Does the lie detector always tell the truth? Lie detector

If you think that a polygraph test does not threaten you, then you can be very seriously mistaken, especially since this device is often used even when applying for a job.

It goes without saying that not everyone wants to tell the truth, which is why there are a lot of ways to outwit the lie detector. By the way, it is not so difficult, the main thing is to understand the mechanism.

We will now talk about how to keep your secrets to yourself and successfully, seamlessly pass a polygraph.

Often lies are told in secret in order to find out the truth.
Pierre Buast

Turn on artistry

Of course, the best option is a quality acting game according to the Stanislavsky system. The whole trick is to be so imbued with your lie that you yourself believe in it.

Agree, if you believe in fiction, then for you this is no longer a lie, which means that your body will perceive this information as true, therefore it will give the appropriate result to the specialist conducting the test.

It goes without saying that for this it is simply necessary to think through all aspects of your deception in advance, so much so that you can discuss this topic for a very long time without inventing a plot along the way, but as if remembering it:

• Add little things to your story, like what the weather was like, what you smelled - just don't overdo it and don't get distracted from the main topic.
  If you have already undertaken to deceive a polygraph with the help of acting, then emotions will definitely not be superfluous, they only need to be changed, turning fear into anger, and repentance into humility.

Physiology

• contraction of the sphincter muscles
• biting the tip of the tongue.

Just remember that you need to do this without any additional facial expressions that can give you away.

More, control your breathing- under normal conditions, we take a breath no more than once every 2-4 seconds. And it's better not to delay him- there is a risk of heart palpitations.

Secret #1

1. Place a push pin inside your shoe under your foot.
2. When you are asked a security question, such as "What's your name?", answer and step on the button.
3. Pain causes a small surge of emotion and is reflected in the detector readings as if you were telling a lie. Thus, when telling a real lie, the readings on the device will be the same or similar, and it will seem that you are telling the truth. Those. the sensors will respond to lies in the same way as to a question about your name.
4. The polygraph examiner does not notice anything strange in almost identical polygraph readings and gives you a positive resolution.

Is it worth it?

One thing is true in any case: if you have made a firm decision to successfully pass the test and deceive the polygraph, then try to do it efficiently, otherwise serious problems and long clarifications about what exactly you wanted to hide cannot be avoided.

» How to cheat a lie detector (polygraph)

How to fool a polygraph? Countermeasures

Today, the myth about the super-efficiency of the polygraph is widespread in society. Unfortunate oversights are attributed to the insufficient qualifications of individual specialists, but the very reliability of the technology is hardly questioned. On the pages of various publications, one can often read "authoritative data" that the reliability of polygraph tests is 99 percent, or even all 100.

Cartoon from antipoligraph.org

This myth is strongly supported by both the polygraph examiners themselves and other interested structures. Firstly, for advertising purposes, in order to create commercial demand for such services. They are not cheap and bring a good income to specialized firms. Secondly, to put psychological pressure on the test-takers, depriving them of the will to resist and increasing the effectiveness of the tests. This approach, figuratively speaking, helps to ensure victory even before the battle begins.

Thirdly, there are deeper, socio-psychological reasons. Even in ancient times, they knew that the fear and simultaneous admiration of the crowd before something mysterious and powerful is the basis of power over it. The myth about the power of the polygraph, which is cultivated today, is no exception. "Chiefs", the ruling class use it to keep in fear and obedience those who are below them on the social ladder (people, plebs, subordinates, office plankton - call it what you want). Not without reason, in many fantastic dystopias, the polygraph and polygraph examiners are an integral part of the totalitarian system, an instrument of social control and oppression of the masses by the ruling elite.

With the same manipulative purpose, the myth is being spread today that only criminals are afraid of polygraph tests, because "an honest person has nothing to hide." A refusal to test or an attempt to oppose the conduct of a polygraph procedure is already a priori proof of your unreliability. This is done in advance to create feelings of fear and guilt in you for your unwillingness to pass the test and turn your soul inside out. Although disgust for the polygraph and refusal to test does not at all indicate that you are a complete villain. Under the laws of most countries, a test on such devices is not direct evidence of guilt or innocence.

Each person has his own personal inner world, which he seeks to protect from foreign interference. And to allow in which he is not obliged to anyone. Each of us has personal motives, interests and secret desires that we do not want and are not obliged to communicate to outsiders. In the Anglo-American legal system, there is even a special category of privacy, meaning the right to secrecy and privacy, the intimate sphere of a person. Polygraph testing is a direct invasion of your intimate territory.

In some cases, such an intrusion is justified. For example, when investigating serious criminal offenses (murders, terrorist acts, etc.) that pose a threat to society and people's lives. If you have been slandered, falsely accused of committing a crime, then a polygraph test is sometimes the only chance to prove your innocence. But often, coercion to test can be called nothing more than an insult to a person, a gross interference in private life and psychological violence against a person. Such can be a general check of personnel for loyalty at the whim of a big boss who wants to know the whole ins and outs about the life of his subordinates; suspicions of adultery on the part of a jealous spouse; and other things that are now widely represented in the price lists of commercial printing firms.

Polygraph examiners at the request of the customer (or even simply because of their own unhealthy curiosity) often go to a direct violation of ethical norms and professional standards. They literally begin to turn the test-taker inside out, trying to find out everything about him: from political views and religious beliefs to sexual preferences. This is especially common when hiring and checking already working personnel (the so-called screening). These kinds of intimate questions can make up a large part of the questionnaire compiled for you by the polygraph operator. If it is impossible to refuse such testing (for example, because of the threat of immediate dismissal), but you also do not want to give out the secrets and nuances of your private life, then an attempt to deceive the polygraph may be your only way out.

Each polygraph examiner, before starting testing, without fail tries to inspire the “victim” with the idea of ​​the futility of counteracting the polygraph. During the briefing, they will explain to you in a friendly and relaxed manner that, they say, the lie detector “sees everything” and it will not be possible to deceive it. And you just have to relax and enjoy the process of turning you inside out, when other people's insensitive fingers unceremoniously climb into the hidden depths of your soul. Let's not blame the specialists for this professional trick - this is part of their work, prescribed in the instructions. Let's talk about whether it is actually possible to deceive a lie detector?

Who can cheat a polygraph

Science and technology do not stand still, but the real efficiency of the polygraph today is still far from the declared indicators. This is evidenced by a large number of errors and high-profile scandals, when the results of a test on the detector literally broke the fate of innocent people. Even in the United States, where the tradition of active use of the polygraph dates back many decades, vast experience has been accumulated, and the level of training and qualifications of the personnel is not like our home-grown specialists, the reliability of estimates today is estimated by unbiased experts at best at 70%. And this is the most optimistic data. Laboratory and field studies examining the accuracy of polygraph tests have shown that they are subject to a significant number of errors. Experiments were also carried out that proved the possibility of learning to successfully counter the polygraph. They testify that bypassing the lie detector, although difficult, is quite real.

The lie detector is quite easy to deceive social psychopaths. They do not have an adequate perception of social norms, ethics and public morality (what is colloquially called conscience). Accordingly, questions about the violation of these norms do not cause a physiological alarm reaction. There are cases when sex maniacs and serial killers successfully passed the test, because they were sure that there was no evidence against them and did not feel anxious about what they had done.

For a similar reason, there are restrictions on polygraph testing of minors and very elderly people in "senile insanity" - the former are still, and the latter are no longer able to understand the meaning and social significance of the questions.

Pathological liars also easily cope with this task, because if a person sincerely believes in his lie, then for a polygraph it already looks like the truth. It is no coincidence that the instructions of polygraph examiners indicate that testing of mental patients during an exacerbation of manic psychosis or schizophrenia is impossible, since in this case the person being tested himself cannot distinguish between illusion and reality.

Another group is highly professional actors who are fluent in their craft (the Stanislavsky system, etc.), able to identify themselves with a fictional character and merge into one with the image of their hero, up to physiological manifestations: “laughter and tears to order, whatever you want ". It is also necessary to mention the employees of special services who received special training. Systematic "training" with the help of the detector allows them to bring the necessary states and reactions to the level of unconscious reflexes in order to more or less successfully deceive the polygraph.

For other people, this requires considerable effort, and sometimes just luck. Individual geniuses with such a gift from birth do not count, since there are very few of them. Unlike the "fighters of the invisible front", you most likely will not have access to the apparatus for pre-training, and the time for preparation will be very limited. But this does not deprive you of the chances of success.

