It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Security Polygraph

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 12:35 PM
How many different types of polygraphs are there for people looking for Top Secret Clearance? I have heard of LifeStyle Poly and I know there are others. Is there a list somewhere?


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:09 AM
Having a Top Secret security clearance does not mean you must take a polygraph.

Polygraphs are given to individuals for two reasons: 1) as a pre-requisite for access to certain kinds of special classified information, or 2) in the event that an individual who has access to special classified information should become the target of a criminal or counterintelligence investigation.

Normally, polygraphs are reserved for those person who will be having access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI). Some organizations, such as the NSA and CIA, require it as a prerequisite for access. Other organizations will grant you access to SCI as long as you sign a waiver stating that you would be willing to take a polygraph in the future if you are asked to. This policy is also true in Special Access Programs (SAPs).

Basically, there are two types of polygraph. Most people who require access to SCI take a "CI" poly, which is limited to counterintelligence related questions, such as "have ever given classified information to an uncleared individual?" or "have you ever had contact with a representative of a foreign intelligence service?". This poly revolves around your ability to handle, control and protect classified information, and also measures your loyalty and if you deviate from established security protocols.

Then there is the "Full Scope" polygraph, where investigators can ask you just about anything in your entire life. Very few people get this kind of polygraph - it is reserved for the most sensitive positions. However, if you plan onworking at the CIA or NSA and want to be able to walk around the building without an escort, this will be a requirement. This type of poly is reserved for those individuals who will have access to multiple compartments and sources of SCI.

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:16 AM
I had a Top Secret clearance while in the US Air Force. I never took a polygraph test. They just had the FBI do a background investigation where they sent Hawaii 5-0 looking FBI agents around the neighborhoods in which I lived and talked to my old/current friends and neighbors about me. They still gave me the clearance.

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 10:22 AM
"they sent Hawaii 5-0 looking FBI agents around the neighborhoods in which I lived and talked to my old/current friends and neighbors about me. "

When I was in the Army, they sent the same guys to do a BI on a gentleman from South Chicago. A neighborhood where it is inadvisable to be white. They were beaten, thrown down stairs, their cars trashed. Took the guy 13 months to get his clearance, with a four year enlistment.

Regarding the polygraph:

Invented by William Moulton Marston.
Second claim to fame: Creator of Wonder Woman. Amazon with spectacular secondary sex attributes, an invisible airplane and a golden lasso that compelled people to tell the truth. In the current vernacular: He had issues.

Most-used polygraph test: the Benneton test. Testee is asked certain questions, and is expected to lie about the answers. Have you ever ran a red light, have you ever stolen company property. These are controls, baseline lies to compare other lies to. The polygraph test can't work if you give truthful answers to these questions.
Bennetons second claim to fame: He's the guy, did the test you've heard about all your life that "proved" plants react to a person who plucked a leaf off that plant 15 minutes ago. He used the galvanometer of a polygraph to do this test.

This test was duplicated by none other than L. Ron Hubbard. Using an "e-meter" on a tomato.

Do yourself a favor, read "A tremor in the blood" by David T. Lykken before you take a polygraph.


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 10:27 AM
I have always wondered about the validity of polygraph tests with regards to their being admissible in some courts.

I have heard they rely on the electrical conductivity of the skin, and the pulse rate.

When you get nervous, you sweat and your pulse quickens, and an increase in that automatic reaction in response to certain questions proves your guilt or innocence. I am not certain that this is correct, but I find it very worrying if true.

Along with certain peoples claims that they can 'beat' polygraph tests is a concern that stems from this:

If you are being questioned about a crime and you are innocent, especially if it is a very serious crime, after being asked mundane name/address questions to 'set' the machine, when the crime you are accused of is mentioned, (you knowing the importance of the answer given here - the response you give here could lead to your imprisonment), surely there is the possibility that even the mentioning of the crime you know you are accused of might lead to a nervous reaction - guilty or not.

Could that be taken as a sign of guilt?


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 05:05 PM
JAK, you have nailed it.

Polygraphs are especially effective on Mormons, devout Christians, observant Jews. Ineffective on atheists, Communists and psychopaths.

They don't measure deception, they measure fear. People who believe in an afterlife, and people in religions with a strong earthly leader, are inclined to fear the machine, the operator, the process, and the result of lying; come judgement day.

People with no belief in an afterlife, or a higher power, don't fear the machine.

The operator will always claim that the tested person lied. Nervous people will break down and confess. People who understand this ridiculous process will know that this is proof the machine is bogus.

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 02:22 AM

Despite claims of better than 90% accuracy, polygraph "testing" has not been proven through peer-reviewed scientific research to reliably work at better-than-chance levels under field conditions

The machine in question is not recognized as vaild by most courts of law and after using google i can understand why.

top topics


log in