Polygraph Tests

• Prior to agreeing to or refusing to take a polygraph test, you should understand the psychology behind it.  I have seen cases previously where an accused has been told that if they take and pass a polygraph, either the charges will be dismissed or the State will not prosecute.  There are some honorable prosecutors, as well as other professionals, out there that are really are looking for the truth and there really is no downside to an innocent person working with them, but you need to determine where they really stand.  In other words, are they having you tested or are they using the test simply as a means of trying to get a confession from you?
• There are several types of tests out there; the most common being the polygraph.  Another test that is used in some states is a voice stress.  That testing is one-on-one, the same as a polygraph, but where the polygraph measures respiratory and cardiovascular, the voice stress measures only the voice.  Now, here I will become controversial.  Those that know me know that I recommend an Abel Assessment over a penile plethysmograph.  That preference is based only on the fact that I find the plethysmograph to be somewhat degrading and humiliating because the person being tested is exposed to pornography.  The Abel Assessment provides the same results, but without the use of nudity or pornography.  That being said, I also highly recommend a polygraph over a voice stress analyzer.  Before anyone jumps up to trash me, I have personally used a psychological stress evaluator, a PSE, for the past 23 years, so I am not trashing the machine, I simply choose what is accepted more in the mainstream.  I have heard attorneys tell clients, “We need to test you to see how you will do.”  I never recommend a polygraph to anyone that I believe is guilty, but when I do recommend such a test I want it to be with the most credible and reliable examiner possible.  In other words, you passed the “best,” then the rest is downhill.  That is just a simple way of putting the fact that you want an examiner with more experience and credibility than anyone the other side could possibly choose.
• You will hear arguments about, “Oh, the polygraph is not reliable,” or, “You can’t use it at trial.”  The polygraph is usually not accurate to those who got a result they do not care for.  As an example, say an accused hired an examiner, was given a test and was told he passed.  There is no way that result would be good enough for the prosecutor or police.  However, let it be known that same examiner failed the accused and the prosecutor and police would be on the tallest mountain possible yelling, “Child Molester.”  Also expect that in a civil case, such as a custody case, the other side will not accept any test that indicates you are “not” what they are trying to prove you are.  In other words, say a father who has been accused of molesting his child takes a test, passes it and provides the results to the Guardian ad Litem.  That father could provide 100 test results and the reaction would be the same - “You faked it,”  “You paid for it,” “You paid for the results you got.”  Once they label you, nothing will change their thinking because it is their “duty” and “responsibility” to rid society of child molesters, period.
• The single most important issue with any polygraph examination is, how can you fail a test when you are innocent?  The answer is simple.  These tests have "human" factors involved.  A polygraph examiner could have a pre-conceived belief that you are guilty and, as a result, the testing can be structured to show guilt, even when there is none.  Believe it or not, people have “failed” simply because the examiner did not like the way they looked, dressed, wore their hair or acted.  Again, the human side.  One of the major problems with these tests is that sometimes "emotion" gets involved and the examiner sees in their charts what they want to see and not what is actually there.  If these examinations were conducted by "nuts-and-bolts,  no emotion" machines and there were no human element involved, I suspect that many examination results would be drastically different.  The human factor often plays a major role and can often be a "problem."
• As with every profession, you have good and bad polygraph examiners.  Do not misunderstand, I am not against polygraph examinations when they are done correctly and by a professional and honorable examiner.  As a matter of fact, as I stated previously, I have personally conducted truth verification testing for the past 23 years and, often, they allow me to resolve issues in cases I never could have resolved had it not been for the tests.  But prior to any testing, you need to “know” the examiner you are dealing with and their history, if possible.
• As a perfect example, what happens if a polygraph examiner fears that if they pass someone and then the “evidence,” without question, supports their guilt?  Isn't that a direct reflection on the examiner?  Think it cannot happen?  An examiner tested a young boy who alleged that he had been sexually molested.  He passed the boy.  In that case, psychologists, detectives and the prosecutor were absolutely convinced that the boy was telling the truth.  A short time thereafter, the boy admitted that the allegation was a lie.  When confronted, the polygraph examiner admitted that the boy had problems with the testing, but he passed him because, "Why would a child lie about something like that?"
• If an examiner is faced with testing an individual who has been accused of sexually molesting a child, the only safe finding he can have is either an inconclusive (cannot determine) or a failure.  If the result is a failure and the accused is then found innocent, the examiner simply says, “I don’t know what was wrong with him that day.”  Obviously, the examiner does not have to explain anything if the result is inconclusive but, again, any examiner who passes someone who has been accused of sexually molesting a child loses their credibility if it is determined that the individual they passed was, in fact, guilty.
• In one prior case, a law enforcement examiner "failed" an accused. The actual charts he produced from the tests were then examined by our expert, who found no deception whatsoever, and the examiner then admitted that "he felt sorry for the child" and thought the accused "looked like a child molester."
