60% Connecticut State Police Polygraph Failure Rate!

[Group9]

My problem with polygraphs is that there is no testing for certification that I know of (i.e. sending control subjects in to test, or keeping a record of operator accuracy, for a particular operator like is done for instance with a K-9 for drug detection).

A good example of how polygraphs are viewed is that our headquarters management, who haven't been out in the real world in decades in some cases, think polygraphs are the holy grail. Street agents generally think they are a little less accurate that ouiji boards.

I personally know of too many applicants for various federal agencieswho have at different times passed and failed the exact same questions when tested by different operators to put any faith whatsoever in them. I personally believe that a good experienced police officer is much more accurate that any polygraph in detecting deception. When you point this out to a polygraph operator, they say "well, that's just operator error."

WHICH IS EXACTLY THE POINT .

[Palerider957]

Hello everyone,

I'm a new member who recently found this site. I work for the federal government and am also a certified polygraph examiner. Let me start by saying that the polygraph is far from perfect, and not all examiners, and polygraph programs are created equally.

In certain situations the polygraph is extremely effective, and deadly accurate. I have worked on specific issue cases where the polygraph absolutely cracked the case. Those who have worked with polygraph know how important it is to be proficient, and to understand the person whom you are testing.

Pre-employment polygraph is the least accurate, but if done properly, still have a lot of merit. There is NO reason for 60% of applicants to be failing polygraph exams, this tells me the examiners are not doing their jobs well. The reason for the poly. should be to verify applicant information and discover any serious crimes of compulsive behavior in the examinees past.

A 60% failure rate is not only excessive, it's causing the agency to lose a lot of good applicants.

[Palerider957]

Group9,

I completely understand where you are coming from. The polygraph should not, IMHO, be used as an absolute. It is a great tool to help focus an investigation and to gauge a basic level of truthfullness on an individuals application. The polygraph has some exceptional uses when you are trying to screen a group of people who may or may not have been involved in a given incident.

As for using instinct versus the polygaph, I have used both. I spent six years working a zone car in federal project homes and have done my share of field interviews. In the polygraph room the Examiner is challenged to turn off the cop "radar" and work to give a good test.

The necessity for a skilled and proficient Examiner cannot be overstated. At the end of the day, the polygraph is a tool with limitations and should not be used as an absolute. I believe having the polygraph for security sensitive positions and for handling specific cases is important.

[Citicop]

Palerider-

Welcome to the forum!

Please stop by the new member introductions area and post an introduction so we can learn a little bit about you.

This thread was last active almost SEVEN years ago. We ask members to leave old threads in peace. Feel free to start a new thread on a topic if you feel you have something to contribute.

Thanks for your understanding-

-Citicop.