Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

FBI

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is an agency of the United States Department of Justice that serves as both a federal criminal investigative body and an internal intelligence agency. The FBI has investigative jurisdiction over violations of more than 200 categories of federal crime.

Headquartered in Washington, DC, the FBI has over 55 field offices located throughout the USA as well as smaller units throughout the world.

Perhaps you are working for the FBI or interested in working for the FBI. Here is a forum to share your experience with the FBI.

2 Pages<12
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
ladybee27  
#21 Posted : Tuesday, September 3, 2019 2:40:12 PM(UTC)
ladybee27

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/21/2011(UTC)
Posts: 13

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Also I see that you're a college senior attempting to get in the intelligence field. I wish I had known that before going back and forth with you. Apply to a few jobs and actually GO THROUGH the process. Then come back to me with your opinions on it. I was naive when it came to these processes before going through it as well. Go in there, answer the questions truthfully and everything should be a go, right? WRONG!

You're in for a rude awakening my dear.

Edited by user Tuesday, September 3, 2019 2:41:53 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

thanks 2 users thanked ladybee27 for this useful post.
someoldguy on 9/3/2019(UTC), Ezhikus on 9/4/2019(UTC)
Mp37376p  
#22 Posted : Tuesday, September 3, 2019 3:01:25 PM(UTC)
Mp37376p

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/28/2019(UTC)
Posts: 23
United States
Location: New York

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
Lol there have been just as many studies that prove that dont do not work. If a human cant detect with 100% certainty when a person is being deceitful, you really believe that a machine can? If you choose to be that naive, so be it. There's a story somewhere online of a former law enforcement official with your same mentality until he was wrongfully accused of being deceitful.

You can speak on your biased "scientific research" however, my FACTUAL informations comes from my PERSONAL EXPERIENCE with the polygraph process. You're accusing someone you know nothing about of being a liar. Your strong defensiveness of said "technology" sounds borderline psychotic.


One of the problems in discussing accuracy figures and the differences among the statistics quoted by proponents and opponents of polygraph techniques is the way the figures are calculated. At the risk of oversimplification, critics, who often don't understand polygraph testing, classify inconclusive test results as errors. In a real life setting an inconclusive result simply means the examiner is unable to render a definite diagnosis of truth or deception. In such cases a second examination is usually conducted at a later date.

To illustrate how the inclusion of inconclusive test results can distort accuracy figures, consider the following example: If 10 polygraph examinations are administered and the examiner is correct in 7 decisions, wrong in 1, and makes no decision as to truth or deception in 2 (inconclusive), we calculate the accuracy rate as 87.5% (8 definite results, 7 of which were correct). Critics of the polygraph technique often calculate the accuracy rate in this example as 70% (10 examination with 7 correct decisions). Since those who use polygraph testing do not consider inconclusive test results as meaningful and do not hold them against the examinee, considering them as errors is clearly misleading and certainly skews the figures.

Screening test accuracy: To date, there have been only a limited number of research projects on the accuracy of polygraph in screening contexts, primarily because of the difficulty in establishing ground truth in real world situations. However, since the same physiological measures are recorded and the same basic physiological principles may apply in both event-specific and screening examinations, there is little reason to believe that such testing is of no value in screening situations as some opponents claim. With that said, however, the number of issues, the lack of a known incident along with other factors likely result in lower average accuracies than seen in event-specific testing circumstances.

While no polygraph technique is infallible, research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent examiner who follows proper protocols, polygraph testing is one of the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception.


US government studies have concluded that when a qualified examiner conducts the test properly, the polygraph exam is between 87 and 98 percent accurate. It is the most accurate means available for determining the truth or deception of a person answering a direct question.Considerable scientific research has demonstrated that the pattern of physiological changes during a polygraph test provides the basis for making highly accurate inferences concerning truth or deception.