The first step is to overcome the fear and "reverence" for the polygraph, which you were instilled in advance with a manipulative purpose. And also get rid of the feelings of guilt implanted in you. They block your will to resist. And what helps you is calm self-confidence and a mindset to win, not to lose. Remember that the lie detector is not omnipotent. He cannot read your thoughts and thus learn something about you. It only logs the state at the time of testing. Or rather, a change in physiological parameters when answering questions. Based on the collected data, the computer generates a probabilistic estimate, which is then analyzed by a specialist. A polygraph, like any machine, can be bypassed, hammered into his “brains” so that he cannot give an accurate answer.

What you need to know about the work of the lie detector

The basic principle of the polygraph is as follows: physiological reactions are stronger, the more important and meaningful the question is for you. As a rule, a person who is not involved in a case that interests the interrogators reacts approximately the same way to all questions: significant for the case and not significant. And for those who are involved, significant questions cause uncontrollable tension.

Usually, before a direct test on a lie detector, all the questions that will be asked are discussed with the person being tested. The subject of the test is agreed in advance to avoid a vague reaction to an unexpected question. If a person is asked head-on, without preparation, something like “Did you sleep with your boss’s wife?”, He simply may not understand what is happening. He will become nervous or hesitate to answer, even if he has never done this. Or he will be very surprised - and the polygraph shows approximately the same reaction to lies and surprise.

During the preliminary discussion, you can already decide how you will respond. Knowing the topic and the approximate range of questions, you can use this. Expel the real picture from consciousness and create a “legend” that is beneficial for you: a bright, emotionally colored image that will crowd out the real one. With developed imagination and self-hypnosis skills, this can help you outsmart the polygraph. The key here is to force yourself to believe in this alternate reality, not just imagine it in every detail. And the main difficulty is “not to think about the white rhino”, to forget for a while about how everything really happened. Otherwise, the real picture in your mind will be superimposed on the imaginary one. Two mutually exclusive images will simultaneously cause mental tension and stress. You will show a belated reaction to questions and other artifacts. They will show that you are constructing an imaginary event (or, more simply, lying) and this will be recorded by a polygraph as evidence of your lie.

Before the main test, the so-called. tuning (pre-test) interview to "calibrate" your answers. Your psychophysiological parameters are studied in a normal state. The sensors record the upper (thoracic) and lower (abdominal) breathing, heartbeat, pressure, tremor (trembling) and the electrical reaction of the skin. Further, the tests find out how the indicators “jump” when the test-taker is asked questions that are meaningful to him. Usually they are quite simple: “What is your name?”, “Do you have a family?”, “Are you going to cheat a polygraph?”

Your reaction to deliberate lies is also being studied. The polygraph examiner calls several names, including yours. You must lie, that is, say that the name spoken is not yours. Thus, it is checked how you react to a lie and how the detector fixes it. For a similar purpose, you may be asked to write down a number from several proposed ones, choose a playing card, put some figure in your pocket, etc. Then the polygraph operator "guesses" the subject, analyzing your reactions.

A funny detail: in many instructions for polygraph operators, when "guessing" is advised not to be limited to the analysis of psychophysiological reactions, but to be reliable, resort to cheating techniques - labeled cards, hidden video cameras ... Such a petty scam is considered acceptable. After all, among other things, the preparatory stage should break the will of the tested person to resist, convince him of the futility of trying to deceive the polygraph. Therefore, during the preliminary demonstration, they strive to completely eliminate the possibility of a “puncture”.

The main test can take several hours. Questions are read out, you are invited to listen carefully and honestly answer “yes” or “no”. Each question is followed by a pause (15-20 seconds) during which the psycho-physiological reaction to it is recorded. The polygraph records when your “heart skipped a beat”, where your breath held, after which question a “sigh of relief” followed, and where your hands trembled and your knees vibrated. Here are some signs of emotional tension in response to the presentation of a meaningful question. They may not be in your favor:

• the magnitude of the skin reaction increases;
• the pulse slows down, followed by a compensatory increase in heart rate;
• holding the breath and slowing down its rhythm, followed by a compensatory increase in the rhythm and depth of breathing;
• changes in inspiratory/expiratory time, inspiratory pauses and expiratory pauses;
• increased muscle tremor

In order to disorient the interviewee and break down his protective barriers, conditions and wording can change. The same question can be asked many times. Questions on the same topic can be formulated in different ways. You may be asked to answer “yes” to all questions, even if you previously answered “no” to them - to find out what will be the reactions to yes answers. Or vice versa - give only negative answers. There is also a "silent answer" - the test-taker is asked only to think about the answer to the question, but not to say it out loud.

During the survey, “filler questions” are used on neutral topics that, in theory, should not cause excitement (“Today is Monday?”, “Are you sitting on a chair?”). Experts suggest including more such questions in the test, to which a knowingly truthful answer is provided. After them, it will be more difficult for a person to lie, and the corresponding physiological manifestations will become more noticeable.

There are also trap questions regarding the details of what happened (for example, theft). They are not known to the innocent, but they will cause a strong reaction from those involved in the crime. It is not uncommon for a question to list keywords and facts. “What did you take from the safe? Mobile phone? Pistol? A pack of condoms? A bunch of keys? “How long has it been since you last used drugs? A week? Month? Year? Five years?". “Do you like to drink alone? In company? In the morning? Evenings? For days on end?" “What kind of bribe did you receive? One hundred? Two hundred? Three hundred? Five hundred thousand?". As you approach the correct answer, there is an increase in signs of anxiety, and then relaxation as you move away from it. Although outwardly it may not be noticeable to a person.

To divert the attention of the test-taker, significant questions complicate. The unknown is presented to the test-taker as known: “Did you hide the package that you stole there?”. A person, by inertia, can “be led”, answer “yes” or “no”. And any unequivocal answer to such questions already contains an indirect recognition.

There are also security questions that should excite even the innocent ("Have you ever taken something that didn't belong to you?"). Everyone has committed such acts at least once in their lives, so it is assumed that the innocent should be more excited about control questions than questions that are directly related to the essence of the case. And a negative answer to the control test question testifies to the lie of the person being checked.

Ways to cheat a polygraph

How to bring down the "calibration" of the polygraph and make it work incorrectly? The first answer that comes to mind is to give deliberately false, random, unsystematic and “idiotic” answers to all questions without exception during the preliminary interview and further during the testing process. Go out of your way to mix up the tracks, preventing the polygraph from seeing what you can be when you tell the truth. It is clear that such a demonstrative opposition to the polygraph is 100% likely to arouse suspicion of your guilt. Therefore, it is usually chosen by those who have nothing to lose, but can only have fun and enjoy. These can be ideological opponents of polygraphs or criminals caught red-handed who go into "complete unconsciousness." There is no need to prove their involvement in the crime. But figuring out the details (“Who are your accomplices and where are the stolen diamonds hidden?”) will be difficult, because it is impossible to build a basic calibration scale against which physiological responses are compared.

Such provocative demarches look impressive. More often than not, however, test takers need to ensure that the testers do not suspect anything. How to deceive a lie detector imperceptibly?

There are three main ways to counter the polygraph. You can easily find their detailed description on the Internet. Remember that all methods require prior training and careful practice. Any attempt to cheat a polygraph without preparation is likely to end in failure for you.

The first way to fool the lie detector- try to reduce the sensitivity of your own sensory analyzers. To do this, it will be enough to drink a certain amount of alcohol the day before. The next day, a person becomes weakly sensitive, his reactions are conditionally “inhibited” and he will not be able to objectively respond to the stimuli presented. The lie detector will not be able to draw unambiguous conclusions.

Specially selected medications are another remedy. These can be drugs for hypertension, which lower blood pressure and at the same time block the production of adrenaline (beta-blockers). Using them, you should know and understand your body's reaction to "chemistry" well. So, for people with low blood pressure, taking adrenoblockers is strictly contraindicated. You also need to be able to calculate the time of action of pharmacological agents. To make everything look natural, the concentration of the drug in the blood should reach its maximum 40-50 minutes after the start of the polygraph test. In this case, as the effects appear, one can refer to accumulating fatigue and poor health, if the operator suddenly suspects an attempt to deceive the polygraph.

If the test subject has taken psychotropic substances for the first time, he will be in a new mental state for him and “out of habit” may begin to behave inappropriately, which will be instantly noticed. There are also standard questions for testing (“Did you use drugs / alcohol / drugs today?”) And if you lie during testing that you didn’t drink or use it, this can be recorded by a polygraph. Although you can swallow something like an aspirin before starting the procedure and then answer “yes” with a clear conscience. In this case, your honest response "overlaps" and masks your emotional reaction to the other substance. The task of such “masking” is greatly facilitated for people with chronic diseases who are forced to constantly take medication.

