Author: Maryna Surkis, a graduate of the VAP Polygraph Examiner Courses in the Fall of 2024.
Everything has a beginning. This simple truth applies to professional life as well. Choosing a new career path later in adulthood is based on a foundation of prior experience, acquired skills, and a desire to expand one’s potential—whether professional, personal, or financial. However, this foundation is often fragile at the beginning and takes time to become a solid foundation for future development.
The Polygraph Examiner’s Path Becoming a polygraph examiner is not just about acquiring a new specialty. It is about mastering the art of using a polygraph, an art that comes only through practice and experience. The moment you first get to work on your own, the gap between the idealized scenarios of training and the “noisy” reality of practice is felt especially acutely.
Initial lack of confidence is a natural phenomenon. After all, polygraphy requires the complex integration of knowledge from psychology, physiology, criminalistics, and a profound understanding of the methodology by which the examination is conducted. When an instructor says during a lecture, “You must be confident in your tests, because they are your instrument!”, that confidence can seem unattainable.
A beginner’s insecurity is not just a lack of knowledge; it is a unique psychological state that can have negative consequences for the quality of the work. In a profession where accuracy is vital and where every mistake can influence human lives, this inner struggle is felt especially keenly.
One of the first things a practitioner encounters is the “impostor phenomenon”—a persistent internal conviction that one doesn’t deserve their achievements and that their incompetence will soon be exposed. For a polygraph examiner, whose conclusion can determine the course of an employment or criminal case and affect the professional reputation and future of the respondent, the pressure of responsibility is exceptionally intense. Research confirms the prevalence of the “impostor phenomenon” in highly qualified, demanding fields, to which polygraphy belongs. This phenomenon is closely associated with increased levels of anxiety, stress, and can also lead to emotional exhaustion and cynicism.
The emotional burden of the “impostor phenomenon” directly impacts a beginner’s work quality, causing two behavioral extremes: аvoidance of complex cases: the specialist limits themselves only to examinations where they feel comfortable (e.g., performing only screenings while avoiding complex investigations). Hyper-compensation: the beginner works “too much” or “too cautiously,” which ultimately leads to burnout.
To overcome the “impostor phenomenon” and build sustainable professional self-esteem, there are proven strategies.
First and foremost, it’s crucial to accept that even the best methodologies and systems have their limitations. It’s essential to continuously engage professional support resources: ongoing training, advanced qualification courses, and open and honest discussion of complex and controversial tests with more experienced colleagues.
A mentor at the start of one’s career acts as a beacon in the turbulent ocean of practice, helping the beginner stay the course and maintain confidence in their own professional development.
The second challenge for beginners is the attempt to keep everything under control.
A polygraph examiner’s work requires the simultaneous management of several processes: interaction with the respondent, adherence to procedure, technical settings, recording, and preliminary analysis of the collected data. According to the results of a large-scale study by the National Research Council (2003) in the US, the quality of a polygraph examiner’s work is directly dependent on their level of qualification and their ability to maintain sustained attention. However, when a novice is overwhelmed by technical details, their ability to analyze physiological indicators and recognize behavioral countermeasures from respondents decreases.
The main difficulties a beginner faces include: distraction from the primary analysis process by technical details. Reduced cognitive integration—instead of holistic perception, they may see physiological reactions fragmented, losing connection with the context of the question. Consequently, they risk misinterpreting the data during the intermediate stage. Novices also often notice a respondent’s behavioral countermeasures later than experienced professionals.
To prevent such difficulties, it is essential to strictly adhere to time standards during testing and follow the chosen research methodology. Specifically, the intervals between questions must be no less than 15 seconds. This period is required not only for the stabilization of the respondent’s physiological indicators but also for the examiner themselves—to maintain sustained attention, preserve the ability to interpret data, and prevent cognitive overload.
In addition, do not immediately announce your conclusion to the client right after the examination is completed, even if it seems obvious and completely conclusive at that moment. Let your opinion “rest” or “percolate.”