Machines are also smarter than man, so I don't see the point you're trying to make there. I prefer to believe Scientific evidence, not some random individual over the internet blindly that they were telling the truth. Again, i've never accused you of being a liar. I've accused you of withholding information, whether that be minor or otherwise.

ladybee27  
#23 Posted : Tuesday, September 3, 2019 3:05:58 PM(UTC)
ladybee27

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/21/2011(UTC)
Posts: 13

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎
Mp37376p  
#24 Posted : Tuesday, September 3, 2019 3:29:27 PM(UTC)
Mp37376p

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/28/2019(UTC)
Posts: 23
United States
Location: New York

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
Also I see that you're a college senior attempting to get in the intelligence field. I wish I had known that before going back and forth with you. Apply to a few jobs and actually GO THROUGH the process. Then come back to me with your opinions on it. I was naive when it came to these processes before going through it as well. Go in there, answer the questions truthfully and everything should be a go, right? WRONG!

You're in for a rude awakening my dear.


I have been through the process. I already have a TS/SCI Clearance, and completed a Full Scope Polygraph with my Internship in the Intelligence Community. I'm so knowledgeable about Poly's because I've done a research project on them for a College Course. Again, some examinees will “fail” a polygraph test even though they are telling the literal truth, but they continue to hold back perti­nent or incriminating information from the examiner.

The purpose of the polygraph examination is not to determine if the applicant is perfect, but rather to help determine if the applicant is willing to be forthcoming and demonstrate that s/he has the integrity required to be a federal law enforcement officer or agent. Each applicant’s case is reviewed by an adjudicator from OPR’s Personnel Security Division who will utilize a whole person concept when applying suitability and eligibility guidelines. The FBI's main interest is safeguarding and maintaining the high standards and integrity of its workforce. Withholding information, minor or otherwise, can impact an applicant’s ability to be successful with the polygraph examination.

99% of the truth is still a lie.

The FBI also uses the “confession rate” as a measure of its polygraph performance. The confession rate is calculated by dividing the number of times examinees with a final opinion of Deception Indicated ended up making an admission or confession that confirmed the polygraph result. In 2006, the FBI’s Polygraph Unit reported to DoDPI that 61 percent of individuals with final opinions of Deception Indicated made an admission or confession, a rate that is considered high within the polygraph community.


If or when I ever take the exam again, I will follow instructions and be forthcoming when asked to provide information.My examiner will be there to guide me through the process. Many people before me have been successful in their examinations, and I can be successful as well. Not to mention that I'd have to periodically take them anyway if I were to get hired. 35,000 FBI Employees were able to pass the Pre Employment Polygraph, as were thousands of other individuals across the Intelligence Community and even Law Enforcement across the country, and so can I. My biggest concern is getting a CJO to begin with.

Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
"I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎"


“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell




Ezhikus  
#25 Posted : Wednesday, September 4, 2019 12:49:07 PM(UTC)
Ezhikus

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/14/2019(UTC)
Posts: 60
United States
Location: New York

Thanks: 36 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 5 post(s)
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
So today I was was informed unofficially that I didnt do well on my poly, which honestly I'm disappointed about, especially since I know that I was honest and forthcoming about everything🙁. In the past I know people were allowed to appeal the poly for a retest.. but I was also informed as of March 2019 they no longer grant appeals. Anyone know why?


I had a meet and greet last month and they shared with us that if we fail poly this means bye-bye without any appeals. Apparently it is the new rule started this year. ..like a pilot PFT before phase 2. Oh well...
remmy  
#26 Posted : Thursday, September 19, 2019 7:24:11 AM(UTC)
remmy

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/22/2019(UTC)
Posts: 4

Originally Posted by: Mp37376p Go to Quoted Post
According to the Honors Internship Application:

"If you fail the polygraph because you withheld information about illegal drug use, criminal activity, or any other violation, you will be automatically disqualified from this and ALL future employment with the FBI. Also, failing the polygraph or background investigation will likely negatively affect future employment opportunities with the U.S. Intelligence Community and with any other agency of the federal government."

Now, you say:

"I know that I was honest and forthcoming about everything."

