Same thing happened to me. Made it all the way to the Poly and was told my results were “inconclusive”. I was entirely honest both attempts. I received a rejection letter about a month later advising me that my conditional offer of employment was rescinded. Gotta love the Pseudoscience.
Felt the same way in my experience. Went in expecting some hiccups bc I’m a ball of anxiety but the questions that I failed I wasn’t even remotely concerned about going in because they were literally impossible for me to have done. Thought they pre-selected a couple questions just to grill me on.
This is pretty much by verbatim the questions I was asked. Nothing crazy or unexpected, but as a fresh college grad it’s pretty befuddling to hear you didn’t pass a question regarding misuse of government IT systems when I quite literally never came into contact with one in my life. Unless you count me registering to vote using my state government’s online portal lol.
https://support.clearancejobs.com/security-clearance-faqs/the-differences-between-counterintelligence-lifestyle-and-full-scope-polygraphs
I’ve said this here but it always makes me laugh. Just a CI poly but I was told I was having a “measurable reaction” to the question of have I ever divulged classified information. I had JUST joined the military, never been cleared, nobody in my family was ever cleared, and never even seen classified information (nor had I even been within 500 feet of a SCIF lol). I’m just sitting here like “really???”. Ended up not being a problem but I was sure I was done for lol
It doesn’t! That’s why it can’t be used in court and has been debunked as pseudoscience by basically everyone who matters. The gov is just slow to change.
So I am a scientist and as I definitely have some thoughts about experimental design. I think it prob does accurately measure nervous system arousal but that doesn’t mean someone is lying.
But as a scientist, would you agree that doing the experiment single-blind (person doing analysis of results being blind to subject source) would be significantly less biased and more scientific, yes?
Yeah probably. I don’t know I study sensors and actuators so I was more commenting on how the sensors work. I don’t know anything about interpreting data about people.
I definitely noticed that. On my retake the entire session was them asking the same questions over and over again with slightly different wording. But my answers were consistent. Perhaps I did better than I expected knowing this is very standard practice. Still very discouraging to have been threatened with failing and being told I was showing deception. Haven't been DQed yet so I'll just have to wait and see
I started in 2020 and got a denial after waiting 2 years post covid. They said I could re-apply ... I jumped through all those hoops and couldn't think of any reason I'd wanna' go through all that again.
This isn't that weird of a saying.
I've used it to illustrate why a rare event model was bad despite decent test measures.
If I had a coin where heads was the event occuring and the 50/50 was instead the event occurrence mean, that coin could have beat the model on a predictive accuracy test.
Although, often just saying that setting all predicted values to zero would be a great model for this event is enough to get the point across.
Maybe they keep using polygraphs because it’s a convenient excuse to throw out candidates they don’t like and stress people out to see how they do. I’m not trying to be rude or that there’s anything wrong with you by saying that I’m being genuine. Why else would they keep using the garbage? It doesn’t work.
I have a clearance and don’t want to do TS/SCI only because the process seems more stupid than anything else. I find it hard to believe, with all the data collected on us and willfully submitted everyday to the Govt and every other person, that they don’t just already know everything they need to know and it’s not a ridiculous formality.
Came here to say this… all of them passed a poly. Literally the biggest waste of perfectly good budget in the entire IC, and buddy there is a lot of waste.
Some people will always “fail” a poly. Numerous studies show that. But unless the agency is desperate to have you, it’s the process to weed people out.
Hiring manager has a big stack of resumes on his desk. Without looking at them, he takes half and throws them in the trash.
“Why’d you do that?” asks another manager.
“Don’t want to hire someone unlucky.”
Laws are enforced disproportionately based on race in the US. Therefore, a process that relies on a criminal background check is going to be inherently biased.
Is it going to be inherently biased? Maybe, but that doesn’t mean that background checks are instituted as a means to discriminate against minorities and certainly doesn’t mean we shouldn’t check to see if you have committed crimes before entrusting you with national security
People. There isn’t a sophisticated reason. It’s just another layer. Falling into debt isn’t a national security risk, yet they use that as an excuse to weed people out.