However, for serious cases, the "chemo-pharmacological" method is not applicable. For example, if the results of a polygraph examination are planned to be used as evidence in court, then a blood test for the presence of various drugs is mandatory.

Chemical methods also include the treatment of the surface of the skin with various substances so that the electrical conductivity becomes constant for some time. Then the sensors attached to your fingers will not record a change in response to meaningful questions. You will have a chance to outwit the lie detector. The most elementary remedy is rubbing with ordinary medical alcohol, which constricts the sweat glands. The galvanic skin reaction is “evened out” by various medical and cosmetic products that greatly reduce sweating: talcs and ointments from sweating, deodorants for the feet, etc. Conditions for their successful application:

• the applied product should be invisible, colorless and odorless;
• its action should be long, since a polygraph test lasts several hours;
• the preparation must be stable and preserved after washing the hands (this is a common procedure before starting the test);

Non-chemical methods also give results. For example - lack of sleep for several days. Due to constant lack of sleep, a person falls into a state close to a trance, between sleep and wakefulness - his physiological reaction to all questions will be equally insignificant. Severe fatigue (after a hard sports workout), exhaustion (due to prolonged fasting) also dull physiological responses to questions, "smoothing" the lie detector indicators. Polygrams will turn out to be “smooth”, unsuitable for decoding. Moreover, it will not be possible to assert with certainty that this is a conscious opposition, or that a person simply has such a physiological constitution (in the jargon of polygraphs - “a body unsuitable for research”).

When reducing the sensitivity of sensory analyzers, it is important not to overdo it. Don't push yourself into a very deep blackout. Almost all polygraphs measure the electrical resistance of the skin (galvanic skin response). It is directly related to the functioning of the brain. The more relaxed the person, the higher the level of skin resistance. If the device fixes the limiting indicators of resistance, there will be suspicions about the reliability of the results. In addition, the polygraph examiner analyzes the magnitude of reactions to control questions that are not known to the test person. If the reaction to them does not differ from the "general background" - the polygraph operator can stop the test, or reschedule it for another time. However, sometimes even such a delay plays into the hands of the test.

Another way to cheat a polygraph- this is the suppression of all emotions so that no stimulus causes a significant response. There are two ways to manage your state that violate habitual reactions: a) general deconcentration; b) attention control (concentration on some object). The basic principle is that a person tries to answer all questions automatically, without paying serious attention to them. He should focus on the drawing of the wall in front of him, or on some other neutral object. You can concentrate on some part of the body, the rhythm of your breath, or a memory from your life experience. Ideally, you generally need to forget about the existence of a polygraph near you and exclude the perception of the content of the questions being asked. In this state, you hear sounds, words, confirming that you are being asked a question, but its content, social significance, does not reach you. This method requires the ability to self-regulate, it takes long training to master it, but its effectiveness is also quite high.

It is important that your inner detachment is not noticed by the interviewer. External signs of trance that can be detected by him:

• monotonous and unnatural voice without emotional coloring;
• the face resembles a stone statue;
• the gaze is directed to one point;
• the answer is given before the tester even has time to ask the question.

If the operator notices all this, he will try to get you out of this state. For example, in the following way, described in textbooks for polygraph examiners:

If during testing you have a suspicion, try to immediately change the question and put it in such a way that the subject is forced to say “yes” if he answered “no” before. For example, asking a question like this: “What is your name ...?” call his name. If the suspect has entered a state of detachment from the content of the questions, he will automatically answer "no". Then, in a mild form, you should express your bewilderment: “How is it, Semyon Semenovich, have you already changed your name?” or “You have never been called that, is this data incorrect in the questionnaire?”. These questions will take him out of the state he has entered and for some time will make him perceive the content of your questions. Usually, after a pause, a neutral question is given, followed by a "meaningful" one.

Third Approach states: “What is important is not the absence of a reaction as such (which is quite easily detected by control questions and can arouse suspicion), but the ability to give the right reaction.” Your reaction should look natural. Effective are feigned emotional reactions to insignificant stimuli. If you want to elicit a reaction to the right question, try simply mentally multiplying a few multi-digit numbers or thinking of something that evokes rage or sexual emotion.

So, if you don't want to be convicted of homosexuality, multiplying the numbers in your head is necessary when you are asked "do you prefer women." And if there is an inverse problem, i.e. if you have to pretend to be homosexual, which you are not, then you need to multiply when you hear the question "Do you prefer to have sex with people of the same sex", etc. Alternatively, when you are asked about women, at that moment you imagine or recall sexual scenes with men (or vice versa). Thus, the sexual reaction to the pictures from your imagination is "superimposed" on the question being asked and it seems that it was the question that caused such a reaction. With due impressionability, willpower and a well-developed skill, this method works.

The result can also be achieved if you start reading poetry. About myself, of course. Something long, like "Eugene Onegin." Worrying about the protagonist and answering questions as if in between times.

There are many different ways to create fake reactions. The most famous of them is “mechanical”, the tension of some muscle groups imperceptible to an expert. Usually they press the toes to the floor, reduce the eyes to the nose, or press the tongue to the hard palate.

Pain also elicits physiological responses that are characteristic of psychological stress. Some, in an attempt to fool the polygraph, put a button in their boot under the thumb and press it with each negative (or positive) answer. The body begins to respond to the expectation of pain, and not to lies or truth. Therefore, the polygraph readings will be the same in the case of a truthful answer and vice versa.

The difficulty lies in hiding these movements from the interrogator, since such attempts to deceive the lie detector are known today even to amateur polygraph examiners. The test subject is filmed on video cameras, which capture close-ups of any movements and changes in the expression of the “muzzle of the face”. Therefore, this should be done very carefully. Remember: any suspicious or ambiguous behavior will necessarily be interpreted NOT in your favor.

If you do not alternate methods, but keep pressing the button with each answer “no” (“did not participate ...”, “did not see ...”, “did not participate ...”, “did not steal ...”) - then the polygraph operator will see a pattern in the manifestation of the same type of reaction and suspect something is wrong. In addition, sensors can be attached to your calf muscles that will record finger movements. The proverbial “nail in the shoe” should be long and sharp enough to cause pain even with light pressure, and your movements should be subtle, with minimal involvement of other muscles in the body. Then there will be a chance that the motion sensors will not notice the counter signal against the background of the general tremor of the body (caused by heart contractions, breathing, etc.).

It is believed that the most difficult in detecting mechanical resistance to the polygraph is the language. After answering the question "yes" or "no", the tongue can imperceptibly be pressed against the teeth or "wrapped" towards the larynx, or pressed against the palate with a force that causes pain. However, this way to deceive the lie detector can be determined using special sensors installed in the chin or larynx. You should also remember about breathing - you need to “work” with your tongue without disturbing the rhythm and depth of breathing, because it will be instantly recorded by a polygraph.

A common disadvantage of all mechanical methods is that they are difficult to hide and take time to complete, which means they cause a delay in the reaction. If the reaction occurs a few seconds after the question is answered, then the polygraph examiner will notice the “turning on” of the button or tongue to create a false signal. The graph will show the delay in the physiological response to the response, its magnitude and duration. Through training, reaction time should be kept to a minimum.

As an alternative to a needle in your pants, you can recommend techniques from the NLP arsenal - learn to put a "psychological anchor" (for tension and relaxation), using it at the right time. After all, it is the internal, mental methods that are most difficult to expose. If you use them at the right time, it is quite possible to deceive the polygraph and lead the expert to erroneous conclusions. Remember: even the absence of a reliable result can sometimes benefit you.

An example for understanding the principle of working with tension / relaxation can be gleaned from fiction:

We're conducting an intensive search for this spy. Since you gentlemen were in close proximity to the scene, I intend to speak with you one by one to find out what you might know. I can also discover... Which one of you is the missing spy?

This last arrow elicited only shocked silence. Now that he had brought us all into a state of depression suitable for cross-examination, the gray man began to call the officers one at a time. I was doubly grateful for my foresight, which had the foresight to drop my head on the ground in full view of everyone.

I was called third not by chance. On what basis? A general similarity in physique with the spy Paz Ratunkov? Bandage? Some basis for suspicion must have existed. I trudged forward, barely moving my feet like the others before me. I saluted and he pointed to a chair next to the desk.

Why don't you hold this while we talk? - he said judiciously, passing me a silver lie detector egg.

The real Vaska wouldn't recognize him, so I didn't recognize him either. I just looked at him with slight interest - as if I did not know that he was transmitting vital information to the lie detector in front of him, and squeezed it in my palms. My thoughts were not so calm.