I doubt that. Deception is indicated when the examinee’s Autonomic Nerv­ous System displays a significant and repetitive “defensive” reaction to one or more of the rele­vant test questions. Although this reaction in itself in not a “lie,” years of research has shown that 90 to 95 percent of the examinees who display this reaction were either lying to the relevant test questions or was withholding pertinent information relating to the relevant test questions. The current polygraph research indicates that when a polygraph exam, conducted by a qualified, trained, and experienced polygraph examiner, is properly administered the accuracy rate is between 95% and 98%. The polygraph is the most accurate tool available today for determining truth or deception. While the polygraph technique is highly accurate, it is not infallible and errors can occur, polygraph errors may be caused by the examiner’s failure to properly prepare the examine for the examination, or by a misreading of the physiological data on the polygraph charts. Since it is recognized that any error is damaging, examiners utilize a variety of procedures to identify the presence of factors which may cause false responses, and to insure an unbiased review of the polygraph records.

These Protective Procedures include:

An assessment of the examinee’s emotional state.
Medical information about the examinee’s physical condition.
Specialized tests to identify the overly responsive examinee and to calm the overly nervous.
Control questions to evaluate the examinee’s response capabilities.
Factual analysis of the case information.
A pre-test interview and detailed review of the questions.
Quality control reviews.


While the polygraph technique is not infallible, research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent examiner the polygraph test is the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception. Since 1980, a compendium of research studies - encompassing 80 research projects involving 6,380 polygraph examinations and 12 studies of the validity of field examinations following 2,174 field examinations, indicate an average accuracy rate of 98%. The FBI selects polygraph examiners from among its Special Agent workforce. Candidates must have at least 5 years of FBI investigative experience and demonstrated success as an interviewer, interrogator, and case agent in complex investigations. Candidates must also have the ability to perform well under stress and in confrontational situations. Prior to selection, examiner candidates must undergo a personnel security polygraph examination.

Candidates with prior experience at conducting polygraph examinations must have completed a basic polygraph course at a polygraph school approved by the FBI or certified by the American Polygraph Association. Candidates who are not experienced examiners or do not have training from an approved school are sent to DoDPI’s 14-week course for examiner trainees. After graduation from the DoDPI course, new examiners are mentored by a senior examiner during a supervised internship. New examiners receive 1 week of specialized training in the Polygraph Unit, and their first 12 examinations are monitored by a senior examiner. Examiners who successfully complete all required training and a 1-year internship, during which they complete at least 48 polygraph examinations, are certified by the FBI. FBI examiners are required to complete at least 48 polygraph examinations a year to maintain their certification. They also must complete a minimum of 80 hours of polygraph-related training every 2 years as part of their continuing education. Because of the extensive training provided to new FBI examiners, they are expected to serve for a minimum of 3 years.

As of December 2005, the FBI Polygraph Unit’s supervisory personnel had an average of 18 years of investigative experience and an average of 9 years of polygraph experience. Field examiners had an average of 17 years of investigative experience and 9 years of polygraph experience.

While I cannot speak to individual experiences, most who fail withhold information (whether minor or otherwise) during the polygraph examination.

As for why the policy has changed, more than likely its due to the recommendations of the OIG in its evaluation of the FBI's Polygraph program.

"The polygraph appeals timeline is pretty well established and many candidates on here are in the process of appealing their polygraph results, whether or not they are willing to publicly acknowledge it,since the failure rate is so high (40-50%), any additional information on this opaque process is definitely welcome."


The Failure rate is also not 40%-50%. An OIG Report from 2005 found that only 24% of Polygraph results had the result of Deception Indicated. I doubt that number has risen since then, considering the process has only improved since.

"It goes to show the FBI are throwing away quality candidates in favor of folks with limited life experience, no travel history and little relevant exposure to the 'real world', and all based on a glorified toaster with a blood monitor attached to it."