• One of the most often asked questions is, "Can I beat the polygraph?" Absolutely, but the fact is, you are not beating the "machine," you are beating the “examiner.”  It is highly unlikely that will happen with an experienced examiner though, because they will quickly realize that you are attempting to manipulate the results and why would you have a desire to do that if you were innocent?  I am certainly not letting any cat out-of-a-bag, because this was clearly shown in the movie, “Ocean’s 13.”  The person being tested had a thumb tack in their shoe.  When every question was asked, they rocked forward, causing pain and that interference caused every response to look the same.  As I said, that would not work with an experienced examiner.  They would realize the person being tested was “playing” some game and why would an innocent person even think about doing something like that?
• When submitting to a polygraph, there should be a thorough pretest interview in which all possible issues that may fail an innocent person are addressed.  It is vital to discuss any problems or issues that may affect the results with the examiner during this interview.  Remember, something that means one thing to one person could mean something entirely different to someone else.  I tested a man that had been accused of rape.  The evidence against him was overwhelming, yet when I asked him if he "raped" the woman, he said, “no”, and was not being deceptive.  When we discussed the matter, I asked him what the word "rape" meant to him.  He said "rape" was when you "beat up" a woman.  That was "his" definition of rape and no, he did not "beat up" the woman.  He took her sexually, so as to "his" definition, he was being truthful when he responded that he had not "raped" her.
• During testing, there are normally three types of questions; control, relevant and irrelevant.  Relevant questions can be "did you molest this child?"  Irrelevant questions, such as "Is today Friday?" are used to develop a "norm" for chart patterns.  A control question addresses an outside issue, not pertaining to the issue that the test deals with.  For example, if you asked someone, "Have they ever stolen anything in your life?" Certainly they have, but the examiner may ask them to respond that they have not.  The idea is, if there is more "reaction" to the control question than there is to the relevant issues, that is certainly indicative that the responses to relevant issues are not deceptive.  Not attempting to be amusing, but in my testing, as a control question, often I'll ask, "Do you visit a dentist regularly?"  Most of us do not.  The question is actually psychological.  Without the person being tested realizing it, I have actually "offended" them to some degree.  They begin thinking, "Why would he ask something like that?"  "Does he see something funny in my mouth?", and before long, many of them actually have their hand covering the front of their mouth out of embarrassment.  When I conduct the test, if the person is not guilty of the issues being tested for, there will normally be a very strong reaction to the "dentist" issue, because, as I said, it can be offensive.  If, however, the person I am testing is guilty, there will be no reaction whatsoever to the control question.  They could care less what you say to them.  Their only concern, "Is this machine going to catch me?" In those cases, obviously, the reaction is to the relevant issues.
• A normal polygraph exam tests for “1" issue and one issue only.  You cannot test for multiple issues in the same test.  Usually, there are 3, possibly 4 relevant questions in a test and those same questions may be asked 3 times.  The examiner must find one issue that deals with all the allegations or you must do separate testing for each.  Most people are afraid that a polygraph covers everything they have ever done.  Absolutely untrue.  The questions are designed to deal with a specific issue.  You know what the issue is and you know what the questions are before you are ever tested.
• Now, we need to discuss the structure of the questions themselves.  As an  example from a Jacksonville, Florida case; my client failed a polygraph test when he was asked if he touched a little girl’s breast and he said, “No.”  The fact is, he had. In that case, that same little girl was sitting in a chair in the kitchen with spaghetti and ravioli stains all over her blouse and he cleaned them off.  Obviously, as he did, he certainly made some contact with her breasts, but again, he told the examiner that he had never touched them.  He would have easily passed that same question has it been structured, “Have you ever touched her breasts for sexual purposes?”  Adding “for sexual purposes or intent” weeds out the innocent touches.
• The last consideration is the examiner themselves.  I have had clients agree to take a polygraph with the police at the request of a prosecutor “after” we knew they had been well trained in the proper procedures.  In some of those cases, it was quickly obvious to the accused that the examiner was simply there to get a confession and not to conduct an unbiased test. The accused told the examiner, “I agreed to take this test, and I do not mind taking it because I am not guilty of the allegations that have been made against me, but I want to make sure that the testing I get is fair and honest." "Based on that, I am asking you to have another examiner test me because it is very obvious that you have already formed an opinion that I am guilty."
• Now, it is not a “requirement,” unfortunately, but the American Polygraph Association recommends that examiners who test for sexual abuse issues take a 40 hour course of instruction and most examiners have never done so.  You can tell if an examiner is biased or unbiased well before the testing begins and the bottom line is, “Do not take a test with an examiner that has already determined that you are guilty.”
• A polygraph test can be honest, credible and assist in proving that a person is innocent, but the key will be the integrity of the examiner, the pre-test interview, and the way the questions are structured.  Do not waste your time taking a test that is simply a front for an attempt to gain a confession.  You cannot win.

