Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 201 posts

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#121

Post by [deleted] »

hestipod wrote: post #83
dripton wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I failed a polygraph. I was truthful and still failed. It cost me a job. Luckily I found a better job. So, thanks polygraph.

I have known multiple people who went through investigations including polygraphs for clearances. They were all told to be 100% honest and that it wasn't violations (within reason) that would hurt them...its not displaying "integrity". Those people were screened out for admitting to minor things like marijuana use etc. One's rejection read like some self righteous admonishment and said something like "You do not disp…

[deleted]

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#123

Post by autoexec »

khawkins wrote: post #34

There's a lot of hyperbolic claims being made in the article and these comments which seem unsupported by science. The answer to the question, "can polygraphs be utilized to draw out truth?", is a resounding yes: >Notwithstanding the limitations of the quality of the empirical research and the limited ability to generalize to real-world settings, we conclude that in populations of examinees such as those represented…

> The answer to the question, "can polygraphs be utilized to draw out truth?", is a resounding yes

So can tarot cards, and magic 8 balls. polygraphs are bullshit pseudoscience and 100% interchangeable with any other fake bullshit when combined with a experienced examiner and an ignorant/gullible interviewee

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#124

Post by [deleted] »

oufoufouf wrote: post #79

The dumbest things about these polygraphs is that you're pretty much forced to lie if you want to pass. Some of the questions were vague and if you are a normal human being without a halo glowing on your head you would fail. Questions like "Do you love your parents?", "Have you ever spread gossip?", "Have you ever done anything immoral" (My interviewer specified watching pornography as something immoral). Thankfully…

[deleted]

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#125

Post by rolltiide »

jandrese wrote: post #48
rolltiide wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just need to show consistency Imagining that I’m running gets my heart rate up, I can keep my breathing consistent, and the finest sensor detects perspiration changes on your finger which is the toughest but also a mental game. Finally you need to consider the psychology of the tester or institution testing you. There are irrelevant questions that may not be yes or no questions, but its often more important for y…

Some questions will cause some people to panic regardless. "Have you ever had sexual thoughts about underage people? Yes or No."

Better to say No and fail the test than say Yes and show consistent polygraphs but still fail the clearance and position.

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#126

Post by hestipod »

Spearchucker wrote: post #71

I've done a few and never failed one. Was told to clench my butt cheeks really hard to get a pass. Another tip was to put a drawing pin into your shoe and push down onto it with your foot as hard s you were able to tolerate. And if you search online there are a few other techniques you can use to ace the tests. Most interesting for me was being told I'd failed a test I was later told I'd passed. It's sheer madness.

They often ask you explicitly if you know or have researched methods to defeat the polygraph. It's a lose/lose situation because most people have heard of such things or DID research out of curiosity facing taking a test, but admitting it makes you look bad. You generally don't get the chance to explain yourself, and if you do it just makes you look more guilty. The entire process is designed to give an excuse to arrive at the conclusions the entity administering the test wants to arrive at.

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#127

Post by throwawy123 »

Causality1 wrote: post #103
throwawy123 wrote: post #36

I took a polygraph twice for an NSA internship (TS/CSI Clearance). It's an interesting process. In the first phase, you go over your security forms (SF-86 and related) in detail with your polygraph examiner. They ask a lot of detailed questions, sometimes including things you aren't legally required to disclose (drug use and foreign travel outside the listed time limits). In the second phase, they hook you up to the…

I wonder if you could get prosecuted or investigated for things you admit to during the interview. I also wonder if there's any sort of legal privacy requirement that stops the examiner or someone else with records access from spreading around information related to your examination. I'd warrant most people have gotten away with doing things that should've gotten them arrested.

Yes, you can be prosecuted for things you admit during a polygraph interview.

You can also be prosecuted for lying, since the polygraph examiners are federal investigators.

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#128

Post by jandrese »

rolltiide wrote: post #125
jandrese wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some questions will cause some people to panic regardless. "Have you ever had sexual thoughts about underage people? Yes or No."

Better to say No and fail the test than say Yes and show consistent polygraphs but still fail the clearance and position.

Lying to the investigator is worse. Ultimately getting a clearance depends on a judgement call from several people. Answering truthfully to a very open ended question like that is not necessarily a dealbreaker.

More targeted followup questions may be worse. Stuff like acting on impulses, doing stuff that you could be blackmailed for, seeking out materials, etc...

People see questions on the forms and think that answering yes anywhere means no job, but what they really want to know is if someone can get leverage over you to betray their trust and if you can show a good level of judgement and maturity.

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#129

Post by Spooky23 »

dheera wrote: post #106
throwawy123 wrote: post #36

I took a polygraph twice for an NSA internship (TS/CSI Clearance). It's an interesting process. In the first phase, you go over your security forms (SF-86 and related) in detail with your polygraph examiner. They ask a lot of detailed questions, sometimes including things you aren't legally required to disclose (drug use and foreign travel outside the listed time limits). In the second phase, they hook you up to the…

> questions about foreign contacts This sounds unreasonably intrusive IMO. What if you have a couple thousand acquaintances and friends around the world?

Look at current events and how relationships are assets and liabilities.

Having thousands of friends and acquaintances around the world may well be disqualifying for certain positions, and assets for others.

Re: Why Lie Detector Tests Can’t Be Trusted

#130

Post by aksss »

xorcist wrote: post #84

How is this not a joke? I get the comments that it's an "enhanced interrogation technique", but it sounds like it requires the subjects to be at least a bit intimidated by it. If someone pointed a dowsing stick at you, you wouldn't be the slightest bit intimidated by it, no matter how mean looking it was. What kind of strange culture lets a prop straight out of a 50s sci-fi flick instill respect in people? And how th…

If you've ever been personally interrogated by someone that knows what they're doing (police detective, etc), it's a pretty intimidating experience by itself - and completely fascinating because you realize it's completely a learned skill to do that! You may call me naive, but it really preys on your desire to tell the truth. I can understand how a "devoted" criminal can easily game the interpersonal exchange, but the average law-abiding person gets confronted with a lot of strange and conflicting emotions - desire to pursue the truth, desire to please, etc. A skilled interrogator is pretty amazing.

Now add biometrics. It's not like the polygraph is separable from the interrogator. It's a question of establishing a baseline and watching for deviations that gain significance based on experience and knowledge. The polygraph enhances the ability of the interrogator in terms of their access to biometric data of the subject, and ancillary to that is the intimidation factor that the subject feels knowing the interrogator may be more aware of your biometrics than the subject themselves.

Post reply on HN