Polygraph - Honest people keep failing the polygraph, how is this fair and why do federal agencies keep using them?

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:20:27 -0500

Honest people are failing the polygraph, and why do agencies keep using them when they are not admissible in court?

Polygraph

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Nov 11 at 2015 11:39 AM

SGT Jerrold Pesz — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:39:43 -0500

That is why they are not legal in court. Not only do honest people fail them but many people can lie to the machine without being caught. In most cases private companies can no longer give a polygraph test but the government still can and people applying for security jobs still have to take them in many places.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Nov 11 at 2015 12:02 PM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:02:42 -0500

1SG Private RallyPoint Member, many people confess to things when faced with a polygraph.....it is not always what the machine tells you, it is often what the person tells you themselves in fear of being found out by the machine.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Nov 11 at 2015 12:14 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:14:04 -0500

Some things are so secure, everyone gets a poly twice a year. They're that serious about not taking chances. With ongoing poly's and heavy shrink review, it helps keep things in the box. That's one extreme that I'm OK with. It's a condition of employment which you get paid for.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2015 12:15 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:15:50 -0500

I loathed taking the Lifestyle. I had nothing to hide, but even knowing the end game, I still defaulted to thinking about those post-its from work that made their way to my home, or that time that I lied to Mom in high school about why I broke curfew. My base-line always spiked, so I was highly stressed throughout the whole ordeal. Oh, and they asked such inane questions, I would laugh and have to be recalibrated. Sucked all around. But, I survived. :)

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2015 12:32 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:32:15 -0500

It is still a developing technology.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Nov 11 at 2015 3:27 PM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:27:50 -0500

A few thoughts:
- The statement that "honest people are failing the polygraph" is an opinion unless there is something else to show that this is a fact. Plus it goes into scientific process details such as false positives, false negatives, true positives, and true negatives and the numbers for each.
- The standard in a courtroom is different from the standard to screen out and hire someone. The former standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt" or "by a preponderance of the evidence" depending upon what type of court proceeding is used. The latter standard is basically "a company needs/wants another tool in its hiring tool box". Simply stated you can not compare one with the other. It is apples and oranges.
- From an employer perspective, I would argue that if: there is a need for a polygraph (security clearance), all perspective new employees have to go through the same process, and the polygraph is not the sole employer decision making criteria on employment then what is the problem?
- If a person is extremely opposed to a polygraph being used to then seek out employment with an employer who does not use a polygraph. We as Americans have the right to an equal playing field. We do not have the right to dictate who and how an employer conducts their hiring process if that equal playing field is present.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2015 3:33 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:33:11 -0500

Polygraphs are no better than the person administering the exam. While in Detective training, we were given a mini-course in how to operate and administer a test. We had all these fancy stats and successful investigations blown up our skirts right after I took a test and bald-faced lied about something asked (nothing incriminating, folks). Dummy said I aced the exam. Truth is, Carlos, there are hundreds of environmental, psychological, medical, mental, and physiological reasons that can affect an honest person's results. But the pre-exam and the capabilities of the operator "should" mitigate them. Conversely, a pathological liar can beat an exam, but a competent polygraphist should be able to see through the BS. Therein, lies the reasons why polygraphy tests are not admissible in CRIMINAL cases. They are admissible in CIVIL cases, and are pervasively used by private industry in the hiring process or internal issues such as thefts.

I hasten to add that I am referring to the public, the civilian world. The military has its own set of rules as to the application and admissibility of polygraph tests. Ten percent of the test is the subject's physical and mental state. Ninety percent is the polygraphist' skills and expertise.

And, I further hasten to add, it takes years to become an expert polygraphist, many years. I once met the top polygraphists in the FBI and the CIA. Some of those boys looked like they'd been around when Hoover was a Boy Scout (or, in his case, Girl Scout, I reckon).

Response by SPC Jared Bever made Nov 11 at 2015 7:25 PM

SPC Jared Bever — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:25:22 -0500

Polygraphs are like circumstantial evidence they should never be the sole case against someone but they may lead to more concrete evidence.
I never would rely on them or trust them to prove anything. It ls a lazy way to claim sucess in a case you suspect against someone.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Nov 11 at 2015 11:52 PM

CMSgt James Nolan — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:52:28 -0500

They are not admissible because they are only an "indicator", and that is why they are not allowed in criminal court.
A good polygrapher is a good investigator. In employment situations, when they see something, they will narrow scope and ask more probing questions. They can often eliminate little things, which will then cause the "victim" to be truthful or deceptive. Still, some can pass with flying colors while lying, and others have all kinds of problems. Not all Federal agencies use them for hiring.
Applying and testing can be extremely frustrating, keep at it!

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Nov 13 at 2015 7:59 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:59:16 -0500

Polygraphs not full proof nor are they 100% accurate in fact most scientists believe they are not accurate