That "Glorified Toaster" has a 98% accuracy rate with a qualified examiner administering the exam, and as i've explained above, FBI examiners are highly trained, and there is even more oversight in the process that I haven't even described. If you wanted to work for the FBI, you probably shouldn't have withheld information or lied to your examiner, because trust me, they can tell when you're being deceptive. In all honesty, its probably best that neither of you are working in a National Security position. Conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations can raise questions about an individual's eligibility, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information. Of special interest is any failure to cooperate or provide truthful and candid answers during national security investigative or adjudicative processes.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has a vital mission — to protect and defend the United States against terrorist and foreign intelligence threats and to respond to criminal threats facing the country. This mission demands that the FBI be vigilant in its stewardship of sensitive information, systems, and spaces. The FBI uses polygraph examinations as one of many tools to assess whether job applicants and employees pose a national security risk or are unsuitable for FBI employment




Lol at all of this.

cmefly  
#27 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2019 6:19:13 AM(UTC)
cmefly

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/10/2018(UTC)
Posts: 8
United States

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Mp37376p Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
If polygraphs were that reliable there wouldnt be any controversy about it's use. You can quote copy/paste whatever info ..however we all KNOW that polygraphs are not a good vetting tool. Otherwise there would be ZERO questions about it's use.


Everything is controversial nowadays, welcome to 2019. I prefer to believe Scientific Evidence and studies over your anecdotal evidence.

As Benjamin Franklin said

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”


Actually science says the polygraph is unreliable at best. Not that I failed it, but quite frankly you're wrong that the polygraph has a 90%+ rate. There are many "criminals" who were put in jail due to a polygraph, even though when evidence such as VIDEO and DNA proved they weren't at the scene of the crime. For you to be casting people here with your judgment says more about you than anyone else.

https://www.apa.org/moni.../julaug04/polygraph.html
thanks 1 user thanked cmefly for this useful post.
George Maschke on 9/25/2019(UTC)
Mp37376p  
#28 Posted : Thursday, September 26, 2019 2:35:06 PM(UTC)
Mp37376p

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/28/2019(UTC)
Posts: 23
United States
Location: New York

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Originally Posted by: cmefly Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Mp37376p Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
If polygraphs were that reliable there wouldnt be any controversy about it's use. You can quote copy/paste whatever info ..however we all KNOW that polygraphs are not a good vetting tool. Otherwise there would be ZERO questions about it's use.


Everything is controversial nowadays, welcome to 2019. I prefer to believe Scientific Evidence and studies over your anecdotal evidence.

As Benjamin Franklin said

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”


Actually science says the polygraph is unreliable at best. Not that I failed it, but quite frankly you're wrong that the polygraph has a 90%+ rate. There are many "criminals" who were put in jail due to a polygraph, even though when evidence such as VIDEO and DNA proved they weren't at the scene of the crime. For you to be casting people here with your judgment says more about you than anyone else.

https://www.apa.org/moni.../julaug04/polygraph.html


Not looking to debate, so don't bother responding

One of the problems in discussing accuracy figures and the differences among the statistics quoted by proponents and opponents of polygraph techniques is the way the figures are calculated. At the risk of oversimplification, critics, who often don't understand polygraph testing, classify inconclusive test results as errors. In a real life setting an inconclusive result simply means the examiner is unable to render a definite diagnosis of truth or deception. In such cases a second examination is usually conducted at a later date.

To illustrate how the inclusion of inconclusive test results can distort accuracy figures, consider the following example: If 10 polygraph examinations are administered and the examiner is correct in 7 decisions, wrong in 1, and makes no decision as to truth or deception in 2 (inconclusive), we calculate the accuracy rate as 87.5% (8 definite results, 7 of which were correct). Critics of the polygraph technique often calculate the accuracy rate in this example as 70% (10 examination with 7 correct decisions). Since those who use polygraph testing do not consider inconclusive test results as meaningful and do not hold them against the examinee, considering them as errors is clearly misleading and certainly skews the figures.

To date, there have been only a limited number of research projects on the accuracy of polygraph in screening contexts, primarily because of the difficulty in establishing ground truth in real world situations. However, since the same physiological measures are recorded and the same basic physiological principles may apply in both event-specific and screening examinations, there is little reason to believe that such testing is of no value in screening situations as some opponents claim. With that said, however, the number of issues, the lack of a known incident along with other factors likely result in lower average accuracies than seen in event-specific testing circumstances.

