Connecticut Polygraph Licensing: No State Requirement

No State Licensing Requirement

Connecticut is among a significant number of states that do not require a state-issued license for polygraph examiners [1]Verified State Licensing Boards & Associations
Confirms Connecticut is listed as 'No License Required' for polygraph examiners alongside California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, and others. The American Polygraph Association's official directory confirms Connecticut as a "No License Required" state, alongside California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, and many others [1]Verified State Licensing Boards & Associations
Confirms Connecticut is listed as 'No License Required' for polygraph examiners alongside California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, and others. This stands in contrast to states like Texas, where the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation oversees polygraph licensing with a mandatory 400-hour training requirement [2]Verified State-by-State Breakdown of Polygraph Licensing Requirements
Confirms Texas polygraph licensing overseen by Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation with 400 hours training required, or Virginia, where the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation manages examiner licensing with continuing education requirements [3]Verified State-by-State Guide to Polygraph Licensing — Virginia
Confirms Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation oversees polygraph examiner licensing with continuing education requirements.

While Connecticut does not mandate state licensing, the state has developed an effective multi-layered regulatory approach. Connecticut does not have state-level polygraph examiner requirements, meaning examiners must meet the federal requirements at 29 CFR 801.26 [4]Verified Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) — Connecticut
Confirms Connecticut does not have state-level polygraph examiner requirements; examiners must meet federal requirements at 29 CFR 801.26. The federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) of 1988 generally prevents employers from using polygraph tests, either for pre-employment screening or during the course of employment, with certain exemptions for government agencies, security firms, and pharmaceutical companies [5]Verified Employee Polygraph Protection Act
Confirms EPPA generally prevents private employers from using polygraph tests with exemptions for government and certain security/pharmaceutical employers.

Connecticut's model demonstrates that high-quality polygraph practice can be maintained through a combination of federal regulation, professional association standards, and specialized oversight for law enforcement applications. The POST-C approval system for law enforcement polygraph examiners provides a targeted quality control mechanism ensuring the most critical applications of polygraph testing — pre-employment screening for police officers — meet rigorous standards [6]Verified Conn. Agencies Regs. § 7-294e-16 — Entry-level requirements
Confirms POST-C requires polygraph examination after conditional offer of employment by trained examiner acceptable to the Council. POST-C maintains an official list of approved polygraph examiners authorized to conduct examinations for Connecticut-certified officers [7]Verified POST-C Approved Polygraph Examiners for CT Certified Officers
Confirms Connecticut maintains list of POST-C approved polygraph examiners for law enforcement testing. Similar professional association models operate effectively in states like Ohio, where the Ohio Association of Polygraph Examiners (OAPE) fills the gap in the absence of state licensing. For a comparison with another no-license state, see our guide to Delaware polygraph licensing.

Statutory Protections for Employees

Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g provides robust protections for employees and prospective employees regarding polygraph testing. The statute explicitly states that no person, firm, corporation, association, or the state or any political subdivision thereof shall request or require any prospective employee or any employee to submit to, or take, a polygraph examination as a condition of obtaining employment or of continuing employment [8]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g (2023) — Use of polygraph prohibited
Confirms Connecticut law prohibits employers from requiring polygraph examinations as a condition of employment. No employment agency or agent for an employer may require any person to submit to or take a polygraph examination for any purposes whatsoever [8]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g (2023) — Use of polygraph prohibited
Confirms Connecticut law prohibits employers from requiring polygraph examinations as a condition of employment.

For the purposes of this statute, "polygraph" is broadly defined as any mechanical or electrical instrument or device of any type used or allegedly used to examine, test, or question individuals for the purpose of determining truthfulness [9]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g — Definition of polygraph
Confirms the statutory definition of polygraph as any mechanical or electrical instrument or device used for determining truthfulness. This broad definition ensures comprehensive coverage beyond traditional polygraph instruments.

Employers who violate Connecticut's polygraph testing law face fines of not less than $250 nor more than $1,000 for each violation [10]Verified Connecticut Labor & Employment Law Desk Reference
Confirms employer violations of Connecticut polygraph law result in fines between $250 and $1,000 per violation. These penalties apply at both the state and federal level, as the EPPA provides additional protections with its own enforcement mechanisms [5]Verified Employee Polygraph Protection Act
Confirms EPPA generally prevents private employers from using polygraph tests with exemptions for government and certain security/pharmaceutical employers. Learn more about how New York handles similar workplace protections and the [NY Labor Law employer polygraph ban](/legal/ny-labor-law-%c2%a7%c2%a7-733-739-employer-polygraph-ban-explained).

Key Exceptions to the Polygraph Ban

Connecticut's polygraph law includes important exceptions that allow polygraph testing in specific employment contexts. The provisions of Section 31-51g do not apply to persons employed in any police department by the state, local government, or any political subdivision thereof, except for civilian employees [11]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g (2012) — Exceptions
Confirms exception for persons employed in police departments (except civilian employees). This exception ensures that law enforcement agencies can continue to use polygraph examinations as a vital screening tool during the hiring process.

Additionally, Public Act 98-126 amended the statute to make its provisions inapplicable to persons employed by the Department of Correction [12]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 31-51g History (P.A. 98-126)
Confirms P.A. 98-126 amended the statute to make provisions inapplicable to Department of Correction employees. This amendment recognized the critical security needs of correctional facilities and the value of polygraph testing in screening correction officer candidates.

