Slashdot Mirror


Leaked Documents Confirm Polygraph Operators Can't Detect Countermeasures (antipolygraph.org)

George Maschke writes: AntiPolygraph.org has published a document (14 MB PDF) on polygraph countermeasures that is allegedly derived from classified information. The document suggests techniques that polygraph operators might use in an attempt to detect efforts to beat the polygraph, but fails to offer any coherent strategy for detecting sophisticated countermeasures such as those outlined in AntiPolygraph.org's The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 MB PDF) or Doug Williams' How to Sting the Polygraph. Ominously, the leaked document avers that an examinee's stated lack of belief in polygraphy is a marker of deception. AntiPolygraph.org has also published an older U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations polygraph countermeasure handbook (3.2 MB PDF) that similarly offers no methodology for detecting sophisticated countermeasures (such as any actual spy, saboteur, or terrorist might be expected to use).

2 of 125 comments (clear)

  1. Let's face it ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Informative

    Polygraph operators can't detect that the magic devices they claim work are nothing but voodoo.

    The stunning lack of science and empirical evidence for a lie detector "fails to offer any coherent strategy" for this being real in any meaningful sense of the word.

    There's a reason it's not admissible in court.

    Ominously, the leaked document avers that an examinee's stated lack of belief in polygraphy is a marker of deception.

    And what they're trying to do is suggesting their useless tool is an utterly useless tool is evidence that you are being deceptive. So, it's saying "I think your lie detector is crap" is being equated with being dishonest.

    Tell you what, prove the fucking thing works first. What's that? You can't?

    Then piss off and stop blaming your own incompetence and reliance on bogus technology on the rest of us.

    Basically this is a tool, which doesn't work as advertised, which is used to bully people into giving the answer you have decided they should be giving. It in no way has anything at all to do with detecting the truth, and never has.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. Re:Old news by George+Maschke · · Score: 5, Informative

    MythBusters did a segment on this and they where not able to demonstrate a way to beat the test that was reliable. In fact, I don't think any of their "test subjects" where able to do so. Can some people do it? I think so. But I seriously doubt *you* could beat it unless you are a pathological liar who just doesn't care anything about truth, ethics or morals.

    The MythBusters "Beat the Lie Detector" segment was particularly bad, and the producers of the show should be ashamed of it. You'll find a detailed critique here. In peer reviewed research on countermeasures, about half of programmed guilty subjects were able to fool the polygraph after a maximum of 30 minutes of instruction, and experienced polygraph examiners were unable to detect the countermeasures. See the studies by Charles R. Honts and others cited in the bibliography of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

    --

    George W. Maschke
    AntiPolygraph.org