Psychological and Psychosexual Testing

• The Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest is an objective method for evaluating deviant sexual interest.  It was developed by Gene G. Abel, M.D., a veteran with over 25 years experience and research in the area of sexual aggression.  This technology uses non-evasive means to achieve objective measures of sexual interest.  There are no nude pictures and no embarrassing physiologic response measures.
• There are basically two types of testing used in the treatment and the  identification of a possible sex offender.  The Abel Screen and the penile plethysmograph.  Prior to developing the Abel Screen, Dr. Abel personally used the plethysmograph, but realizing that in many cases it could be very degrading for the person being tested, he developed the Abel Assessment to accomplish the same results as the plethysmograph, but without the embarrassment, the nudity or the pornography.
• As I said above, I personally use the Abel Screen and have for the past 8 years because of the qualifications of Dr. Abel personally, and for the fact that, as previously stated, the plethysmograph testing can easily be degrading to many.  The penile plethysmograph measures penile circumference in millimeters caused by a partial or total erection. It is, therefore, a good, direct measure of physiological arousal because erection rarely occurs except to sexual stimulation. The Abel Screen, on the other hand uses an indirect measure to obtain results.  These are two totally different methods of measuring a sexual preference, such as pedophilea. Both the Abel Screen and the plethysmograph are very good tools and, in reality, each does pass all the requirements for scientific measure.  The catch is that there are a few people who molest children who are not sexually aroused by children, such as psychopaths, alcoholics and child porn persons who are in it for the money, but they can usually be detected with psychological tests.  Although not perfect, the accuracy of both of these devices are probably the best of any psychological tools.
• Doctor Abel is a Board Certified Psychiatrist and Medical Director.  He is a distinguished psychiatrist with a national and international reputation for diagnosing and treating problems of sexual misconduct and sexual aggression.  He is considered by many of his colleagues to be the leading psychophysiology researcher in studies of sexual behavior in the United States.
• Doctor Abel has directed six (6) National Institute of Mental Health Research Projects dealing with sexual deviancy problems.  He has published over 100 medical articles in scientific journals.
• Keep in mind that, although I have discussed sexual issues above, the overall evaluation is far more than that.  As I have already explained, the sexual assessment is only one part, but the part Dr. Abel is the most famous for since he invented the test.
• Understand that if anything, Dr. Abel is pro-prosecution.  His book is, “Stopping Child Molesting,” and the last thing he will do is risk his reputation of a test where he is “paid” to provide a ceratin result.  That is not going to happen.  Testing with Dr. Abel is what it is, no more and no less.
• Dr. Abel is very cautious in the manner in which he conducts an evaluation.  As a perfect example, a polygraph is a part of his evaluation and just after the polygraph is completed, he requires the person being tested to submit to a drug screen, just to assure they did not take some form of medication in an attempt to “fool” the polygraph.  I know of no other professional who does that and it simply shows how serious Dr. Abel is in conducting and honest and unbiased evaluation.