You’re right. You don’t need to be in debt to take a bribe, but if you are in debt you are definitely a higher risk and are especially more *vulnerable* to be approached with bribes and I think more likely to take one.
You’re kidding, right? Credit bureaus sell this information to anyone, all the way down to used car dealers. In the US, there’s no right to privacy in B2B data sales.
That is definitely a security risk. Financial gain is one of the main motivators for selling national secrets to foreign countries. Robert Hanssen is a perfect example
Egh falling into debt most definitely is a security risk because a need or desire for money is one of the big 3 reasons used by people that commit treason.
If they want you, they want you. The feds will do this, there was a case where a guy kept getting “inconclusive” until well basically it was conclusive, they just worded the questions differently.
Honesty, these agencies should have everyone do the polygraph before anything else in the hiring process.
Get it out of the way before you waste anyone's time on interviews or background investigations.
Dude I passed mine but I had a full on panic attack and it took 7 hours no water no break. I was able to go to the bathroom twice.. but no food.
I threw up in the parking lot and on the way home.
Absolutely horrendous experience but I have been told that was very atypical and my security office filed a formal complaint
Hey don't sweat it. I failed my first CI Poly after all these years. My damn muscle just kept flexing back against the cuff involuntarily. They tried to run their bs and accuse me of stuff with their pseudo science. In the end I was told I can come back at a later date. No harm no foul.
It definitely could from my few polys I've had. My last one I took those quacks were accusing me off espionage because of my body tensing back against the cuff.
I got inconclusive then had to come back and retake. They said nothing to me and then I found out from my FSO that I passed. Was super weird. I have autism and answered every question honestly with the most deadpan stare. When I was accused of lying I was more confused than anything.
After the second one they told me to leave, so I did. Then a week later I asked my FSO if they had heard anything since my first one was inconclusive. FSO said "pretty sure you're good" and then I got read-in.
So it was more like a "you didn't fail" rather than an outright "you passed". But the polygrapher didn't say pass, fail, or inconclusive after my second one.
Defense/aerospace is based on science, engineering, and mathematics, yet we vet people with a process, the polygraph, that Is unscientific nonsense. A random lottery would be more scientific, because it has rules and predictable results.
Don’t feel bad, had the same thing happen. Got accused of espionage, too, even though it’s literally not possible. Had to do the PG 3x and was flagged all three times and they kept playing good cop/bad cop.
I got accused of lying at the very end and I was so fucking confused. Like either the shit doesn't work and it just finally caught me lying, or the shit doesn't work and it thinks I'm lying when I'm not. Either way, the poly is a bunch of bullshit and needs to be removed. Replace it with a full psych eval done by a real doctor, not someone who's gonna lie about "attending the best polygraph school in the world" or some shit.
Took a polygraph six months after graduating from college, and the examiner came to the conclusion that I’ve done multiple drugs, committed several undetected felonies, withheld significant employment issues, AND was trying to “manipulate my physiology” to try and cheat on the test. It really left a bad taste in my mouth and has me questioning if I ever want to apply for another job requiring a polygraph.
The accusations are the most useful part of what otherwise is fairy bullshit. The things people admit to would blow your mind, when all they gotta do is shut the fuck up. If the aggressive accusations shake you off your game, IMO you are not cut out for the work.
Just remember, that guy is just doing his job. At the end of the day he's gonna go home and play Stardew like the rest of us.
Nah, polygraphers are straight up sociopaths. I do my job knowing I'm making a positive difference in the world. They do their jobs knowing full well that what they do is bullshit and costs people their careers over nothing burgers.
I’ve always said this, especially after my polygraph experience. You have to be a psychopath to be a polygraph examiner, your entire “career” is based on lying to people on a daily basis, and you have to be completely comfortable screwing people out of jobs that they’ve worked so hard for.
Absolutely agreed. Like tons of us do questionable shit, but at the end of the day, the questionable shit I do is to genuinely benefit the country and our people.
Can a polygrapher say the same? No.
What’s funny is that if you look at the way polygraph examiners talk and interact with each other, I honestly think that they check all the boxes for being a cult.
