# Are polygraphs accurate?



## broder62 (Aug 17, 2012)

I called a polygrapher who charges 480. dollars. He said he has 30 years experience and 19,000 cases (I'd like to have that polygraphed) but he said that he didn't need ANY questions from me (to ask her). He said he'll just focus on 1 issue (cheating with one person) for the most reliable. He said it did not matter if it's with regard to a specific situation because if she's cheating, she's cheating. I don't know polygraph but I was hoping to ask specific questions about a specific date, but he was casual about that not being necessary (maybe for him, but for me it is). He said the big picture is if she ever cheated, so my specific questions weren't needed. Anyone???


----------



## ColemanBooks (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm thinking they're pretty accurate. Ask him for references from past clients in a similar situation...19,000, he should have a bunch. Not my place to tell you it's a bad idea, but it certainly is a slippery slope.


----------



## dallasapple (Jun 20, 2012)

No they are not 100% accurate.Thats why they are non adimissable as evidence in a court case.Only a tool.mostly for elimination. Many that fail a polygragh are not guilty (or otherwise being truthful) When it shows they are lying..Its my understanding if someone passes a polygragh test more than likely they are innocent(telling the truth).But failing it its not more than likely they are guilty.(lying)IOW I have seen a polygragh show deception when the person is asked their name and date of birth and address.(even though those are confirmed facts)


----------



## dallasapple (Jun 20, 2012)

Let me put it more simply..if you pass a polygragh more than likely you are being 100% truthful..if dont pass a polygragh that is not "evidence' you are lying.Thats the problem with the polygragh.Its HARD to pass if you are lying..its EASY to fail if you are telling the truth.


----------



## Joey Joe Joe Jr. Shabadoo (Mar 22, 2013)

From what I was taught in psych class years ago, if the person is lying it is fairly accurate in reading that, a high percentage. If the person is telling the truth, however, it will often misread that as a lie because of other factors that can be read as lies. So the heart rate or whatever goes up for a variety of reasons, it's seen as a lie and so is inaccurate. Therefore overall it's seen as not accurate enough for use in court and in other situations, but might be good enough for your purposes.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

A polygraph is just an instrument and a quality instrument is extremely accurate. The quality of the test depends on the training and experience of the polygrapher. If I were accused of a serious crime, I'd take one to clear my name but only if I could have an experienced examiner trained by the U.S. Department of Defense. A chimpanzee with an MRI is still only a chimp. I've known great polygraphers and I've seen some who couldn't get a confession from a priest on sodium pentathol.


----------



## Prodigal (Feb 5, 2011)

dallasapple said:


> Thats why they are non adimissable as evidence in a court case.


Wrong. In CA, AZ, NV, GA, and FL polygraphs ARE allowed in court, if all parties agree to the admissibility. However, each state differentiates the accuracy of such a test.

In CA, an attorney can present the results of a polygraph to a jury and they can decide/argue the accuracy.

In GA, a defendant is permitted to suffer damages because of a polygraph that is deemed false. Thus, it IS admissible. However, since the veracity of such a test is often called into question, such an action is frequent. The polygraph operator can be sued for fees incurred for administering the test, and damages can be collected.

These are the facts.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

No

They are not reliably accurate.


----------



## Prodigal (Feb 5, 2011)

tacoma said:


> No
> 
> They are not reliably accurate.


Unfortunately, certain state statutory codes disagree with your opinion.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

Prodigal said:


> Unfortunately, certain state statutory codes disagree with your opinion.


This means what to me?

Polygraphs aren't admissible in federal court because they can be shown to be inconsistent.

This means they can not be reliably accurate.


----------



## geek down (May 10, 2012)

A polygraph only measures your emotions, not the facts. It monitors if you're having an elevated emotional response. But it does not state which emotional response it is..anger, fear, arousal

Example.. You ask a guy seven control questions and then send in a hot young women with revealing clothes to ask the same questions..The polygraph will measure the accelerated heart rate and give off a false positive..

THIS is clip explaining why Polygraphs are inaccurate..Its has a clip from Lie to Me, however the clip is based on real evidence, and shows more then one version of a polygraph...


----------



## geek down (May 10, 2012)

Prodigal said:


> Wrong. In CA, AZ, NV, GA, and FL polygraphs ARE allowed in court, if all parties agree to the admissibility. However, each state differentiates the accuracy of such a test.
> 
> In CA, an attorney can present the results of a polygraph to a jury and they can decide/argue the accuracy.
> 
> ...


you are correct, however if the case is on appeal and goes beyond the local/state level, then the tests cannot be used as evidence, hence why most polygraphs are used with other coroborated evidence..

It can be used to prove doubt, but beyond that..no.


----------



## SpinDaddy (Nov 12, 2012)

Prodigal said:


> Wrong. In CA, AZ, NV, GA, and FL polygraphs ARE allowed in court, *if all parties agree to the admissibility*. However, each state differentiates the accuracy of such a test.
> 
> In CA, an attorney can present the results of a polygraph to a jury and they can decide/argue the accuracy.
> 
> ...


*How about polygraph testing is not generally admissible – because as you’ve noted in (5) states it can be admissible only upon consent by all parties to the suit?*


----------



## dallasapple (Jun 20, 2012)

> A polygraph only measures your emotions, not the facts. It monitors if you're having an elevated emotional response.


Exactly that is why it can look like you are being deceitful even when they ask you questions they know already the answer to and you answer truthfully.Like "are your eye blue yes or no "and you have brown eyes so you answer no but it can still look like a lie on the graph.I think the best they can do is say "this person is most likely lying"(about what is is you are trying to find out) or this person is most likely telling the truth but that is still no gaurantee as well as many times they just have to say its inconclusive all together they cant even say "most likely" either way.

I do know the police will use it to determine to keep investigating the person or go ahead and clear them.But I think using THAT as evidence in a trial if they go ahead and charge the person is not right.The test IMHO should only be used(if they fail ) to continue on their trail to gather hard evidence or so much circumstantial its beyond a reasonable doubt.

I think the answer to the question though is are they "accurate" the answer is they can be and they can not be.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Border, the polygrapher you talked to seems to be talking about giving a general reliability exam, like one might give a prospective employee. That's not what you're looking for. You already know if you wife is generally honest or not. You have specific reason to be suspicious of her relationship with a specific person. Naturally, he would need to give her targeted "yes" or "no" questions, specific to that line of inquiry. Keep looking for a polygrapher. This one either doesn't care or he doesn't know his buttocks from a hole in the ground.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

Having worked for a federal agency, the folks that I know in that section largely will tell you that polygraphs cannot assist even one iota with finding out "the truth"; but they are remarkably accurate in the detection of "deceptive trends" in answers.

That's why the results from such are largely inadmissable in court, as most state laws still view it as an unscientific pseudo-science!

Isn't it strange though, that when those test results actually come to benefit one party in court, the adversarial side, whether it be the prosecution or the defense, always gets them, with rare exception, thrown out!


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

No, they're not accurate. The National Academy of Sciences has studied them, and found that they are definitely better than random chance, but not by enough to be considered reliable.


----------