• Most psychological testing consists of “self-reporting” tests that ask questions and provides you with several possible answers.  An example would be the MMPI 2, a test that consists of about 576 questions.  As with any test of this nature, there is an art to completing them properly and many people fail simply because so many people attempt to provide answers to the questions that make them appear in a favorable light.  As a perfect example, let’s say a question is, “You are at a party, in a crowded room.” “You feel most comfortable: (1)  Being the center of attention, (2) Talking to a few people, (3) Standing in a corner, alone, or (4), So uncomfortable you leave.”  Let’s say your honest answer is (4), “So uncomfortable you leave.”  Now, remember, most psychological testing is “self-reporting.”  That means “you” have the opportunity to show what “you” are.  The problem is, most people will want to show themselves in the best possible light, so, with the above question, if their honest answer was (4), they think, “Well, I don’t want to say that because they will think something is wrong with me and, since I am providing the answers, I’ll put myself in the best possible light.”  “Since I don’t want to say (4), although it is really the way I feel, and I sure don’t want to say (1) and make them think I am someone who runs everything, the safe response is, (2), Talking to a few people.”  “That response would make them believe I am normal.”  The problem is, these tests ask basically the same questions over and over, but worded slightly differently and, “if” you are trying to “fake” the test and put yourself in the “best possible light,” you will probably get caught and the final result will be, “Invalid results, unable to offer an opinion.”  The test was invalid because they “intentionally” attempted to “put themselves in the best light” and, therefore, were faking their responses.  That is “not” something that you need an expert testifying to so, simply put, when questions are answered, answer truthfully, regardless of whether or “not” you believe your “response” will put you in a favorable light.  Normally, the first answer is usually the best.  The more time you take mulling over what you “think” your response should be, the more prone you are to getting an “invalid” result.  Respond from your heart and move on to the next question.  Do not try to out-think the test.
• During your evaluation, speak openly and honestly with the doctor and his staff about anything and everything.
• Do not attempt to put yourself in the best light when taking the written psychological tests.  Answer all questions honestly, regardless of how you believe they will make you look.
• Do not attempt to do any prior research on the Abel Assessment.  There are those that do, attempting to figure out a way to “beat” the test.  I have seen Dr. Abel add a polygraph question, asking if anyone has done prior research.  As I previously stated regarding the polygraph, they can tell if you are attempting to manipulate the testing and the question is, why would you do that if you are honestly innocent?
• If you are submitting to an overall evaluation, you will possibly spend 2 days of your life completing it.  Do it honestly, without games and without trying to outsmart the test or the evaluator.

The above is what I tell clients.  There is nothing in any of it that suggests how to “beat” any test.  It is simply advise as to how to keep things on an even playing field.  Obviously, there is a great deal of strategy that goes along with testing.  Strategy that is individual to every case and the last thing I would do would be to divulge that, however, there is nothing more rewarding than watching a client gain the upper hand in a case where the other side is attempting to destroy that client.

Hopefully, the information provided here will prevent an unethical “professional” from making statements that “I teach a father how to beat a polygraph.”

---

You have accessed one of the many pages here at the Cowling Investigations, Inc., a False Allegation Defense Website. For an explanation of how we assist our clients who have been falsely accused, see Our Expertise, We Can Help. If you have been falsely accused, see What to Do - What Not to Do When Falsely Accused.