I got caught! He opened me up! He knows who I am and plays with me.

He looked deep into my bloodshot eyes, and I noticed that his mouth twisted slightly in disgust.

Did you still have that night, lieutenant? he asked me, looking at the sheet of paper and at the polygraph readings.

Yes, sir, you know... Had a few drinks with the guys. That is what I said out loud. And to myself I thought this: now they will shoot me to death, right in the heart! I imagined this vital organ throwing my living blood into the dirt.

I see you have recently been demoted... Where are your fuses, Pas Ratunkov?

"I'm tired... how I wish I was in bed," I thought.

Explosives? - I blinked my red peepers and, raising my hand to scratch my head, touched the bandage and thought that it was better not to. His eyes bored into mine, gray eyes almost the same color as his uniform, and for a moment I caught strength and anger behind his calm manner.

And your head wound, where did you get it? Our spy was hit on the side of the head.

I fell, sir, I must have been pushed from the van. The soldiers bandaged, ask them...

Already asked. They got drunk, fell, disgraced the officer corps. Get out and clean up, you disgust me! Next!

I unsteadily got to my feet, not looking into the piercing gimlets of those cold eyes, and walked as if I had forgotten about the device in my hands, and then came back and dropped it on the table, but he bent over his documents, ignoring me. I saw a faint scar under the sparse hair on the top of his bald head and left.

It takes skill, practice and training to fool a lie detector. I had all this. This can only be done under certain circumstances, and the current ones were ideal. Sudden interrogation, at night, without testing for the subject's normal response. So I had to express a beautiful peak on his recorder. I was afraid: of him, of something else, of anything. But when he asked capture questions designed to expose a spy, I relaxed because I was waiting for them, and the device showed it. The question was meaningless to anyone but the spy. If he soon saw this, the interrogation was over, he still had a lot of work to do. ( Harry Harrison, Revenge of the steel rat)

Reception with psychological relaxation has its pitfalls. Polygraph examiners are well aware that every “normal” person experiences worries, fears, fears in an uncomfortable testing situation for him. Therefore, relaxation should not fall below some general background of anxiety. In a person who is well-versed in self-regulation, relaxation in response to the presentation of a significant question leads to a sharp activation of inhibitory processes. The activity of recorded physiological manifestations is significantly reduced. As a result, the reaction can turn out to be paradoxically low - less than the answer to any neutral question. Such an unusual result will attract attention. If you relax too much, you risk arousing suspicion.

Connoisseurs of English are advised to visit the site of staunch polygraph fighters Antipolygraph.org. The credo of this site is very appealing to many. In a free translation into Russian, it sounds something like this: "Their right is to try to find out all the ins and outs about us, our right is to send them all to hell ... This is democracy." This site presents a curious work "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector". In it, opponents of the detectors offer their own methods of dealing with "unscientific ways of testifying, designed for idiots and working only in a non-legal country."

These recommendations apply to the classic lie detector, which captures pressure fluctuations, respiratory rate, blinking, heart muscle contractions, skin electrical activity, brain activity, involuntary movements of the arms and legs.

When the device is connected to the body, the first thing to do is to pay attention to even breathing. Its frequency can range from 15 to 30 breaths per minute (this is approximately 2-4 seconds). Rapid or slow breathing indicates that the person is lying. In addition, it is known that after a “dangerous” question, a “sigh of relief” follows, so you should control the rhythm of breathing until you completely “disconnect” from the wires with which you are entangled.

Breathing is directly related to the pulse, heart rate, which is also recorded by sensors. When you inhale, your pulse speeds up; when you exhale, it slows down. This is well known to Indian yogis who use a certain type of breath to meditate and slow down the heart. With a long exhalation with a quick inhalation, you can “hold” the pulse when answering questions, preventing it from becoming much more frequent. If, however, before each answer to a question, a short forced breath is taken, then the reactions to all questions will be equally increased, without sharp jumps. Of course, such an inhalation / exhalation should look natural, be as inconspicuous and silent as possible - which is achieved only through training. If you are accused of doing it on purpose, you can always answer that this is a natural and familiar way for you to breathe. Or just the result of general nervousness and fear of the polygraph.

In order to fool blood pressure sensors, enthusiasts advise squeezing the muscles of the anal sphincter and biting the tip of the tongue between polygraph questions. Instead of the proverbial "button in the shoe" to cause pain, women and men are advised to put "thorny objects" in more intimate places where inspectors usually do not look. You need to squeeze the muscles so that the legs and buttocks do not move, since in modern models of detectors, sensors are connected to the seats, indicating the slightest fidgeting in the chair and rocking the ankles.

Remember: testing continues as long as the sensors are connected and the conversation lasts. Don't let yourself be fooled. It happens that the operator puts sensors on the respondent and says that he will not turn on the polygraph for now, so that you get used to the sensors. And he starts to discuss the topics of questions with you. In fact, the detector is in working mode and captures all your indicators, as well as the moment of transition to direct testing. If, at the moment of transition, the respondent changes the nature of breathing, begins to move, strain various parts of the body, etc. - this may indicate his attempt to deceive the polygraph. The same trick can be done after the poll is completed. The operator says that testing is over, but the sensors are not disconnected. In fact, the polygraph continues to work.

Finally, we present the original method of dealing with a polygraph, sent by our reader.

After a little thought, I decided to write a few words about the polygraph... If you'll excuse me... I don't think that in connection with my problem I will have to pass such a test... But still...

The point is that you can cheat a polygraph using the methods you suggest... But for this you need to be a very prepared person. The committee has been preparing people for this, mmm...well, for a very long time. After the failure of the Stasi agents, if sclerosis does not fail me in the 60th or 61st year. I mean the methods of replacing questions or (even more so!!!) suppressing emotions. The button method is good, but... In modern testing, sensors are placed under the legs of the chair. And any movement will be instantly detected and will be interpreted not in your favor. As well as muscle contraction. Pressing the tongue to the palate, biting the tongue is quickly determined by appearance by any, even not very experienced expert, who during testing will not look at the tape at all - why, it is recorded automatically anyway, well, or on the monitor screen , but will look you in the face, revealing additional, NOT psychophysiological reactions, especially eye movement. Coming from a hangover is good. It's also good to come JUST after drinking some alcohol. Maybe NOT alcohol. You can coffee cups 7-10. You can and other drugs, such as tranquilizers. But then again, with SERIOUS testing, you will definitely get a blood and / or urine test. What all your tricks will calculate. Which again will be interpreted NOT in your favor. Not to mention that testing can simply be postponed. In addition, all this affects the heart rate. And it is ALWAYS measured during polygraph testing. And an increased number of heartbeats per minute can also be interpreted AGAINST you. And absolutely all these methods are inapplicable if you are being tested FROM THE CAMERA. But the method that I will allow myself to offer you is largely free from all these shortcomings, tested (do not ask where!) And showed good results. With this method, you also need to drink. But only water. And in large quantities. Everyone knows approximately how much he needs to drink to go to the toilet ... well, VERY wanted. How long to drink ... You can try to calculate in such a way that on preliminary, “sighting” questions you don’t really want to. And this is about the first 10-30 minutes. But, even if you didn’t calculate, anyway, you can force yourself not to think about what you want to go to the toilet, relax as much as possible ... Well, in general, everyone has their own ways of dealing with themselves in such cases. But then ... He will concentrate as much as possible on his bladder, which is swelling, swelling, which is about to burst, thinking only about the unbearable desire to go to the toilet, no more strength to endure, no more strength to think about anything but what you want pi-pi! !!

Techniques such as those listed above can be used not only during a lie detector test, but also during any interview or interrogation with prejudice: with an investigator, psychologist or personnel service specialist when applying for a job. After all, an experienced psychologist-expert will also very closely monitor your reaction to his questions to find out if you are telling the truth.

Well, now that's all! Good luck!

Polygraph studies (lie detector) are primarily associated with films about the CIA. In fact, it is used in many Russian organizations - from government to commercial. In Moscow, polygraph examiners are often approached by people who suspect their spouses of infidelity, and such a study is quite affordable even for the middle class. This was told The Village by a polygraph examiner with five years of experience, currently working in the civil service.

What does it take to become a polygraph examiner?

I graduated from the Military University with a degree in military psychology and the Academy of the FSB (operational activities), then for several years I worked in the army on a contract basis. When my position was reduced, I went to study as a polygraph examiner. In principle, in order to learn how to work with a lie detector, you do not need to have any special higher education - both engineers and former law enforcement officers do this. I was lucky that I am a psychologist, I did not have to spend a lot of time on mastering the psychological part of the curriculum.

