Should lie detectors be used to screen for National Security Job in the US?

Question

If so how much should their results be relied upon?

Do you believe polygraph tests are accurate?

Answer 1

Polygraphs simply do not work consistently, if at all. They're not recognized by most in scientific communities. Coming from FBI Advanced Interrogation and Interview training and the US Army's Interrogator course, I can tell you that humans have a better innate lie detector if they learn how to use it.
Polygraphs are used for such federal jobs to show the public their accountability and transparency in hiring, because those positions often subtly illicit inequity and favoritism in the hiring process. They can tell people that so-and-so passed polygraph tests. The test, unless it's a "full-scope lifestyle" screening, is a joke with only about 6 questions like; (after confirming your name) Did you falsify or omit anything in the application? No. Have you ever conspired against the government? No.
As you see, they're all closed ended questions requiring a simple yes or no. Also, from interrogation training and experience, almost everyone lies. Even if one passes the polygraph, it does not mean they are a saint. If it's taken into consideration at all, it should be considered inconclusive. Alas, it is not. They put a lot of stock into that thing.

Answer 2

There are mixed studies on the effectiveness of polygraph tests. Some studies attest to the accuracy while other studies show flaws The polygraph should be included in the screening process but should definitely not carry the most weight in consideration of the applicant. A background investigation is probably the most important aspect of the screening process for NS jobs.

Answer 3

Sure they should,

I think they are in their 90% percentile accurate... Generally they are not legal to use in any type of job application in the private sector but are allowed to be used to determine ones eligibility for many federal jobs where a breach of a security may cause a breach of national security.

I know that they might not be 100% accurate. But when it comes to national security, you cant take any chances with anyone.

Using Lie detectors can only further enhance the national security.

Its better a few extra people get accidently dismissed because of incorrect polygraph tests then having anyone who is a threat to national security get into a position where they could do damage.

This is why lie detectors are legal for use with certain federal jobs yet illegal for use in the private sector and illegal for use in court criminal cases where you need proof "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Answer 4

Yes. And no. I've seen my brother tell outright lies and pass the lie detector test. At my shore command, I spent a week with the polygrapher and learned a lot about the process. I even tested it out. And I learned that I couldn't pass the test. Even though we both knew I was telling the truth. But talking it over with him, there are a few cases like that. There is a reason why the lie detector is no longer admissable as evidence anymore.

Answer 5

Lie detectors do no longer detect lies. They detect physiological transformations interior the physique.. which incorporate better heart fee, respiratory, and so on.. All of those would be contemporary in the process the controversy being that they are on national television being asked no longer uncomplicated questions that would desire to hypothetically fee them the election. all of the information attained by using the lie detector might have an insurmountably extensive errors presented to it. it truly is needless to say further to the errors it is already contemporary in mentioned "lie detector". as properly, with the quantity of factors a destiny presidential candidate has they are going to little question be in a position to receiving training in countermeasures. it truly is basically understanding the adaptation between administration questions, and beside the point questions, coupled with extensive practice. in short, lie detectors are crap. they're a pseudoscience in accordance with trickery and deception employed by using a proficient interrogator.

Answer 6

I have held several national secuity jobs in the past and all of them required a polygraph test.

I don't beleive in them or trust, them, But they are relied on very heavy as to if something is true or not.

Answer 7

I believe they should. Their reliability is pretty strong. Someone without a "history" should have nothing to worry about. There are some that have lied and gotten away with though. But in National Security jobs they don't let you off the hook once you've gotten the job, they are periodically monitoring you.
I think they would be useful to deter anyone to apply for the wrong reasons. I think some questions shouldn't be asked, about your personal sexual preferences. The questions should be job related only.

Answer 8

Polygraphs are phony science for non-scientists. There is not a legitimate science or legal agency world-wide that accepts them as anything but voodoo. The only people I know who accept them are people who have a vested interest in saying they are real.

Answer 9

Yes; polygraphs have their uses.

Answer 10

Should they be used for screening --- yes.
They are somewhat accurate. However, most courts do not allow them as evidence because it can provide false readings.

The thing is that if you get a false reading and don't get a job, its not a major deal. But, if you get convicted in court because of a false reading --- oh crap !!!!!