Why Teaching How to Beat Polygraphs Can Land You in Jail
Last September, Chad Dixon was sentenced to 8 months in a federal prison for teaching clients counter-measures for polygraph tests. Federal prosecutors charged Dixon with obstructing justice—they view his business as undermining an important tool used to check the credibility of government employees and prosecute criminals.
The information Dixon was selling wasn't new. Books on beating polygraphs have been around since the machines were invented. So why is the federal government cracking down now?
In an effort to stop the next Edward Snowden, officials are emphasizing polygraphs' ability to prevent leaks by keeping employees honest. The NSA has recently gone from polygraphing its employees once every five years to four times a year.
Relying on polygraphs is extremely risky according to most scientists. "There is no unique physiological signature that is associated with lying," says Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. Polygraphs can only record physiological responses to situations and, Aftergood explains, you can train yourself to control those responses: "You can learn to regulate your heartbeat, you can learn to control your breath, and you can generate spurious signals."
Supporters of polygraphs believe that up-to-date machines and well-trained operators can detect lies, making the counter-measures Dixon was teaching obsolete. "We're trained in all those type of counter-measures," says Darryl DeBow of the Virginia Polygraph School. "They are so antiquated, we know when they are doing it." Yet if the counter-measures can easily be detected, it throws doubt on the argument that Dixon was hindering the federal government's work.
4 minutes.
Produced by Joshua Swain. Shot by Swain and Amanda Winkler. Narrated by Todd Krainin.
Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube Channel to receive notifications when new material goes live.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?