The training, together with practice, took nine months, and for five years now I have been working in a new profession.

In all schools, training to become a polygraph examiner costs differently. I bought equipment for myself, and together with the payment for the courses, my expenses for retraining amounted to 250 thousand rubles. My polygraph is inexpensive - 120 thousand rubles. The most expensive lie detector in Russia costs 350 thousand. This is all domestic equipment. The alternative is American, but we do not work on it, because, firstly, the entire interface is in English, and secondly, the Americans have the same principles, but ours have gone further.

All polygraphs, regardless of price, look approximately the same: a device weighing about 500 grams, in a plastic or metal case, is connected on one side to a computer, on the other side, sensors that are attached to a person depart from it. The difference between inexpensive and expensive polygraphs is how they produce results. It is clear that the curves are the same everywhere, but one of the devices simply builds scales, and the other immediately gives out the stressful state of a person. In more expensive models, you can open several windows at once, conduct a comparative analysis, and in those that are simpler, you yourself have to count something. Some polygraphs already contain a database of questions and automatically transfer them to tests, while in some you have to do it manually - the person in front of you is sitting, waiting, time is running out. Not to mention that some models do not work with the latest "Windows". By the way, Americans have lie detectors that work with Macs, we don't.

The most advanced Russian polygraph is Diana, especially version 7. Even the Americans say that this is a very worthy polygraph. I worked with the latest American Lafayette polygraph - it didn’t surprise me at all, according to the information reading sensors, ours are even better. For some reason, Americans are now trying to go to wireless polygraphs - in my opinion, this will not lead to anything good. They want the sensors to be attached to a person, and the polygraph itself would not be attached to a computer. But the signal can still be lost, and how accurately will the detector show the results then?

Chats with Americans and the sect "Magnet"

According to my data, about 30 people graduate from Moscow schools of polygraph examiners every six months. We have a chat in Telegram, there are about 500 permanent members. Taking into account those who do not communicate, it turns out, I think, about 2 thousand.

In addition to Moscow, in Russia they teach polygraph examiners in Novosibirsk and Krasnodar.

Novosibirsk has a strong school, they often invite specialists from abroad, including Americans. And in Krasnodar they teach according to their own method, which was developed in the Magnit network. In our country, this is considered quackery, but they work on it, and if someone in Krasnodar deviates from their teaching, they take it with hostility. Such is the sect "Magnet".

In the international chat on WhatsApp, we have 180 active members (you can’t make a group more than 200 people there). But the sanctions on the communication of Russian and American polygraph examiners greatly influenced. Recently, I was at an international conference of polygraph examiners, the Americans came there and very reservedly told us what we basically already know: “Oh, we haven’t had our own developments for several years.” But the Czechs and Bulgarians who go to international conferences in Europe say: “Yes, they all talk, share,” but probably not with us.

Well, God bless them, because the Americans, to be honest, have recently gone to the wrong steppe. For example, if we list possible murder weapons - a screwdriver, an axe, a handle, a fork, a hand - and a person has a physiological reaction to a screwdriver, this does not mean that he is lying. Maybe he has some personal memories connected with the screwdriver. The Americans immediately say: this is a lie. Our psychobiologists work based on the works of the famous Soviet scientist Alexander Romanovich Luria, and everything is simple with him: significance is a reaction, that is, something can be significant for a person, because it is a memory, an association, a fear of a false accusation, a traumatic factor. It is very difficult to get a person out of a state of trauma, especially if he witnessed violence, especially sexual violence - they will definitely give a reaction on the polygraph as involved. The Americans immediately conclude: involved means guilty, the lie has been revealed. We do not make a final conclusion about a person, even if all his reactions add up to one. It can be very difficult to break this traumatic factor.

Then, we have completely different ideas about the judicial and legal system. When there are criminal cases, what happens to suspects in the US? Signing not to leave, detention for several days, then the person, as a rule, is released. We have a man in jail. And what happens to him there? Some article is glued to him. He lies down with this thought and wakes up, plus the traumatic factor of prison. Of course, if you put him on a polygraph, he will give a reaction on this topic. But this does not mean that he is involved in this. Doesn't necessarily mean.

The truth is actually a simpler process in the human brain, because it is associated with only one mental process - with memory. And when a person is asked about what he did, but he does not want to talk about it, he must create in his brain such a semantic construct that was not there.

Can a polygraph be fooled?

The psychology of a person's lies is such that a person lies only in one case - when the truth is dangerous. When a person is asked about himself, about the events of his past, about his character, about what he did, heard, knows or sees. When, during the capture of Nord-Ost, the militants asked “are there any military men?”, This simple question immediately turned into a stress-inducing factor, because the military was shot in the first place. External danger always forces a person to tell a lie.

The truth is actually a simpler process in the human brain, because it is associated with only one mental process - with memory. I ask you - were you born in Moscow? You look into your memory - yes, it is written in the passport, my parents told me that I was born in Moscow, everyone knows this. And when a person is asked about what he did, but he does not want to talk about it, he must create in his brain such a semantic construct that did not exist. That is, he already works with two mental processes - with memory and imagination. And it's always more difficult. This is mimically expressed: fine motor skills of the muscles of the face, redness, vegetative. But even if it is impossible to determine deceit by these signs, because there are such impenetrable foreheads that lie, looking into the eyes, then there is a polygraph for these purposes.

Why is it hard to deceive a polygraph, almost impossible? Not a single person in the world could teach his heart to beat more slowly, to make his blood thinner or denser, to regulate sweat. I always give such an example for those who do not believe in a polygraph: you tell me about yogis who can walk on coals, but a person internally prepared himself for this, and when external danger factors work instantly, not a single person can prepare. If you lead a yogi into a dark room and also blindfold him, and give a burning coal to his hand, he will pull his hand away with a 99% probability. So in the case of the polygraph, it turns out that we are working with a provocation - that is, we put a person in the conditions of an experiment, when questions act as a stimulus.

When a dog is poked with a stick, its hair stands on end, it starts to growl - it shows stress. This is where we need to force a person to show stress. They will ask a person who has never used drugs in his life: have you tried drugs? He understands that drugs are bad, there will be a reaction, but a small one. A person who has tried drugs, but did not talk about it, will have a strong stressful situation, a strong peak of tension. Therefore, I always say to test-takers: you must be clearly aware that the truth told before the polygraph and revealed on the polygraph are two different things. By and large, we don’t even need to distinguish truth from lies - we need to find out if the person is loyal to the investigation, if he told everything.

About lying polygraph examiners

According to Russian legislation, in particular, the documents of the Ministry of Justice, any expert examination carried out as part of judicial proceedings can be organized by any specialist, if the parties to the prosecution or defense prove the fact that he is an expert, using the appropriate document (certificate, advanced training courses, diploma). A polygraph examination can be declared as a special psychophysiological examination - along with ballistic, handwriting, forensic, psychological, psychiatric - if the defense or prosecution proves that this is necessary.

Often the polygraph is used in the ORD - operational-investigative activities. As an aid to the investigation, it can be perceived. But only the investigator should make a decision on its basis. I do not argue, it happens that the polygraph turns the investigation upside down. But polygraph examiners do not have the right to evaluate the investigation within the framework of the examination.

The worst thing that happens to my colleagues is that sometimes they do data spoofing. Sometimes they are nomenklatura polygraph examiners, when they are told from above in some structure “This person must be guilty,” sometimes they are commercial ones who are tempted by money. I had cases when I was offered money: in the case of adultery, theft. But I just understand that if you do this once, you, as a specialist, will bury yourself right there, and there will never be any trust in you again. I know such people, and in the circle of polygraph examiners they are known. I once had to double-check for such a polygraph examiner, who found traces in the memory of a person that he had committed a crime, and he, in general, did not follow the man’s lead, but only because that person did not have money.

In Moscow, the usual cost of a polygraph examination is from 3 thousand rubles. I was offered three times more than the official cost for replacing the results of the examination. Another time I tested for 5 thousand, and they told me: "Let's transfer 25 thousand to your card now." Naturally, I refuse such proposals.

What do customers want

The duration of the examination depends on the subject, on the specific situation, on the customer, because sometimes he needs very detailed information, and sometimes the answer “was” or “was not” is enough. The basis for the study is a conversation, because you need to set a person to work, stir up his memory a little, you need to touch those strings that can help the uninvolved avoid punishment, and, on the contrary, touch the involved with questions of verification. The conversation goes even before the sensors, sometimes it lasts half an hour, sometimes 40 minutes, sometimes two hours.