While no polygraph technique is infallible, research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent examiner who follows proper protocols, polygraph testing is one of the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception. The current polygraph research indicates that when a specific single issue polygraph exam, con­ducted by a qualified, trained, and experienced polygraph examiner, is properly administered the accuracy rate is between 95% and 98%. This percentage is still higher than other forms of evi­dence, including psychiatric opinions, suspect identification as provided by victims and wit­nesses, and fingerprint identification. The polygraph is the most accurate tool available today for determining truth or deception. The accuracy of the multi-issue exam drops in accuracy due to a number of psychological factors. These statistics do not include “inconclusive” test results in which no opinion of truth of deception can be made from the physiological data collected on the polygraph charts.

Recent research reveals that the accuracy of the new computerized polygraph system is close to 100 percent. In the past 75 years, over 250 studies have been conducted on the validity, accuracy and reliability of polygraph testing (American Polygraph Association 1996 Polygraph Issues & Answers). Based on twelve separate studies involving 2174 real cases since 1980, evidence suggests that qualified field polygraph examiners are 98 percent accurate in their overall decisions (Norman Ansley, "The validity and reliability of polygraph decisions in real cases", Polygraph, v.19, 1990). Research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent polygraph examiner, the polygraph test is the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception.

The Polygraph Alone couldn't put anyone in jail. And i'm not sure of any cases in of which it was used to put an innocent person in Prison. Plenty of rules which I could go over in the use of Polygraphs in Criminal Cases, but ill save you the details.


I'll end by saying this to everyone reading this. The Polygraph is required to work for the Intelligence Community, Federal Law Enforcement, many positions in the military and many different Law Enforcement at the state and local level. Whether you think its as accurate as I do or as inaccurate as some of its Proponents will say is irrelevant, you have to take it and pass it to get whatever position you're looking to get at the end of the day. And in some cases you'll have to take it and pass it periodically. My advice to anyone taking it are to be completely truthful on your application forms to include the e-QIP or Standard Form-86. Be prepared to discuss any updated e-QIP or SF-86 information during your examination. Ask your examiner if you have any questions or concerns. Your Polygraph Examiner will explain the examination process to you and the two of you will discuss all of the questions you will be asked prior to taking the examination. You will also have opportunities to ask questions or clarify your answers prior to the examination. The most important thing to remember about taking a polygraph examination is to follow instructions and to be forthcoming when asked to provide information. Your examiner will be there to guide you through the process. Many people before you have been successful in their examinations and you can be successful as well. It is recommended that you do not seek or necessarily trust information about the polygraph found on the internet, chat rooms, social media, YouTube or other non-official sources, as those sources often provide inaccurate information which could be detrimental to your success. Please ask your examiner if you have any questions or concerns. All of FBI's Polygraph Examiners are federally certified and held to strict guidelines and standards governed by the National Center for Credibility Assessment. FBI Polygraph Examiners work hard to provide each applicant with a fair and accurate examination; however, applicants must be forthcoming and cooperative in order to successfully complete the polygraph examination. Come with an open mind, it’s a unique experience each time.

And that's the last time I will talk about the Polygraph on here, so don't bother responding

zoe lee  
#29 Posted : Wednesday, October 16, 2019 8:22:16 AM(UTC)
zoe lee

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/10/2019(UTC)
Posts: 4
United States
Location: Dallas, TX

MP37376, simply from a technical standpoint, how can polygraph tell the difference between lying and withholding? Any biological signs to indicate that one is withholding rather than lying?
FBI_Prospect  
#30 Posted : Monday, October 21, 2019 5:42:40 PM(UTC)
FBI_Prospect

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/31/2018(UTC)
Posts: 2
United States

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Mp37376p Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: cmefly Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Mp37376p Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
If polygraphs were that reliable there wouldnt be any controversy about it's use. You can quote copy/paste whatever info ..however we all KNOW that polygraphs are not a good vetting tool. Otherwise there would be ZERO questions about it's use.


Everything is controversial nowadays, welcome to 2019. I prefer to believe Scientific Evidence and studies over your anecdotal evidence.