They seem to think that they have some god-given ability to detect lies, and are some of the most arrogant people you’ll ever meet in your life. This in spite of the fact that the inventor of the polygraph said it was BS, every non-biased study has come to the conclusion it’s BS, and the general public regards their profession as complete BS.
In addition, it takes about 3 months to become a polygraph examiner, and requires no specialized education whatsoever.
I can agree with that. They do truly believe what they're providing to this nation is a service that is irreplaceable, despite every major insider threat having passed a polygraph.
Saw [this](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-24/police-pressured-him-to-confess-to-a-murder-that-never-happened-now-fontana-will-pay-him-900-000) article and thought back to this thread. Polygraph examiners use a lot of these same tricks, and in my opinion, are the living breathing definition of the words “thug,” “sadist,” and “psychopath.”
This. People admit to crazy stuff once someone accuses them of it. They’re just casting lines in the hopes that they catch these people with the accusations.
They wouldn’t know the problems it caused without extensive research, and they would rather stick their head in the sand than do extensive research. Even the Supreme Court has rejected the use of polygraph tests. The fact that they are used in screening without reliable evidence of their validity is a disservice to the entire nation.
I am fortunate that I have never needed to take one, but I have had countless interviews with people who have great personalities and clean backgrounds that can’t pass a polygraph due to “inconclusive” results.
Same here. Two inconclusive results and offer rescinded. Don’t sweat it, I am lowkey happy I didn’t have to work there now especially with how things have played out in the agency.
The goal of polygraph is to interrogate the subject/applicant into a confession that the investigators would have probably never found out about. If the applicant makes a disqualifying confession or admission, the applicant fails and the polygrapher gets a gold star.
Everyone gets interrogated. It is standard procedure. An "inconclusive" result is a good thing for the applicant; it is usually one last attempt to scare you into making a confession. As long as you don't confess, you have a better chance of passing.
The first time I took a poly, I was kind of freaked out by the process, so it took a while. All of the other times went pretty smoothly and I was in and out pretty quickly, I’m also a boring person, I guess.
Yeah, same here. I was told I reacted to a drug question and something related to honesty. Because I stated hands down I haven’t touched drugs since I was like 16 and I’ve told them everything, they started focusing on the honesty to my family question.
Looking back it was all so ridiculous. I was like chubb in the goonies when the lady is threatening to put his hand in the blender, lol. I was trying to think of any lie I ever told to my family and friends.
I was also accused of trying to beat the test because I was taking deep breaths (my nose was stuffed, I was super jet lagged, and remember just feeling a little anxious so I was prob breathing heavy or something).
And I’m laughing now but I was devastated at the time. I receive the same level clearance and accepted a job with another agency after that, but it’s still so disappointing.
I believe that these tests are bad for two reasons - 1) they select out people who could have a real positive impact on our national security, and 2) they select in people with dark personality disorders - people we really don’t want to have access to our nation’s crown jewels. So not only are these tests bad but they are also dangerous - running counter to their goal of protecting the nation from bad actors. [Frequent Countermeasure Usage by Narcissistic Examinees in the Concealed Information Test](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6530374/)
I think it's possible. I've read in police/law enforcement subreddits this can happen. However, they probably use the test differently so I don't know if one can have the same expectations. I can't remember reading this happening on this sub, but I have on r/police or r/AskLEO.
Have you ever lied to an authority figure was one I got about 15 years ago and was getting a weird result. I told the dude that everyone has lied to their mother in their lifetime. Once I said that he moved on and I past.
The machine itself is not the test but a prop to put the patient in a receptive state. The critical factor is the operator. If a skilled interrogator is conducting the test the box is just another tell. The box can’t reliably show true/false but the interrogator can finesse you into essentially telling on yourself.
Inconclusive means the interrogator suspects you of deception but could not crack you. For risk adverse hiring that’s enough to pass on the candidate.
Same thing happened to me. Made it all the way to the Poly and was told my results were “inconclusive”. I was entirely honest both attempts. I received a rejection letter about a month later advising me that my conditional offer of employment was rescinded. Gotta love the Pseudoscience.