My longest test lasted from 8 am to 5 pm. It was a theft investigation, but there were breaks for the test subject, there was even a break for lunch. A man was sitting in my presence, there was a security service behind the wall, there were a lot of clues that needed to be identified. In the end, it turned out that he was involved. He surrendered himself, and then law enforcement agencies worked with him. It was an internal investigation: money was stolen in the company, for which, to put it mildly, no records are kept. Naturally, the owner of the company wanted to solve this issue with the help of a polygraph, and not the police. Then they simply found a reason why this person should be taken into custody.

At the beginning of my career, I was interested in every case that I was called to, and now I just closed the door behind them and forgot. The first time I had a routine screening test when applying for a job. Risk factors are taken (alcohol, drugs, bad habits, gambling, a tendency to theft, theft, drunkenness at work, leaking information, getting a job at the request of third parties, money fraud), presented to the test person, and we look at what he reacts. This is not an investigation, we are simply looking at a person's inclinations. For example, we might ask, “Do you belong to any religious organization?” What does this seem to have to do with the case? Actually straight. If a person is in a sect, he is suggestible. Tomorrow the sect will tell him: “Give us all your money, we don’t have enough of your sold apartment, go and find somewhere else.” And this is a certain risk for the company.

Each employer has its own risk factor. I worked with one design company, where the director said: “If drugs are revealed, it’s even good, because they are better creative when they are on drugs.” And there was a security organization, the head of which said: “If there is drugs or alcohol, I won’t let anyone close at all.” I tested a personal driver for aggressiveness behind the wheel - a very important factor when you trust him with your life.

How do polygraph examiners earn?

In all state and business structures with a large staff there are polygraph examiners, I know these people. They are loaded with work for the most do not indulge. All my friends test at least two people a day. It's very hard. Today I worked two people in a day - I don’t even have the strength to write a conclusion on them.

Officials must be tested every three years. Every day I have two officials tested, rarely one. As far as I know, employees of organizations subordinate to the state, starting with metro employees, should also be tested.

In private orders, I have the most adultery - 50%, I guess. Simply because such testing is a popular thing in Moscow. Thefts are probably 30%, the rest is household goods and screenings when applying for a job. In the civil service, 80% of me is screening (when hiring or personnel, which is done every three years), and 20% is investigation.

There are more full-time polygraph examiners in state structures, because they themselves send a person to study at state expense. Commercial structures usually hire polygraph examiners from outside. Firstly, a full-time polygraph examiner in a commercial structure in Moscow will ask for 80 thousand a month, and secondly, some are afraid that close relations will arise between the polygraph examiner and the employees whom he must check. Or, for example, if you have identified some risk factor in a person, it is not at all necessary that the employer will fire him, he will continue to work, but at the same time know that it was you who identified his problems on a polygraph.

It is best to work in companies with a large staff in different cities - for example, a chain of pharmacies. Then the polygraph examiner flies from city to city, no one knows him in the regions, but at the same time he is an employee of the central office, for example. Many of my friends work in such companies. I had such a part-time job, I went to them once a year. I knew the director, but the staff changed over the course of the year. Of course, I remembered someone from last year's testing, but this is not at all the same when you communicate every day in the office.

The infamous polygraph test, also known as the "lie detector", is often seen as a cause of anxiety and fear even among people who have not committed offenses and who should pass the test without cheating or manipulating the results. Anyway, you've come to the right place if you need advice on taking a lie detector test.

Steps

Before checking

Understand how the polygraph works. The polygraph is not able to detect lies per se, but it monitors the physiological changes that occur in the body when a person lies (blood pressure, pulse, respiration, sweating).

• Familiarize yourself with the test equipment and procedures when you arrive at your designated location. It doesn't hurt to learn the basics yourself, too, but avoid the "lie detector" horror stories that tend to be posted online and make people even more nervous.

1. Try not to overthink the test. You run the risk of distorting the test results if you spend too much time worrying and needlessly self-judging before taking the polygraph test.

   • In order to avoid unnecessary worries, do not ask those who passed the "lie detector" about the process itself, do not waste time on self-analysis and do not try to anticipate the questions you will be asked.
   • Try not to spend too much time browsing anti-printing sites, as they often mix reality with false "facts" and can cause unnecessary panic.

2. Take care of your body the day before the test. You must feel comfortable during testing to ensure accurate physiological responses. To do this, you should make sure that you are well rested and physically feel comfortable.

   • Follow your regimen as accurately as possible. Even if it includes caffeinated coffee or jogging in the morning, which tend to affect the heart rate. It is necessary to adhere to the daily routine, as your body is used to working in these physiological conditions.
   • The night before the test, try to set aside seven or eight hours of sleep.
   • Make sure you are not hungry and that your clothes are loose and comfortable.

3. Fill in all the forms given to you. Depending on the reason you are taking the polygraph test, you may be given forms to fill out, such as a personal information release form or a regular form requiring your permission. Take your time filling out the forms. Read them carefully and sign your name only when you are ready.

   Tell the expert if you have any medical conditions or drugs you are taking. If you are currently sick, the examiner may change the test date. Some medications, such as blood pressure medications, can interfere with the results of a lie detector test. So you have to inform the expert if there are any.

   • If you have a disease, you will feel uncomfortable, which will lead to a distortion of the results.
   • If you are taking prescription drugs, continue to take them as directed by your doctor until the test begins.
   • Contrary to popular belief, most antidepressants cannot change polygraph results and allow you to “not mention their use.” But, despite this, you need to inform the expert about taking them (if so), as antidepressants can lead to abnormal results.

4. Review the questions and take as much time as possible to understand them. In some cases, polygraph examiners provide questions in advance. When studying them, take your time, and also feel free to ask an expert to clarify vague or confusing questions.

   • You need to ask the expert to clarify all questions immediately prior to testing. Your answers will be limited to "yes" and "no", and therefore any discussion during testing is prohibited, so all questions must be asked before the start of the test.

5. Know which questions will be used. The following types of questions are used in tests: neutral, significant and control.

   • Neutral questions are not intended to provoke any reaction. As a rule, they are used to understand how attentive the examinee is. No matter how you react to them - these results will not be taken into account. Sample questions: “Your name is Igor?”, “Do you live in Russia?”
   • The purpose of significant questions is to identify possible offences. It is assumed that a person who has committed an illegal act will be significantly nervous, which will be displayed on the indicators of the device. Otherwise, all indicators should not deviate from the norm. Of course, the reactions to these questions will be taken into account when summing up.
   • Control questions do not indicate any illegal action, but are more general in nature. Their goal is to cause nervous excitement in the tested person. During testing, the polygraph examiner will evaluate your physiological responses to questions that, according to the expert, you definitely lied to.

   Standard polygraph test

   1. Allow yourself to be nervous. During a polygraph test, no one remains calm, even if the person in question is innocent of anything and has nothing to hide. By allowing yourself to be nervous, you will give the polygraph examiner the opportunity to determine accurate physiological statistics while you are telling the truth or lying.

      Tell the truth. Answer the truth to every question asked, unless you have something that you would like to hide or be ashamed of. As a rule, people most often lie when answering control questions. The more often you tell the truth, the more accurate the results will be, which will help determine your innocence.

      • People are often afraid of trap questions, but experts in many countries are now increasingly leaning towards more direct questions.
      • Listen carefully to the entire question and answer it as accurately as possible. Do not answer after listening to only half of the question, and also learn to understand what in fact you are asked.

   2. Take your time. Depending on who is testing you, you can ask the expert to repeat the question two to six times. Find out how often you can repeat the question before starting the test. Take your time when answering questions, as a sense of urgency can skew test results.

      • A survey usually takes five to ten minutes, but depending on how often you are asked questions, how long it takes you to make a decision, and the nature and reason for testing, it may take longer.

   Manipulation of test results

   1. Create a stressful state for yourself by answering control questions. If, when answering a security question, it becomes necessary to deceive a polygraph, most people recommend inducing mental or physical stress on their own. Your baseline will go up, so when you lie, the line on the polygraph will be smaller than the line on the test.

      Remain calm when answering meaningful questions. Remain calm when you are asked questions about a case. By staying as calm as possible, you can prevent major spikes in your physiological response.

   2. Don't use tricks that are easy to spot. If you are caught, testing may be rescheduled, or the examiner may take countermeasures against further acts of manipulation. Moreover, attempts to distort the results can lead to the fact that at the end of testing, the expert will judge your results more harshly.

      • For example, don't put the button in your shoe and don't try to push it hard, thereby pricking yourself during control and meaningful questions. Very often, experts ask you to take off your shoes to avoid such tricks.
      • Although physical pain can be easily caused by self-injection, it is easier to notice than psychological stress. An experienced polygraph examiner will easily detect any attempts to bite the tongue, tighten the muscles, or other such tactics.

