|
|
Post by Guest78 on Oct 17, 2003 17:41:21 GMT -5
Take this for what it is worth......I thought that some rcmp relevant poly info would help the debate. Please post contradicting articles too....can't have a debate without both sides.
From:
David C Raskin PhD
Professor Emeritus of Psychology
University of Utah
In 1987, a field study conducted with the cooperation of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police reported that R.C.M.P. polygraph examiners were 100% accurate on suspects who were later confirmed to be guilty and 90% accurate on suspects later confirmed to be innocent. In 1988, we completed a 3-year study at the University of Utah funded by the National institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, using polygraph examinations conducted in criminal investigations by the U.S. Secret Service. The results showed an overall accuracy rate of approximately 95% both on suspects later confirmed to be guilty and those later confirmed to be innocent. In 1997, another field study using criminal cases from the R.C.M.P. indicated the examiners were 100% correct In detecting guilty suspects and 94% correct in identifying innocent suspects. It should be noted that research findings demonstrate that the confidence in test outcomes that indicate truthfulness is slightly higher than confidence in tests that indicate deception. Thus, a truthful polygraph test outcome is more likely to be correct than a test result that indicates deception. In other words, courts can be more confident in accepting a polygraph report that the accused person was truthful in her denials than a report indicating deception on the part of the accused.
|
|
|
|
Post by George Maschke on Oct 19, 2003 11:12:35 GMT -5
The above-cited passage is from Raskin's affidavit submitted in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Louise Woodward.The U.S. National Academy of Sciences disagrees with Dr. Raskin regarding the reliablity of polygraphy. See Chapter 1 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF) and the sources cited there.  See also the excerpt from David T. Lykken's A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector cited in the AntiPolygraph.org message board discussion thread Interesting poly thread on cops2be.com. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest78 on Oct 22, 2003 0:22:18 GMT -5
Thanks for the info George. I'm still a pro-poly guy, but I will read and look at any relevant material to make an educated opinion.
Question for you George.....on some other threads it has been mentioned that the failure rate for the poly is 50%. But no one has shown any original source data on this. Do you have any references to prove-disprove this? It was posted by someone that the an LAPD cheif said they have a 50% failure rate....is there a study that shows this (the chiefs word could be self serving..and not necessarily true). I'm looking for a general stat....not a chossen few departments with high rates. This is for pre-employment interviews....not criminal investigations.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by George Maschke on Oct 22, 2003 2:15:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Author on Oct 22, 2003 11:51:11 GMT -5
Well thats great that you can quote yourself but anyone can write an article that states any number...
Did you know that 48% of statistics that come from individuals are correct only 72% of the time.. hmmm or is it 27% or is it........
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest78 on Oct 22, 2003 13:56:15 GMT -5
Humm....still no original source data on the 50% poly failure rate. It seems to be a number based on an estimate. Well, I will still keep looking. Thanks for the feedback George...you can see my issue though. Both the poly and anit poly side are basing their argument on non-scientific data. Now this point may just support the policy of not having the poly becasue it is not fully scientific. However, if used properly (which seems to be the biggest issue, the abuse of it) it would be a slightly different form of a one-on-one interview with a recruiter doing a security interview. The subjectivity has to be carefully watched and assumptions can not be made.....any 'red flags' that are based on physiological responses or 'red flags' based on how you answered a question in a non-poly interview should be further investigated.
Anyways.....interesting stuff. I will be more interested to hear the stories from RCMP applicants when they go through it....specifically the ones that fail.
|
|
MPOV
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by MPOV on Oct 22, 2003 20:20:59 GMT -5
The problem arises Guest 78 when the police use the polygraph and take the polygraphers word about an applicant being "deceptive" as absolute and fail to further investigate the polygraphers and applicants claims. Most police forces use the poly blindly as a rudimentary screening tool and nievely take the poly results as final. They are wrongly using the poly as a cost saving measure to "weed" out applicants. You sound rather scientific and logical in your posts. Do some homework on the poly and come back and tell me if you really think that if a person shows increases in heartrate, BP or altered breathing patterns they are being deceptive. That is where the problem with pre-employment screening lies. An applicant is asked "Were you completely truthful with me regarding your past drug history?" For the truely honest applicant who might have never tried drugs before that question would surely cause a rise in BP, heartrate etc. That spike causes them to be labelled deceptive and they are forever screwed in their attempts to become a cop. Simply and scientifically put, alterations in autonomic nervous system parameters is not an indicator that the person was deceptive. Polygraphers would have you believe otherwise. I don't buy it.
|
|
|
|
Post by George Maschke on Oct 23, 2003 1:16:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ronin3333 on Oct 27, 2003 19:55:50 GMT -5
Hey Guys:
Has anyone heard of a recruit failing a poly. with one department and then being hired later with another (EG RCMP). I am wondering because as you may remember I'm in that boat (failed a poly. and am now waiting for the RCMP to call for my interview). I know I have to fight an even greater battle to get in because of what happened, but I would like to know if I have any chance at making it, cause as everyone knows this recruiting thing costs alot of $$$. Thanks.
|
|
