Lie Detector Tests On "Maury" TV Show And Ignorance Among General Public - Tests A Joke: PROOF! Article

Lie Detector Tests

On "Maury" TV Show

And Ignorance

Among General

Public - Tests Are

Not Infallible

The Lie Detector / Polygraph: Useful Scientific Tool or

Charlatan’s Trick? UPDATE 10/13/05

Polygraph Quackery


Scientists overwhelmingly agree that polygraph "testing" is junk science. The only "raging debate" pits people who don't yet understand that it's flimflam against the growing number who do.

Our government's stubborn reliance on this pseudoscience poses a clear and present danger: make-believe science yields make-believe security.

This non-profit, public interest website is dedicated to telling the truth about lie detectors that those with vested interests in perpetuating the polygraph don't want you to know.
 
Polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis.
The lie detector is itself based on lies...

Did you know it takes less training to give lie detector "tests" than it does to give haircuts? The longest polygraph school (run by the U.S. Government; perhaps its students are slow learners) produces newly minted polygraphers in just 14 weeks -- less than half the time it takes to graduate from a typical barber college. But while barber college graduates can cut hair, polygraph school graduates cannot detect lies.

The dirty little secret behind the polygraph is that the "test" depends on trickery, not science. The person being "tested" is not supposed to know that while the polygraph operator declares that all questions must be answered truthfully, warning that the slightest hint of deception will be detected, he secretly assumes that denials in response to certain questions -- called "control" questions -- will be less than truthful. An example of a commonly used control question is, "Did you ever lie to get out of trouble?" The polygrapher steers the examinee into a denial by warning, for example, that anyone who would do so is the same kind of person who would commit the kind of behavior that is under investigation and then lie about it. But secretly, it is assumed that everyone has lied to get out of trouble.
http://antipolygraph.org/




Tabacco initially published this Comment without an Article – a Throw Away. I had no idea so many people would be interested. I stated clearly in the Excerpt: No Article – That’s It! But 10 optimists ignored my warning and pushed the “More” anyway. So, here goes. I told you it was a con – Sorry, Maury!


Does ____Can ____How
It _______You ____To
Work? ___Beat It? _Pass!
http://www.police-test.net/


CAN YOU BEAT THE POLYGRAPH?


YES

"[Polygraph screening] is completely without any theoretical foundation and has absolutely no validity...the diagnostic value of this type of testing is no more than that of astrology or tea-leaf reading."

former Supervisory Special Agent
Dr. Drew C. Richardson,
FBI Laboratory Division


Are you aware that truthful people can fail a lie detector / CVSA examination?

Every year thousands upon thousands of people (especially police officers) are subjected to these things. Police departments use them as a regular hiring practice for their job openings. There are many reasons that a truthful person will fail. Just a few reasons include nervousness, health problems, surprise, etc....

Polygraphy has not been shown to reliably distinguish between truth and deception in healthy individuals, there is no reason to expect that these "machines" are reliable when used on people with chronic medical conditions. As matter of fact, the American Medical Association has taken a stand against these machines and testified before Congress in support of the 1988 Employee Polygraph Protection Act. Once again, there is no way to explain why a subject--healthy or ill--may have "failed." These "tests" are simply not a reliable way to measure truthfulness.

WASHINGTON -- The use of the polygraph is not nearly as valid as some say and can easily be beaten and should never be admitted into evidence in courts of law, say psychologists from two scientific communities who were surveyed on the validity of polygraphs. This survey appears in the June issue of the American Psychological Association's (APA) Journal of Applied Psychology.

"The B.C. Civil Liberties Association believes that there is convincing evidence to suggest that the use of the lie detector is arbitrary, subjective, biased toward accusations of guilt and claims of very high validity are scientifically indefensible. However, even if one is not willing to be persuaded by evidence on these matters, one must admit, at the very least, that there is no scientific opinion whatsoever concerning the validity of the polygraph. In fact, there is extremely wide divergence over the validity itself."