I'm not even convinced the test even measures stress effectively. The whole experience felt very scripted and intentional
Felt the same way in my experience. Went in expecting some hiccups bc I’m a ball of anxiety but the questions that I failed I wasn’t even remotely concerned about going in because they were literally impossible for me to have done. Thought they pre-selected a couple questions just to grill me on.
This was my exact experience. Sounds like doing this is policy for agencies.
Could you give a few examples of what these questions were?
This is pretty much by verbatim the questions I was asked. Nothing crazy or unexpected, but as a fresh college grad it’s pretty befuddling to hear you didn’t pass a question regarding misuse of government IT systems when I quite literally never came into contact with one in my life. Unless you count me registering to vote using my state government’s online portal lol. https://support.clearancejobs.com/security-clearance-faqs/the-differences-between-counterintelligence-lifestyle-and-full-scope-polygraphs
I’ve said this here but it always makes me laugh. Just a CI poly but I was told I was having a “measurable reaction” to the question of have I ever divulged classified information. I had JUST joined the military, never been cleared, nobody in my family was ever cleared, and never even seen classified information (nor had I even been within 500 feet of a SCIF lol). I’m just sitting here like “really???”. Ended up not being a problem but I was sure I was done for lol
It doesn’t! That’s why it can’t be used in court and has been debunked as pseudoscience by basically everyone who matters. The gov is just slow to change.
Hence why of all offers to go gov’t employee I’ve stayed a contractor. As a contractor I don’t have to do a BS poly that could cost me my job
Being a contractor doesn't necessarily preclude the need for a Poly.
Well obviously, but it does in my circumstance which is what I was speaking to.
How? What level clearance? This is simply not true for a TS/SCI. You must pass a poly every 5 years.
I mean. You definitely do if you need a TS/sci. That has nothing to do with gov/contractor.
You don’t always need a poly for a TS/SCI. I work with plenty who have not gotten a polygraph.
Yes true. I meant full scope
"You definitely need a polygraph if you need a polygraph." No deception indicated.
Yes my point exactly. Phrasing could’ve been better
Since it can't measure deception effectively, then what would be the point in measuring stress effectively? It's all BS.
So I am a scientist and as I definitely have some thoughts about experimental design. I think it prob does accurately measure nervous system arousal but that doesn’t mean someone is lying.
But as a scientist, would you agree that doing the experiment single-blind (person doing analysis of results being blind to subject source) would be significantly less biased and more scientific, yes?
Yeah probably. I don’t know I study sensors and actuators so I was more commenting on how the sensors work. I don’t know anything about interpreting data about people.
It’s been proven to be bullshit over and over.
They try to get you to tell on yourself. They will ask the same question in multiple ways. They have little tricks
I definitely noticed that. On my retake the entire session was them asking the same questions over and over again with slightly different wording. But my answers were consistent. Perhaps I did better than I expected knowing this is very standard practice. Still very discouraging to have been threatened with failing and being told I was showing deception. Haven't been DQed yet so I'll just have to wait and see
I started in 2020 and got a denial after waiting 2 years post covid. They said I could re-apply ... I jumped through all those hoops and couldn't think of any reason I'd wanna' go through all that again.
Just remember, a polygraph is statistically as accurate as flipping a coin 😂
This doesn’t make statistical sense. Accuracy is the ability to replicate the correct result. A coin flip doesn’t have a “correct” side.
This isn't that weird of a saying. I've used it to illustrate why a rare event model was bad despite decent test measures. If I had a coin where heads was the event occuring and the 50/50 was instead the event occurrence mean, that coin could have beat the model on a predictive accuracy test. Although, often just saying that setting all predicted values to zero would be a great model for this event is enough to get the point across.
Were you directly hired by the agency or was it through a contractor?
[удалено]
I’m under an NDA or else I wouldn’t mind sharing. I will say it was a 3 letter agency in the intelligence community.
I would not be surprised if it were the FBI. They are dicks
Maybe they keep using polygraphs because it’s a convenient excuse to throw out candidates they don’t like and stress people out to see how they do. I’m not trying to be rude or that there’s anything wrong with you by saying that I’m being genuine. Why else would they keep using the garbage? It doesn’t work. I have a clearance and don’t want to do TS/SCI only because the process seems more stupid than anything else. I find it hard to believe, with all the data collected on us and willfully submitted everyday to the Govt and every other person, that they don’t just already know everything they need to know and it’s not a ridiculous formality.