The third challenge is setting up the polygraph indicators. The duration of the setup time for a specific respondent can vary. At this stage, a beginner may start to rush and become nervous, especially when the respondent demonstratively yawns or complains of discomfort, asking: “How long will the test take?” or “My arm/leg is stiff!” However, this process is critically important for the examiner: the quality of the polygrams recorded, upon whose analysis the conclusion about the person is based, depends entirely on precise adjustments. It is necessary to clearly set priorities, which means abandoning haste and acting with concentration. The time spent on correct setup is never wasted; it is an investment in the accuracy and reliability of the examination.
The fourth challenge is the pre-test interview, the cornerstone of the entire polygraph process. Eventually, conducting the pre-test interview becomes almost automatic for the examiner, but at the initial stage of professional development, it requires special attention, precision, and clarity.
A critical component of the pre-test interview is the correct psychological preparation of the respondent. It is necessary to reduce the level of non-specific anxiety that often accompanies a person before testing. Consistent instruction, a clear explanation of the procedure, and the creation of an atmosphere of trust ensure more interpretable testing results. To overcome errors at this stage, beginners simply need to strictly adhere to the algorithm for conducting the pre-test interview that they were taught in their polygraph training courses.
The fifth challenge is the pressure from the client who insists that the questions in the tests must be formulated in a specific way.
Questions requested by the client can turn out to be ambiguous for the respondent. For example:
1. “Have you ever let people down?” Who exactly? Colleagues, friends, or family? In what context? How can the reaction to this non-specific question be interpreted later?
2. “Besides what you’ve already disclosed about those incidents, have you ever concealed anything similar related to this situation?” Complex phrasing confuses the respondent, and a reaction may arise from the sheer cognitive strain.
3. “Do you feel like you’ve done something wrong?” The reaction might be caused by a feeling of guilt for any other action not related to the test.
4. “Have you ever told a lie?” – A universal question that applies to every person but not to a specific event.
5. “Have you ever disclosed confidential information to unauthorized persons?” – This is internally unclear for the respondent: “unauthorized person” can mean a competitor, a spouse, or an ex-girlfriend; “confidential information” can be a document or any minor detail. Even a detailed explanation by the examiner during the pre-test interview about the intended meaning often fails to eliminate the respondent’s doubts. Doubts “noise up” the polygrams, reactions are less clear, and consequently, drawing a conclusion becomes more difficult.
6. “Have you committed theft more than once?” – The question already contains an assumption of guilt, which puts an innocent respondent into a defensive state.
7. “Have you ever taken money or concealed information at this job?” – Dual phrasing; a reaction might occur to the second part, even if the first part doesn’t apply to the respondent.
8. “Besides what you have already told me, is there anything else you know or are concealing about the theft?” – Mixing confirmed facts with a new assumption, which confuses the respondent.
9. “Have you violated any company rule in the last five years?” – An overly broad question. It forces the respondent to think about numerous minor infractions (from being late to using a work phone for personal purposes, or browsing social media during work, etc.), causing cognitive overload. The reaction may be caused not by concealing information about the target event, but by memory effort or fear.
10. “Have you ever misled someone?” – This question does not concern the target event. Due to their generality, such questions significantly reduce the accuracy of the conclusion.
These examples clearly demonstrate that the ambiguity in the formulation of relevant questions, insisted upon by the client, can provoke false reactions.
The only way out is to explain to the client that the test questions must be formulated by a professional polygraph examiner who was trained for this in courses. The specialist shouldn’t be stubbornly categorical but must also not compromise on matters of principle. One must be able to give an “argued no,” as written in the section on the ethics of the polygraph examiner in the textbook “Polygraphology” by Tetyana Morozova.
Ultimately, the words of our instructor—Tetyana Morozova, a polygraph examiner with vast experience, under whom we were fortunate to study in the courses: “You must be confident in your tests!” – became a true professional compass for me. This phrase reflects the main principle of a polygraph examiner’s work: confidence based on knowledge, methodology, and experience.