» Polygraph. deceive the lie detector

Interesting facts about the polygraph (lie detector)

1. The first device for lie detection was called "hydrosphygmometer". It was used by the Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso. In the 1890s, he used a hydrosphygmometer to measure the blood pressure of suspects while they were being interrogated by the police. Lombroso claimed he could tell when criminals were lying. Showing photographs related or not related to the crime, he simultaneously recorded the pulse and blood rates of the suspects.

2. The prototype of the modern polygraph was developed in the 1920s by John Larson, a California police officer. The device he created provided simultaneous registration of blood pressure, pulse and respiration. With the help of this apparatus, a large number of checks were carried out on persons suspected of criminal offenses. Larson named his instrument "polygraph", borrowing the name from John Hawkins, who coined the term in 1804. This was the name of the machine he invented for creating exact copies of handwritten texts (see the figure below). The name "polygraph" comes from two Greek words - "poly" (many) and "grapho" (to write). This machine was used by many in the 19th century, including Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States and author of the Declaration of Independence. However, it was John Larson who took the lead in applying the word "polygraph" to a device for detecting lies.

3. In 1926, a student and employee of John Larson named Leonard Keeler (Leonard Keeler) introduced an additional channel into an existing polygraph that records changes in skin resistance. This greatly improved the accuracy of testing. The Keeler polygraph, created in 1933, was used at the Chicago Crime Investigation Lab. By 1935, he was examining about 2,000 suspected criminals. Later, Keeler introduced the fifth channel for registration - the tremor channel (muscle trembling). This was the beginning of the modern stage of "lie detection". The basic set of registration channels (breathing, blood pressure, skin resistance and tremor) proposed by Larson and Keeler is present in all modern devices.

4. A modern polygraph captures signals coming from sensors that are attached to various parts of the body. In this case, changes in indicators are associated with fluctuations in the level of excitation. It is believed that lying will cause a higher level of arousal than telling the truth. This may be the result of guilt in the subjects or, more likely in the context of polygraph testing, fear of being found out.

Currently, the polygraph is able to very accurately record changes in sweating of the palms, blood pressure and respiration, and is sensitive to even the slightest shifts. To register changes in the depth and frequency of breathing, pneumatic tubes are placed on the chest and stomach. The change in blood pressure is recorded using a special cuff that wraps around the shoulder, and the sweating index of the palms is recorded using metal electrodes attached to the fingers of the hand. In some cases, the electrical activity of the brain (evoked potentials) is also recorded.

5. Modern bark detectors can record up to 50 physiological parameters: redness of the face or its individual parts, lip twitching, pupil dilation / contraction, rapid blinking and other changes that may indicate a lie. For example, devices record changes in the expansion of capillaries. This is the simplest reflex response, the so-called "shame" or "color of embarrassment" - a reaction to a shocking question. It is not controlled by will power in the same way that breath can be controlled. Some models of polygraphs allow you to analyze human speech. It is believed that if the suspect tells a deliberate lie, his vocal cords change state, which produce a somewhat distorted sound due to an irregular change in the main vibration frequency. Other detectors respond to changes in temperature around the eyes. The principle of their action is based on the fact that when a person experiences mental discomfort - lies or is disingenuous - intraocular pressure rises, there is a rush of blood to the eyeballs, which increases the temperature of the periocular space. In recent years, new lie detection technologies have been developed that use the methods of psychosemantics (analysis of the semantic fields of the test person) and psychoprobing (analysis of subconscious reactions to the unconscious presentation of test stimuli). There is no doubt that in the near future we will see other, much more sophisticated methods.

6. Often the polygraph is called a lie detector, but this term is incorrect, because it misleads the public. The polygraph does not read thoughts and does not detect lies, but only registers physiological activity and changes in its parameters. It does not reveal a lie, but only arousal, which, with a certain degree of probability, may indicate a lie. According to physiological reactions, it is impossible to accurately determine the nature of the process that caused them (positive or negative emotion, lies, fear, pain, any associations, etc.). Currently, there is no other way to detect a lie, except in an indirect way, since a 100% reliable pattern of physiological activity characteristic of a lie simply does not exist.

7. Contrary to popular belief, polygraph testing is not a strictly scientific and standardized procedure. There are numerous doubts and criticisms regarding the scientific validity of the results obtained. It is believed that this is more of an art than a science, since a lot depends on the qualifications, experience and intuition of a polygraph examiner. Unlike scientific, strictly standardized tests, the list of questions for polygraph testing is not fixed. For successful testing, the polygraph examiner must each time select and formulate questions in such a way as to cause the desired reaction in a particular subject. And then to be able to correctly interpret the whole variety of physiological manifestations, which are very different in different people. In this case, errors caused by the notorious "human factor" are inevitable.

8. In the UK, after a high-profile spying scandal, the government announced its intention to conduct pilot studies on the effectiveness of polygraph testing. A number of well-known psychologists formed a working group under the leadership of Professor T. Gale. The task of the group was to provide a report on the status of polygraph testing. The report of the British Psychological Society working group on the use of the polygraph contained sensational results and plunged many into shock. Psychologists have questioned almost all aspects of the polygraph, primarily the accuracy of the results. Thus, testing procedures have not been standardized to the extent that can be considered satisfactory in terms of scientific psychometrics.

The researchers encountered difficulties in validating the methodology and practice of conducting testing by different polygraph specialists. This means that the decision-making process is subjective, since it depends entirely on the specialist who directly conducts the test. Moreover, it is not verifiable. It is difficult for other professionals to understand why a particular polygraph examiner came to this conclusion. A devastating conclusion was made about the reliability of the polygraph, listing the ways in which detectors can be fooled and innocent people found guilty. The commission also decided that some aspects of polygraph testing, in particular the misleading of the test subject during the test of control questions, conflict with British law and moral standards, thereby making the test results inadmissible for consideration at the meetings of the British court. The UK government has abandoned plans to introduce polygraph testing.

9. The result of a polygraph test cannot be considered 100% reliable, since the polygraph analyzes only emotions and physiological reactions about the subject of testing, regardless of the true guilt / innocence of their carrier. Any strong emotion of the subject: anger, fear, sexual arousal can be mistakenly interpreted by the polygraph as his guilt. Paul Ekman, in his book The Psychology of Emotions, gives a classic example of such a system error, which is due to the very principle of the polygraph. This is the case of the army sergeant who first discovered the naked dead body of his neighbor, another sergeant's pretty wife. During interrogations, he strongly denied his involvement in the murder, but failed three times to pass the polygraph test. The reason was his feelings for the victim. In the past, he constantly had sexual fantasies about a neighbor, and when he saw her naked body, he felt sexual attraction to her, even though she was dead. He blamed himself for experiencing that feeling. Whenever he was asked about her death and how he discovered the corpse, he felt guilty and this emotion did not allow him to take a polygraph test. When evidence was found that forced the woman's true killer to confess, the sergeant was acquitted.

Similar mistakes occur in Russia. Once, an employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs was tested on a polygraph, and the device showed a strange reaction to a question about drug use. The polygraph specialist processed this information as a drug addiction. Later it turned out that there was nothing of the kind, just the policeman expressed aggression and indignation at the question about drugs. However, he was fired anyway.

10. One evening, eighteen-year-old Peter Reilly returned home to find his mother dead. He assumed she had been murdered and called the police. After talking to Reilly, the police suspected him of killing his own mother. A polygraph test was scheduled. The police informed Peter of the failed test, thus indicating that he was guilty, even though he had no recollection of the incident. Examination of the transcripts of the interrogations showed that Reilly went through an amazing journey of psychological transformation, from a complete denial of guilt to an admission of guilt, and finally to a change in the initial testimony (“Well, it really looks like I did it”) and a complete written recognition. Two years later, an independent investigation determined that Reilly could not have committed the murder and that the confession, which even he had begun to believe, was in fact false.

Subsequently, psychologists proved that the suspects themselves may begin to doubt their innocence, because they believe in the myth of the super-effectiveness of the polygraph. Before starting testing, the polygraph operator convinces the suspect of the accuracy of the device and the impossibility of making a mistake. Moreover, after testing, the police usually inform the suspect that the results are accurate. Some suspects believe this. Sometimes innocent suspects knowingly make a false confession after being declared guilty on a polygraph test. One of the reasons is that they see no way to convince the jury or the judge of their innocence and therefore decide to confess in the hope of getting a less severe punishment.