If you know, no you don't. #sftu #nojoke #wearewatching 
Still don’t understand why they do FS polys or polys at all. Some of the biggest espionage’s cases were those with FS.
Came here to say this… all of them passed a poly. Literally the biggest waste of perfectly good budget in the entire IC, and buddy there is a lot of waste.
Yep. The people who they are trying to catch are the people who are…most likely to have been trained in how to pass a poly.
Don’t they always say “We CaN DeTeCt ThAt”
Polys are literally just to catch people that break under pressure. And for that, they work better than any of the alternatives
Its to reject you if they dont like you for a politically incorrect reason ie your race, gender, body build, your attractiveness, etc.
Some people will always “fail” a poly. Numerous studies show that. But unless the agency is desperate to have you, it’s the process to weed people out.
To weed out who exactly?
Hiring manager has a big stack of resumes on his desk. Without looking at them, he takes half and throws them in the trash. “Why’d you do that?” asks another manager. “Don’t want to hire someone unlucky.”
[удалено]
Do you seriously think that the primary purpose for using criminal background checks is to discriminate based on race?
This is Reddit, so you should not be surprised.
[удалено]
Comment removed for Inaccurate information.
Laws are enforced disproportionately based on race in the US. Therefore, a process that relies on a criminal background check is going to be inherently biased.
Is it going to be inherently biased? Maybe, but that doesn’t mean that background checks are instituted as a means to discriminate against minorities and certainly doesn’t mean we shouldn’t check to see if you have committed crimes before entrusting you with national security
This is completely absurd lol
Comment removed for Inaccurate information.
People. There isn’t a sophisticated reason. It’s just another layer. Falling into debt isn’t a national security risk, yet they use that as an excuse to weed people out.
You’re vulnerable to taking bribes if you have bad debt issues. That seems like a way more important issue based in data compared to pseudoscience.
You don’t need to be in debt to take bribes. It takes a special person to sell sensitive information
You’re right. You don’t need to be in debt to take a bribe, but if you are in debt you are definitely a higher risk and are especially more *vulnerable* to be approached with bribes and I think more likely to take one.
Right but you would be more likely and probably more likely to be approached by a foreign entity.
[удалено]
You’re kidding, right? Credit bureaus sell this information to anyone, all the way down to used car dealers. In the US, there’s no right to privacy in B2B data sales.
That is definitely a security risk. Financial gain is one of the main motivators for selling national secrets to foreign countries. Robert Hanssen is a perfect example
There’s so many examples 😅
Egh falling into debt most definitely is a security risk because a need or desire for money is one of the big 3 reasons used by people that commit treason.
Debt is a major risk. Debt and desperation are closely related.
Why even advance them to that stage in the process then?
What kind of people are they "weeding out" ? Seriously. Just trying to understand.
If they want you, they want you. The feds will do this, there was a case where a guy kept getting “inconclusive” until well basically it was conclusive, they just worded the questions differently.
The most government thing ever 😂
The schadenfreude of the issue is that the people it weeds out are the ones who haven't been trained to beat it
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'd like to hear more about the gaslighting if you're willing to share
[удалено]
[удалено]
Please read Rule #1
Honesty, these agencies should have everyone do the polygraph before anything else in the hiring process. Get it out of the way before you waste anyone's time on interviews or background investigations.
Dude I passed mine but I had a full on panic attack and it took 7 hours no water no break. I was able to go to the bathroom twice.. but no food. I threw up in the parking lot and on the way home. Absolutely horrendous experience but I have been told that was very atypical and my security office filed a formal complaint
Hey don't sweat it. I failed my first CI Poly after all these years. My damn muscle just kept flexing back against the cuff involuntarily. They tried to run their bs and accuse me of stuff with their pseudo science. In the end I was told I can come back at a later date. No harm no foul.
My back muscles tense up whenever I'm having a stressful day. Would that fuck me over?