As Benjamin Franklin said

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”


Actually science says the polygraph is unreliable at best. Not that I failed it, but quite frankly you're wrong that the polygraph has a 90%+ rate. There are many "criminals" who were put in jail due to a polygraph, even though when evidence such as VIDEO and DNA proved they weren't at the scene of the crime. For you to be casting people here with your judgment says more about you than anyone else.

https://www.apa.org/moni.../julaug04/polygraph.html


Your posts to date would indicate that you are either employed by the bureau or someone you know is. Quoting government studies in support of the polygraph is kind of like asking a politician if in his opinion, his policies to date were good ideas...of course they won't indicate anything to suggest otherwise. Furthermore I would recommend that at your next scheduled polygraph you disclose in full your posting history on this forum in regards to the topic of the polygraph. We wouldn't want a bit of sweating and anxiety to be 'misinterpreted' as being dishonest and ruin your chances to get hired now would we ?



Not looking to debate, so don't bother responding

One of the problems in discussing accuracy figures and the differences among the statistics quoted by proponents and opponents of polygraph techniques is the way the figures are calculated. At the risk of oversimplification, critics, who often don't understand polygraph testing, classify inconclusive test results as errors. In a real life setting an inconclusive result simply means the examiner is unable to render a definite diagnosis of truth or deception. In such cases a second examination is usually conducted at a later date.

To illustrate how the inclusion of inconclusive test results can distort accuracy figures, consider the following example: If 10 polygraph examinations are administered and the examiner is correct in 7 decisions, wrong in 1, and makes no decision as to truth or deception in 2 (inconclusive), we calculate the accuracy rate as 87.5% (8 definite results, 7 of which were correct). Critics of the polygraph technique often calculate the accuracy rate in this example as 70% (10 examination with 7 correct decisions). Since those who use polygraph testing do not consider inconclusive test results as meaningful and do not hold them against the examinee, considering them as errors is clearly misleading and certainly skews the figures.

To date, there have been only a limited number of research projects on the accuracy of polygraph in screening contexts, primarily because of the difficulty in establishing ground truth in real world situations. However, since the same physiological measures are recorded and the same basic physiological principles may apply in both event-specific and screening examinations, there is little reason to believe that such testing is of no value in screening situations as some opponents claim. With that said, however, the number of issues, the lack of a known incident along with other factors likely result in lower average accuracies than seen in event-specific testing circumstances.

While no polygraph technique is infallible, research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent examiner who follows proper protocols, polygraph testing is one of the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception. The current polygraph research indicates that when a specific single issue polygraph exam, con­ducted by a qualified, trained, and experienced polygraph examiner, is properly administered the accuracy rate is between 95% and 98%. This percentage is still higher than other forms of evi­dence, including psychiatric opinions, suspect identification as provided by victims and wit­nesses, and fingerprint identification. The polygraph is the most accurate tool available today for determining truth or deception. The accuracy of the multi-issue exam drops in accuracy due to a number of psychological factors. These statistics do not include “inconclusive” test results in which no opinion of truth of deception can be made from the physiological data collected on the polygraph charts.

Recent research reveals that the accuracy of the new computerized polygraph system is close to 100 percent. In the past 75 years, over 250 studies have been conducted on the validity, accuracy and reliability of polygraph testing (American Polygraph Association 1996 Polygraph Issues & Answers). Based on twelve separate studies involving 2174 real cases since 1980, evidence suggests that qualified field polygraph examiners are 98 percent accurate in their overall decisions (Norman Ansley, "The validity and reliability of polygraph decisions in real cases", Polygraph, v.19, 1990). Research clearly indicates that when administered by a competent polygraph examiner, the polygraph test is the most accurate means available to determine truth and deception.

The Polygraph Alone couldn't put anyone in jail. And i'm not sure of any cases in of which it was used to put an innocent person in Prison. Plenty of rules which I could go over in the use of Polygraphs in Criminal Cases, but ill save you the details.


