anyone (who is not a polygraph examiner) that admits to having researched the polygraph did so in order to learn how to "beat" the test.

to play devils advocate here mo, is it fair not to give the kid a shot at a job because he has knowledge of the polygraph? pretty interesting question to ask. In my opinion, if every aspect of his life is looked into, and is backed up by the polygraph machine, it doesnt seem to be that big of deal to me. But once again, this is only my opinion. Not a big fan of the polygraph knowing one can deceive it.

[bluelightzgrl]

But on another note... You could be completely honest with the machine and still manage to fail. :eek: One of my co-workers, posted it in another threat that he had failed a poloygraph on questions he could prove he WAS honest. If I remember correctly one was "Are you over 21" and "Do you have a current driver's License"


Sadly, I can see your dilema... this is a d@mned if you do, d@mned if you don't situation. Personally, I would say honesty is your best policy when it comes to this. They will probably be more pissed if they find out after the fact that you have the knowledge of the machine than if you tell them upfront. Especially if you explain that your "know" of the machine comes from the college paper you did.

[mobrien316]

to play devils advocate here mo, is it fair not to give the kid a shot at a job because he has knowledge of the polygraph? pretty interesting question to ask. In my opinion, if every aspect of his life is looked into, and is backed up by the polygraph machine, it doesnt seem to be that big of deal to me. But once again, this is only my opinion. Not a big fan of the polygraph knowing one can deceive it.

I don't think that is playing devil's advocate - I think it is the voice of reason.

It is absolutely unfair for an examiner to allow an examinee's knowledge of a test create bias against that examinee. I was not trying to suggest that the scenario I described was fair - just that it was, in my opinion, the most likely scenario the original poster would encounter.

I think it is simply another indicator that the polygraph is not a valid scientific test - an examinee's knowledge of the polygraph can invalidate the test. In every polygraph I took I was always asked if I had researched the polygraph - why would they ask that question if they couldn't care less about the answer?

I can't imagine having a drunk driver step up to the Intoxilyzer and asking him if he'd ever researched how the Intoxilyzer worked, knowing that if he said that he had done research it would be problematic to administer the test.

How scientifically sound would the Intoxilyzer be as a test if a drunk driver had researched how the machine worked it would be likely to make any test result invalid?

[lax854]

I don't think that is playing devil's advocate - I think it is the voice of reason.

It is absolutely unfair for an examiner to allow an examinee's knowledge of a test create bias against that examinee. I was not trying to suggest that the scenario I described was fair - just that it was, in my opinion, the most likely scenario the original poster would encounter.

I think it is simply another indicator that the polygraph is not a valid scientific test - an examinee's knowledge of the polygraph can invalidate the test. In every polygraph I took I was always asked if I had researched the polygraph - why would they ask that question if they couldn't care less about the answer?

I can't imagine having a drunk driver step up to the Intoxilyzer and asking him if he'd ever researched how the Intoxilyzer worked, knowing that if he said that he had done research it would be problematic to administer the test.

How scientifically sound would the Intoxilyzer be as a test if a drunk driver had researched how the machine worked it would be likely to make any test result invalid?

mr mo i agree with you 100 percent. I dont really understand the processes with the polygraph since i never went through one myself. Planning on taking one hopefully after this next nassau exam! :D So if the question of have you ever had knowledge on how a polygraph works is asked, this guy will be a POSSIBLE DQ for having done reaseach on it for a LEGIT reason? i understand the reasoning behind the use of the polygraph, seems alil unfair though if that above question can dq someone

[ML75]

mr mo i agree with you 100 percent. I dont really understand the processes with the polygraph since i never went through one myself. Planning on taking one hopefully after this next nassau exam! :D So if the question of have you ever had knowledge on how a polygraph works is asked, this guy will be a POSSIBLE DQ for having done reaseach on it for a LEGIT reason? i understand the reasoning behind the use of the polygraph, seems alil unfair though if that above question can dq someone

I have taken 1 polygraph. I was asked what I knew of the process. I told the BI giving the test that I had done some research on the web and that I absolutely did not believe in the validity of the test and that I found it particularly stressful that the future of my application could likely be determined based on the ethereal reactions analyzed by the machine.

He had no problem with my research or view of the process.

I would think it would be expected that an educated person would research something that he does not know about before taking part in it. How foolish would we be to blindly walk in to an unknown situation with doing our due diligence in educating ourselves? You research the job and process prior to applying right?

Just my thoughts. and..yes, I passed my polygraph with the New York State Police.

[Sullio]

Thanks for the replies. I think there are two major things to consider here. One, I want to be honest. I don't want to lie in any way, especially if he outright asks me if I know anything about it. While I don't presume to know as much as a polygrapher, I do know a lot more than your average joe. Two, I don't intend to disrespect the investigator or his profession, and that's key. Once you learn a lot about polygraphs, you very easily could come to some disrespectful conclusions about its use and its users, but if I give any indication of that, I'm afraid he will not have a favorable impression of me at all.

So hopefully, if I'm honest as well as respectful, it won't pose too much of a problem. False positives on polygraphs do happen, but not often enough for me to worry about it. Especially since I shouldn't be as nervous as someone who's never had one and doesn't know much about it.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the responses!

[mobrien316]

False positives on polygraphs do happen, but not often enough for me to worry about it.

Just out of curiosity, at what rate to do you believe false positives happen? And on what are you basing your answer?