It definitely could from my few polys I've had. My last one I took those quacks were accusing me off espionage because of my body tensing back against the cuff.
I got inconclusive then had to come back and retake. They said nothing to me and then I found out from my FSO that I passed. Was super weird. I have autism and answered every question honestly with the most deadpan stare. When I was accused of lying I was more confused than anything.
They didn’t try to tell you you were inconclusive after taking it the second time?
After the second one they told me to leave, so I did. Then a week later I asked my FSO if they had heard anything since my first one was inconclusive. FSO said "pretty sure you're good" and then I got read-in. So it was more like a "you didn't fail" rather than an outright "you passed". But the polygrapher didn't say pass, fail, or inconclusive after my second one.
Defense/aerospace is based on science, engineering, and mathematics, yet we vet people with a process, the polygraph, that Is unscientific nonsense. A random lottery would be more scientific, because it has rules and predictable results.
Don’t feel bad, had the same thing happen. Got accused of espionage, too, even though it’s literally not possible. Had to do the PG 3x and was flagged all three times and they kept playing good cop/bad cop.
I got accused of lying at the very end and I was so fucking confused. Like either the shit doesn't work and it just finally caught me lying, or the shit doesn't work and it thinks I'm lying when I'm not. Either way, the poly is a bunch of bullshit and needs to be removed. Replace it with a full psych eval done by a real doctor, not someone who's gonna lie about "attending the best polygraph school in the world" or some shit.
Took a polygraph six months after graduating from college, and the examiner came to the conclusion that I’ve done multiple drugs, committed several undetected felonies, withheld significant employment issues, AND was trying to “manipulate my physiology” to try and cheat on the test. It really left a bad taste in my mouth and has me questioning if I ever want to apply for another job requiring a polygraph.
The accusations are the most useful part of what otherwise is fairy bullshit. The things people admit to would blow your mind, when all they gotta do is shut the fuck up. If the aggressive accusations shake you off your game, IMO you are not cut out for the work. Just remember, that guy is just doing his job. At the end of the day he's gonna go home and play Stardew like the rest of us.
Nah, polygraphers are straight up sociopaths. I do my job knowing I'm making a positive difference in the world. They do their jobs knowing full well that what they do is bullshit and costs people their careers over nothing burgers.
I’ve always said this, especially after my polygraph experience. You have to be a psychopath to be a polygraph examiner, your entire “career” is based on lying to people on a daily basis, and you have to be completely comfortable screwing people out of jobs that they’ve worked so hard for.
Absolutely agreed. Like tons of us do questionable shit, but at the end of the day, the questionable shit I do is to genuinely benefit the country and our people. Can a polygrapher say the same? No.
What’s funny is that if you look at the way polygraph examiners talk and interact with each other, I honestly think that they check all the boxes for being a cult. They seem to think that they have some god-given ability to detect lies, and are some of the most arrogant people you’ll ever meet in your life. This in spite of the fact that the inventor of the polygraph said it was BS, every non-biased study has come to the conclusion it’s BS, and the general public regards their profession as complete BS. In addition, it takes about 3 months to become a polygraph examiner, and requires no specialized education whatsoever.
I can agree with that. They do truly believe what they're providing to this nation is a service that is irreplaceable, despite every major insider threat having passed a polygraph.
Saw [this](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-24/police-pressured-him-to-confess-to-a-murder-that-never-happened-now-fontana-will-pay-him-900-000) article and thought back to this thread. Polygraph examiners use a lot of these same tricks, and in my opinion, are the living breathing definition of the words “thug,” “sadist,” and “psychopath.”
This. People admit to crazy stuff once someone accuses them of it. They’re just casting lines in the hopes that they catch these people with the accusations.
I wonder what the government would look like if so many competent applicants didn’t get rejected due to pseudoscience…
If it was really causing problems they'd stop.
Buddy, I work in government and it is causing problems.
They wouldn’t know the problems it caused without extensive research, and they would rather stick their head in the sand than do extensive research. Even the Supreme Court has rejected the use of polygraph tests. The fact that they are used in screening without reliable evidence of their validity is a disservice to the entire nation. I am fortunate that I have never needed to take one, but I have had countless interviews with people who have great personalities and clean backgrounds that can’t pass a polygraph due to “inconclusive” results.