These machines are not to be taken lightly. There are still several hundred thousands people every year tricked into taking one of these things. They are inaccurate and unreliable. NASA has even written articles on why these things don't work. Why trust your career or your freedom to some machine that has been proven time and time again to not work. Our staff is experienced and has taken several of these tests for open police officer positions and have yet to fail one. This technique is tried and trusted. At least give it a look. It could be the difference between a new job and your same old one you hate so much.







Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing:
A Research Review and Evaluation
A Technical Memorandum
Washington, D. C.: U.S. Congress
Office of Technology Assessment
OTA-TM-H-15
November 1983

Table of Contents

1. SUMMARY

Introduction
Federal Polygraph Use
Federal Polygraph Policy Changes
Polygraph Validity
Findings
Personnel Security Screening
Criminal Investigations
False Negatives/Countermeasures
False Positives
Voluntary v. Involuntary
Polygraph Theory
Further Research
Chapter-by-Chapter Overview
Conclusions

2. VARIETIES OF POLYGRAPH TESTING AND USES

Introduction
Polygraph Instrument
Types of Testing Procedures
The Pretest Interview
Types of Questions
Polygraph Question Techniques
Post-Test Interview
Uses of Polygraph Testing
Current Use
Conclusions

3. CONTROVERSY OVER POLYGRAPH TESTING VALIDITY


6. FACTORS AFFECTING POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION VALIDITY


7. CONCLUSIONS

If you are cruising for a bruising, go to the site:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/ota/





October 13, 2005 DOL Home > ESA > WHD > EPPA

Compliance Assistance —
Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA)
 

Quick Links
 

Links to ESA compliance resources:

* ESA Compliance Assistance
* WHD Compliance Assistance

Links to other Departmental compliance resources:

* Compliance Assistance
* Summary of Major DOL Laws
* Compliance Tools
* Employment Law Guide

* The Law
* The Regulations
29 CFR Part 801

Synopsis of Law

The EPPA prohibits most private employers from using lie detector tests, either for pre-employment screening or during the course of employment. Employers generally may not require or request any employee or job applicant to take a lie detector test, or discharge, discipline, or discriminate against an employee or job applicant for refusing to take a test or for exercising other rights under the Act. Employers may not use or inquire about the results of a lie detector test or discharge or discriminate against an employee or job applicant on the basis of the results of a test, or for filing a complaint, or for participating in a proceeding under the Act. Subject to restrictions, the Act permits polygraph (a type of lie detector) tests to be administered to certain job applicants of security service firms (armored car, alarm, and guard) and of pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors and dispensers. Subject to restrictions, the Act also permits polygraph testing of certain employees of private firms who are reasonably suspected of involvement in a workplace incident (theft, embezzlement, etc.) that resulted in specific economic loss or injury to the employer. Where polygraph examinations are allowed, they are subject to strict standards for the conduct of the test, including the pretest, testing and post-testing phases. An examiner must be licensed and bonded or have professional liability coverage. The Act strictly limits the disclosure of information obtained during a polygraph test.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/polygraph/






Why does this setup look like an
Electric Chair? Is it meant to
intimidate the subject? You bet!

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2002/11/ma_148_01.html


Lie Detector Roulette


News: Everyone admits that polygraphs are unreliable. So why are government employees subjected to tests that can ruin their careers?

By Brendan I. Koerner

November/December 2002 Issue




Now, I already told you in the original non-article that this “evidence” is not admissible in a court of law. So why, you ask, did O. J. take one and allegedly fail it? Psychology! Jury influencing! Media propaganda! Take your pick. Obviously O. J. didn’t know what you now know or his guilt complex was just too strong to permit him to lie without sweating.

It basically comes down to intimidation. If the subject believes it, he or she will fail the test. If the subject is psychotic and feels innocent, in spite of having committed the crimes, he will pass. If he is naturally nervous in all pressure situations, he will fail. An accomplished liar will probably pass. So take your pick. It’s a waste of time unless your subject doesn’t know how flaky this thing is. If the subject is unaware of the truth, he or she will buy into it and admit everything once Maury Povich announces, “Reader, the lie detector test determined that was a lie!”


T.A.B.A.C.C.O. (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization)

tags: maury  tv  guilt complex  lie detector  ignorance  polygraph  exploitation  guilt  psychology  hypocrisy