11. The expediency of using a polygraph for the purpose of personnel selection has not yet been proven. Most scientists and researchers involved in the problem of lie detection unanimously and categorically protest against the use of a lie detector when applying for a job. The reason is a large number of errors when testing candidates on a polygraph. The punishment for exposing lies in employment testing is much less than in criminal cases. And since the stakes are lower, the horror of exposure is not as strong, and therefore it is much more difficult to catch liars. On the other hand, people who are honest and very eager to get a job are often afraid of being misjudged, and that is why their fear can be mistakenly assessed as a sign of guilt.

Another reason is that during the selection, the employer is interested in general information about the candidate. For example, whether he is honest and whether the applicant has ever stolen anything. The polygraph is not able to accurately answer this question, since it can only ask specific questions about specific events that occurred at a specific time. General questions can be asked in the sequence of security questions. However, the probability of obtaining incorrect results increases the more, the more generalized the questions themselves become. The polygraph test can provide information about the subject's behavior in the past. (for example, the test can show whether the applicant cheated while filling out the questionnaire, whether he tried drugs in his youth, etc.), but for employers it is most often more important what the applicant's behavior will be in the future , as well as his professional qualities. The absence of illegal actions in the past does not at all guarantee their absence in the future (and vice versa - a person who has committed some act before will not necessarily commit it again). The polygraph cannot answer anything here, and this limits the reliability of its use for personnel selection.

12. The most scandalous case of the use of a polygraph in business occurred in 1987, when investigating the theft at the CBS television company. The company enlisted the help of four New York polygraph testing firms to determine which employee had stolen an expensive camera. At the stage of preliminary preparation, the manager of the company informed in advance which of the employees he suspected of a crime. After a polygraph examination, it turned out that polygraph examiners pointed to these employees as having committed theft, although they were innocent.

It was pure farce: in fact, the camera did not disappear, and all employees of the company were well aware of this. They were simply instructed to deny the theft (that is, to tell the truth). As an incentive, employees were promised $50 in salary, but only if the polygraph test was successfully passed. When polygraph testers came to conduct tests (on different days), each of them was informed that a particular employee was causing the company manager's suspicions. At the same time, each inspector was called another person. Ultimately, each of the four experts "identified" the perpetrator with certainty, and in each case it was the same employee who was identified as a suspect before testing. Polygraph examiners were not specifically tuned for such a result. It's just that they were unconsciously influenced by the preliminary information they received.

13. In addition to assumptions about the possible guilt of the subjects, the result of a polygraph test may be influenced by other subjective factors, for example, sympathy or pity for the suspects. The polygraph examiner will begin to unconsciously “play along” with the subject and it is possible that in these cases the result “considered guilty” is less likely to appear. Conversely, if you cause dislike and disgust in the polygraph operator for some reason, then the likelihood that as a result of testing you will be found guilty increases.

14. Is it possible to fool a lie detector? Yes it is possible. There are various types of polygraph cheating, such as biting the tongue, straining the legs (by pressing the big toes on the floor), mentally counting sheep, or counting backwards. These actions will lead to physiological reactions that the polygraph will register. By doing so, test subjects can artificially increase physiological responses to control questions and thereby increase the likelihood of passing the test. The result of counting sheep or counting backwards (of course, not out loud, but to yourself) will be such that the subjects will not be able to comprehend the questions asked by the examiner or the listed alternatives, which will lead to an indeterminate test result. Use of “filler questions” (for example, in quiz test) can interfere with this technique, as subjects are expected to answer “yes” to fillers and “no” to other questions. This forces the subject to think and make sense of the information, as a "no" response to the filler may indicate that the questions are being ignored.

15. There is an opinion that psychopaths can deceive the lie detector more effectively than healthy people. The level of arousal in psychopaths and pathological liars does not increase when telling lies, and therefore it is impossible to detect lies in them. So, Gary Ridgway, nicknamed the "Green River Killer", one of the bloodiest serial maniacs in US history, once being a suspect, brilliantly passed a lie detector test and was able to prove his innocence to the police. He later explained his calmness by the absolute certainty that the police had nothing on him. In addition to differences between psychopaths and healthy people, there are differences in polygraph testing between introverts and extroverts.

16. The most famous lie detector test was conducted by Floyd Fey, nicknamed "The Flyer". He was wrongly convicted of murder after failing a polygraph test. Fairy's innocence was established only a few years later. During his unjustified time in prison, he decided to take revenge on the offenders and became an expert in polygraph testing. Floyd taught 27 inmates who voluntarily confessed to him a crime how to take a security question test. After a 20-minute session, 23 out of 27 prisoners successfully passed a polygraph test, which showed their innocence.

17. In a 1994 study, subjects were trained for 30 minutes to use either physical countermeasures (tongue biting or toe pressure on the floor) or mental countermeasures (mentally counting backwards from seven). After this training session, they were tested on a polygraph. Mental and physical countermeasures were equally effective, allowing about 50% of the subjects to fool the polygraph. Moreover, the examiner (who was an experienced specialist) only in 12% of cases noticed the use of physical resistance, while none of the subjects who used mental resistance aroused the examiner's suspicion either by their behavior or physiological reactions. This data contradicts advertising claims by polygraph examiners that any attempt to use deception techniques will always be detected by them.

18. A person who is used to lying can fool a polygraph. This conclusion was reached by a team of scientists led by Bruno Vershure from the University of Ghent. In 2010, scientists conducted an experiment involving three groups of students. Subjects were asked to write a short report on their daily activities, after which they were asked questions about them. One of the groups had to tell only the truth, the other - only a lie, and the third could make a choice, but in such a way that both options were approximately in equal proportions. It is known that a lie requires additional cognitive control and inhibition of the process of voicing the truth. But in pathological liars (and such a feature of the psyche qualifies as a disorder), “dominant truthfulness” may weaken. As a result of the experiment, it turned out that the brain of notorious liars quickly adapts to the need to lie, and it becomes almost impossible to calculate the veracity of the answer by the time spent on thinking. In order for lie detectors to work more efficiently, experts suggested including more questions in the test, which provide a knowingly truthful answer. After them, it will be more difficult for a person to lie, and the corresponding physiological manifestations will become more noticeable.

19. Spies and intelligence officers are trained to cheat a polygraph. A well-known example is Aldrich Ames, a CIA officer who sold secrets to the Soviet Union for many years and passed several polygraph tests over the years. Ames has been successful in his spy career for so long, incl. and because his ability to fool the polygraph dispelled any suspicions of CIA officials. Ames' KGB liaison Viktor Cherkashin later told a British newspaper The Sunday Times how he helped Ames pass the polygraph tests. Cherkashin arranged for Ames to have lunch with a Russian diplomat. To Ames' surprise, Cherkashin himself was also present at the lunch. Ames became worried as the FBI knew Cherkashin and was watching him. However, Cherkashin came to lunch on purpose. He knew that the CIA often conducted routine polygraph tests with its employees, and he knew that Ames would be asked the following question: "Have you recently had informal contact with the KGB?", since it was a standard question. Since contacts between Ames and the KGB were classified, Ames would have had to lie. After lunch, however, Ames no longer needed to lie and could safely say that he had been contacted.

20. Futurologists and science fiction writers have long been thinking about how the polygraph will be used in the future. In many fantastic dystopias, the polygraph and polygraph examiners are an integral part of the totalitarian system, the apparatus of social control and oppression. For example, in the movie Equilibrium, forbidden emotional responses are screened for secret dissidents and resistance fighters using a polygraph. In the fantasy television series Stargate (SG-1), we can see the "Zatarc detector" - a fictional device that is used to detect zatarks - "sleeping agents" of aliens who do not themselves know about it. The detector checks the subconscious and conscious memory of the subject, because the aliens mask the programming of their victims with false memory. During interrogation, any question is asked and the detector can determine whether the recalled memory is true, even if the person himself does not suspect it.

In the cult science fiction film Blade Runner, another type of lie detector is used - the Voight-Kampff test. This test, based on questions and emotional responses, helps the protagonist of the film determine whether the person being tested is a human or an android replicant who secretly made his way to Earth. The result of the test is used for the final verdict. The Voight-Kampf empathy test was invented by writer Philip K. Dick and was first mentioned in his novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? According to F. Dick, it arises only within the community of people. Even an android endowed with absolute intellectual power sees no point in empathy, so it fails this test. According to The Wave Magazine, in 2004 in San Francisco, local politicians were tested using a similar test to determine if the politicians were really homo sapiens? All applicants suspected of the opposite answered specific questions, mainly affecting the life or death of animals. Experts observed their reactions and drew conclusions. You can also test yourself with the help, adapted for online testing.

Based on scientific and popular publications