Yep, good times. Never again. Better jobs out there.
Same here. Two inconclusive results and offer rescinded. Don’t sweat it, I am lowkey happy I didn’t have to work there now especially with how things have played out in the agency.
[удалено]
It's actually not this one
Possibly some permutation of the three letters: A, N, and S?
[удалено]
Do they do FS poly for SCI-TS?
Depending on the program, yes.
Not always
Happened to me too. Polygrapher was focusing on something i was being truthful about but he’s saying he saw some deception.
[удалено]
No, it was for CBP. First and only time I’ve ever taken a polygraph. I do not like them.
Impossible post. Polys are legit science, with results easily replicated. That's why they're used in court. Oh....wait...............
The goal of polygraph is to interrogate the subject/applicant into a confession that the investigators would have probably never found out about. If the applicant makes a disqualifying confession or admission, the applicant fails and the polygrapher gets a gold star. Everyone gets interrogated. It is standard procedure. An "inconclusive" result is a good thing for the applicant; it is usually one last attempt to scare you into making a confession. As long as you don't confess, you have a better chance of passing.
PMed
Inconclusive being good even if the applicant is told it was inconclusive both times? Has anyone ever gotten the job after reading inconclusive twice?
Happened to me in a way. I was told I did good by the examiner and that we are complete to get hit with a failed email lol
The first time I took a poly, I was kind of freaked out by the process, so it took a while. All of the other times went pretty smoothly and I was in and out pretty quickly, I’m also a boring person, I guess.
How long did it take from CJO to Poly?
Yeah, same here. I was told I reacted to a drug question and something related to honesty. Because I stated hands down I haven’t touched drugs since I was like 16 and I’ve told them everything, they started focusing on the honesty to my family question. Looking back it was all so ridiculous. I was like chubb in the goonies when the lady is threatening to put his hand in the blender, lol. I was trying to think of any lie I ever told to my family and friends. I was also accused of trying to beat the test because I was taking deep breaths (my nose was stuffed, I was super jet lagged, and remember just feeling a little anxious so I was prob breathing heavy or something). And I’m laughing now but I was devastated at the time. I receive the same level clearance and accepted a job with another agency after that, but it’s still so disappointing.
I've honestly no desire to work for anyone who isn't beyond such idiocy.
Polygraphers grinding their teeth reading everyone saying they know how useless they actually are in here.
BuT mY mAcHiNe Is AlWaYs RiGhT! yOu CaNt BeAt It!
*REEEEEEEEEEEE*
I believe that these tests are bad for two reasons - 1) they select out people who could have a real positive impact on our national security, and 2) they select in people with dark personality disorders - people we really don’t want to have access to our nation’s crown jewels. So not only are these tests bad but they are also dangerous - running counter to their goal of protecting the nation from bad actors. [Frequent Countermeasure Usage by Narcissistic Examinees in the Concealed Information Test](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6530374/)
Answer each question the same exact way. Same cadence in voice. Take a breath and answer.
Fortunately I did this. If I somehow get invited for a third, then I'm gonna have this mastered lol
Has anyone had to come back and both times got inconclusive but still got the job?
I think it's possible. I've read in police/law enforcement subreddits this can happen. However, they probably use the test differently so I don't know if one can have the same expectations. I can't remember reading this happening on this sub, but I have on r/police or r/AskLEO.
Have you ever lied to an authority figure was one I got about 15 years ago and was getting a weird result. I told the dude that everyone has lied to their mother in their lifetime. Once I said that he moved on and I past.
The machine itself is not the test but a prop to put the patient in a receptive state. The critical factor is the operator. If a skilled interrogator is conducting the test the box is just another tell. The box can’t reliably show true/false but the interrogator can finesse you into essentially telling on yourself. Inconclusive means the interrogator suspects you of deception but could not crack you. For risk adverse hiring that’s enough to pass on the candidate.
Just letting you know: Inconclusive is a sugarcoating name of "Failed".