I'll end by saying this to everyone reading this. The Polygraph is required to work for the Intelligence Community, Federal Law Enforcement, many positions in the military and many different Law Enforcement at the state and local level. Whether you think its as accurate as I do or as inaccurate as some of its Proponents will say is irrelevant, you have to take it and pass it to get whatever position you're looking to get at the end of the day. And in some cases you'll have to take it and pass it periodically. My advice to anyone taking it are to be completely truthful on your application forms to include the e-QIP or Standard Form-86. Be prepared to discuss any updated e-QIP or SF-86 information during your examination. Ask your examiner if you have any questions or concerns. Your Polygraph Examiner will explain the examination process to you and the two of you will discuss all of the questions you will be asked prior to taking the examination. You will also have opportunities to ask questions or clarify your answers prior to the examination. The most important thing to remember about taking a polygraph examination is to follow instructions and to be forthcoming when asked to provide information. Your examiner will be there to guide you through the process. Many people before you have been successful in their examinations and you can be successful as well. It is recommended that you do not seek or necessarily trust information about the polygraph found on the internet, chat rooms, social media, YouTube or other non-official sources, as those sources often provide inaccurate information which could be detrimental to your success. Please ask your examiner if you have any questions or concerns. All of FBI's Polygraph Examiners are federally certified and held to strict guidelines and standards governed by the National Center for Credibility Assessment. FBI Polygraph Examiners work hard to provide each applicant with a fair and accurate examination; however, applicants must be forthcoming and cooperative in order to successfully complete the polygraph examination. Come with an open mind, it’s a unique experience each time.

And that's the last time I will talk about the Polygraph on here, so don't bother responding



Your posts to date would indicate that you are either employed by the bureau or someone you know is. Quoting government studies in support of the polygraph is kind of like asking a politician if in his opinion, his policies to date were good ideas...of course they won't indicate anything to suggest otherwise. Furthermore I would recommend that at your next scheduled polygraph you disclose in full your posting history on this forum in regards to the topic of the polygraph. We wouldn't want a bit of sweating and anxiety to be 'misinterpreted' as being dishonest and ruin your chances to get hired now would we ?

ladybee27  
#31 Posted : Tuesday, October 22, 2019 7:12:27 AM(UTC)
ladybee27

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/21/2011(UTC)
Posts: 13

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
This Mp whatever his name is guy is a joke. That's why I stopped responding. We all know the polygraph is bogus, however we go through with it, in hopes to get these jobs. I'm not upset about it, I've moved on.

This dude is basically quoting information that he found on the internet, my responses were based on my REAL life experience, not something that I read online.
Tpr6701  
#32 Posted : Tuesday, October 22, 2019 10:53:22 AM(UTC)
Tpr6701

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/19/2019(UTC)
Posts: 60
United States
Location: USA

Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 34 time(s) in 14 post(s)
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎


I have enough experience and have taken multiple polygraphs and been around others who have taken it and administered it, and although they aren’t 100% accurate hence the reason why they aren’t admissible in court, however, they are a great investigation tool. They are just a tool and their efficiency is increased significantly with experience and knowledge of the polygrapher. Has someone who was absolutely honest but was told being deceptive before? I m sure of it, but that’s rare. Has some who just flat out lied and was told he was good to go? I m sure of that too. That’s when the skills of the polygrapher comes in to play as well as the circumstances. For the most times, the tool works as it’s designed to do.

Edited by user Tuesday, October 22, 2019 11:15:37 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

George Maschke  
#33 Posted : Tuesday, October 22, 2019 11:16:12 AM(UTC)
George Maschke

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 100

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 6 time(s) in 5 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Tpr6701 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎


I have enough experience and have taken multiple polygraphs and been around others who have taken it and administered it, and although they aren’t 100% accurate hence the reason why they aren’t admissible in court, however, they are a great investigation tool. They are just a tool and their efficiency is increased significantly with experience and knowledge of the polygrapher. Has someone who was absolutely honest but was told being deceptive before? I m sure of it, but that’s rare. For the most times, the tool works as it’s designed to do.