The sixth challenge for a beginner is the correct delivery of questions during polygraph examinations. From the very beginning of my work as a polygraph examiner, I faced the fact that reading questions aloud is not as simple as it seems. Pace, timbre, and emphasis have a direct impact on the respondent’s perception and, consequently, on their reactions. I even noticed that sometimes the respondent’s answers unconsciously mimic my intonation.
To reduce emotional load during testing and minimize the risk of errors, I developed my own practice: I would read the questions aloud at home before the examination. This helps me sound more confident and steadier during the actual test, without unwanted emotional accents. Such simple preparation significantly reduces the risk of intonation errors that might influence the respondent’s reactions.
The seventh obstacle for a novice polygraph examiner can be the “white coat hypertension” effect. In medicine, this manifests as an increase in blood pressure when a person comes into contact with a doctor in a white coat. During polygraph examinations, this phenomenon can have similar consequences: some respondents experience anxiety or a high level of emotional tension just at the thought of undergoing the testing.
In my practice, there was a case where a respondent experienced a state similar to a panic attack during the examination. It unfolded very quickly, with no prior warning signs. In another instance, a respondent developed nervous tics right in the middle of the test, although the physiological indicators on the polygram remained within the normal range. I still don’t know whether these states were genuine or simulated. However, I was taught in polygraph training that the professional, time-tested tactic is to always act as if the person is genuinely unwell.
There were also situations where, due to the influence of medication, respondents exhibited suppressed reactions, creating an illusion of “calmness” and confidence in their innocence. In other cases, heightened anxiety manifested as excessive sweating or sharp fluctuations in breathing, which could easily be confused with reactions to the relevant questions.
All these examples prove the following: a polygraph examiner is not an operator or a polygraph technician; they do not have the right to limit themselves to merely servicing the device. The examiner must be attentive to the respondent’s condition and under no circumstances should he conduct the examination while looking exclusively at the laptop screen.
The eighth challenge for beginners is confirmation bias. This is a cognitive error where the polygraph examiner unconsciously interprets ambiguous results in favor of already established beliefs. For instance, if the specialist is leaning toward believing the respondent is uninvolved or involved beforehand, they may subconsciously interpret doubtful or unclear reactions as confirmation of their hypothesis. This is a serious ethical problem that undermines the professional’s neutrality and objectivity.
In my practice, there was a case where a 25-year-old woman, suspected of stealing a significant sum of money, came for polygraph testing. During the pre-test interview, her emotional state was noticeably strained: she began to stutter from anxiety, and time was needed for her to calm down and fully participate in the examination. The employer’s initial assumption was specifically directed against her, and the employer conveyed their suspicions to the examiner during the very first conversation. However, the results of the polygraph examination refuted her involvement. The polygraph examiner insisted that all employees potentially connected to the incident should be tested. This objective and comprehensive approach proved effective: the true culprit was identified, and the young woman was cleared of unfounded suspicions.
This case is a vivid example of how confirmation bias can influence perception. The employer’s initial conviction of the woman’s guilt increased the risk of misinterpreting her anxiety. But the objectivity of the examination and strict adherence to the methodology showed the opposite and thus served as a reminder: the polygraph examiner should not rely on others’ expectations or first impressions. And doing so can sometimes be difficult, as the pressure of responsibility, emotional atmosphere, and client expectations can be just as influential as the testing process itself.
In such situations, I always recall the words written in Tetyana Morozova’s textbook “Polygraphology”: the conclusion is made exclusively on the basis of the results of the analysis of the obtained polygrams. And nothing else.
Afterword: Everyone starts their journey with small, sometimes uncertain steps. That’s simply how it goes. These first experiences gradually shape the way we work — helping us build focus, patience, and resilience along the way. Becoming a polygraph examiner isn’t simple; it requires steady growth, learning through practice, and taking responsibility for the choices you make.
And at some point, it becomes clear: as your experience grows, so does your responsibility. But instead of feeling intimidating, it starts to feel natural — a sign that you’re steadily growing into the role.
I want to wish everyone who stands at the beginning of this path to maintain self-belief, find the courage to move forward, and rely on the support of colleagues. Because only together do we form a professional environment where confidence strengthens and the true power of our profession—the polygraph examiner—is revealed.