The polygraph can be useful as an interrogational prop for scaring admissions out of naïve and gullible persons, but it has no validity as a diagnostic test for deception. Not only are polygraphs not 100%, they haven't been shown through peer-reviewed research to reliably work at better-than-chance levels under field conditions. False positives are common, and while the procedure is inherently biased against truthful persons, liars can pass the polygraph using simple, effective countermeasures that polygraph operators cannot detect.
Signal/WhatsApp/Snapchat/Telegram/iMessage: +1-202-810-2105
Tpr6701  
#34 Posted : Tuesday, October 22, 2019 11:49:33 AM(UTC)
Tpr6701

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/19/2019(UTC)
Posts: 60
United States
Location: USA

Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 34 time(s) in 14 post(s)
Originally Posted by: George Maschke Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Tpr6701 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎


I have enough experience and have taken multiple polygraphs and been around others who have taken it and administered it, and although they aren’t 100% accurate hence the reason why they aren’t admissible in court, however, they are a great investigation tool. They are just a tool and their efficiency is increased significantly with experience and knowledge of the polygrapher. Has someone who was absolutely honest but was told being deceptive before? I m sure of it, but that’s rare. For the most times, the tool works as it’s designed to do.



The polygraph can be useful as an interrogational prop for scaring admissions out of naïve and gullible persons, but it has no validity as a diagnostic test for deception. Not only are polygraphs not 100%, they haven't been shown through peer-reviewed research to reliably work at better-than-chance levels under field conditions. False positives are common, and while the procedure is inherently biased against truthful persons, liars can pass the polygraph using simple, effective countermeasures that polygraph operators cannot detect.


That is true, however, polygraphs are great tools to have applicants be much more forthcoming with vital information during preemployment Screening’s. As I said, it is a great tool for investigations. Two key words, tool and investigation.

Edited by user Tuesday, October 22, 2019 11:50:30 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

George Maschke  
#35 Posted : Tuesday, October 22, 2019 11:59:37 AM(UTC)
George Maschke

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 100

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 6 time(s) in 5 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Tpr6701 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: George Maschke Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Tpr6701 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: ladybee27 Go to Quoted Post
I'm not reading your long winded responses anymore. Revisit this post in a few years. When you have real life experience under your belt and not just an internship. Not saying that to sound condescending just saying that experience changes opinions. Good luck with your future career endeavors.😎


I have enough experience and have taken multiple polygraphs and been around others who have taken it and administered it, and although they aren’t 100% accurate hence the reason why they aren’t admissible in court, however, they are a great investigation tool. They are just a tool and their efficiency is increased significantly with experience and knowledge of the polygrapher. Has someone who was absolutely honest but was told being deceptive before? I m sure of it, but that’s rare. For the most times, the tool works as it’s designed to do.



The polygraph can be useful as an interrogational prop for scaring admissions out of naïve and gullible persons, but it has no validity as a diagnostic test for deception. Not only are polygraphs not 100%, they haven't been shown through peer-reviewed research to reliably work at better-than-chance levels under field conditions. False positives are common, and while the procedure is inherently biased against truthful persons, liars can pass the polygraph using simple, effective countermeasures that polygraph operators cannot detect.


That is true, however, polygraphs are great tools to have applicants be much more forthcoming with vital information during preemployment Screening’s. As I said, it is a great tool for investigations. Two key words, tool and investigation.


Polygraphs are great tools for screening applicants except when they're not. For example in the case of this thread's original poster. Or in the case of the thousands of other federal applicants who each year tell the truth but end up being blackballed because their polygraph tracings zigged when they were expected to zag. Or in the case of former FBI intelligence analyst Leandro Aragoncillo, a spy who beat the pre-employment polygraph to infiltrate the Bureau. Or in the case of Ana Belen Montes, a spy who beat the Defense Intelligence Agency's pre-employment polygraph as well as a post-hire polygraph.

The problem is, the FBI is not using the polygraph simply as a ruse for interrogating gullible criminal suspects. They're treating the results as if polygraphy actually were a scientific test for lying.
Signal/WhatsApp/Snapchat/Telegram/iMessage: +1-202-810-2105
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 1.017 seconds.