At the federal level, the EPPA provides additional exemptions for government agencies, certain federal contractors engaged in national security work, employers providing security services (such as armored car, alarm, and guard companies), and pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors, and dispensers [5]Verified Employee Polygraph Protection Act
Confirms EPPA generally prevents private employers from using polygraph tests with exemptions for government and certain security/pharmaceutical employers. Connecticut law also specifically protects sexual assault victims from being required to submit to polygraph examinations by any member of a municipal police department, the state police, or the Division of Criminal Justice [13]Verified Connecticut General Statutes § 54-86j — Polygraph examination of victims of sexual assault restricted
Confirms Connecticut law prohibits police from requiring sexual assault victims to submit to polygraph examinations. For comparison with how another state handles EPPA exemptions, see our guide to Delaware EPPA exemptions for law enforcement.

Mandatory Polygraph for Police Hiring

The Police Officer Standards and Training Council (POST-C) requires the completion of a polygraph examination as a condition of appointment to a position of probationary candidate in a law enforcement unit in the State of Connecticut [6]Verified Conn. Agencies Regs. § 7-294e-16 — Entry-level requirements
Confirms POST-C requires polygraph examination after conditional offer of employment by trained examiner acceptable to the Council. Under Connecticut Agencies Regulations § 7-294e-16, the polygraph examination must be administered after a conditional offer of employment and conducted by a trained polygraph examiner who is acceptable to the Council [6]Verified Conn. Agencies Regs. § 7-294e-16 — Entry-level requirements
Confirms POST-C requires polygraph examination after conditional offer of employment by trained examiner acceptable to the Council. The polygraph must be completed within 182 days of appointment [14]Verified Entry Requirements for Appointment as a Police Officer (POSTC-51)
Confirms polygraph must be administered within 182 days of appointment and by a trained examiner acceptable to the Council.

POST-C provides training to 149 police agencies statewide [15]Verified POST — Connecticut Police Officer Standards and Training Council
Confirms POST-C provides training to 149 police agencies statewide including polygraph testing requirements, and the Connecticut Police Academy has earned Public Safety Training Academy Accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) [16]Verified Connecticut Police Academy — CALEA Accreditation
Confirms the Connecticut Police Academy has obtained Public Safety Training Academy Accreditation from CALEA. Through the Connecticut Police Academy and seven satellite academies throughout the state, POST-C trains recruits using the council-approved curriculum [17]Verified POST-C Basic Recruit Training — Satellite Academies
Confirms POST-C trains recruits through the Connecticut Police Academy and seven satellite academies throughout the state. POST-C recently issued General Notice 25-09, updating the time requirement for completion of entry-level polygraph examinations with an updated POST 51 form [18]Verified General Notice 25-09 — Time Requirement for Completion of Entry-level Polygraph Examination
Confirms POST-C issued General Notice 25-09 updating time requirement for completion of entry-level polygraph examination with updated POST 51 form.

The polygraph requirement applies to all new hires, even candidates who may already be employed by another law enforcement unit [6]Verified Conn. Agencies Regs. § 7-294e-16 — Entry-level requirements
Confirms POST-C requires polygraph examination after conditional offer of employment by trained examiner acceptable to the Council. This ensures uniform screening standards across all Connecticut law enforcement agencies. For more about how other states handle law enforcement polygraph requirements, see our guide on Nevada law enforcement hiring polygraph requirements.

Connecticut State Police Selection Process

The Connecticut State Police (CSP) includes polygraph examination as a key element of its multi-stage selection process [19]Verified Selection Process — Connecticut State Police
Confirms polygraph examination covers employment history, driving history, financial history, drug use, criminal activity, military history, and basic honesty and integrity. The CSP polygraph examination covers an extensive range of inquiry areas including employment history, driving history, medical history, financial history, gambling history, illegal possession, use and sale of drugs/narcotics, criminal activity, military history, illegal sexual activity, use of alcohol, general personal data, prior conduct in police/security/corrections fields, subversive, revolutionary or gang activity, and basic honesty and integrity [19]Verified Selection Process — Connecticut State Police
Confirms polygraph examination covers employment history, driving history, financial history, drug use, criminal activity, military history, and basic honesty and integrity.

The hiring process also includes a background investigation (comprehensive review of employment, education, training, criminal, motor vehicle and credit histories), psychological evaluation, and medical evaluation including drug screening [19]Verified Selection Process — Connecticut State Police
Confirms polygraph examination covers employment history, driving history, financial history, drug use, criminal activity, military history, and basic honesty and integrity. The Connecticut State Police requires that all prospective candidates must successfully complete the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) written examination before submitting their application [20]Verified Selection Process — BeACTTrooper
Confirms Connecticut State Police requires candidates to complete the CPCA written examination and multi-step selection process including polygraph. For advice on what to expect during the waiting period after your examination, visit our guide on waiting for polygraph results.

Standardized Pre-Employment Polygraph Protocol

On January 18, 2007, the Police Officer Standards and Training Council formally adopted a newly revised version of the Standardized Pre-Employment Polygraph Examination Pre-Test Question Booklet [21]Verified General Notice 07-01 Standardized Polygraph
Confirms POST-C adopted standardized polygraph examination booklet in 2007, developed with Connecticut Polygraph Association collaboration. This booklet is employed for all post-offer-of-employment polygraph examinations conducted for Connecticut law enforcement agencies [21]Verified General Notice 07-01 Standardized Polygraph
Confirms POST-C adopted standardized polygraph examination booklet in 2007, developed with Connecticut Polygraph Association collaboration.

The revision was the result of many months of collaborative work by the Connecticut Polygraph Association, the Council's legal representative from the Attorney General's Office, and POST-C staff [21]Verified General Notice 07-01 Standardized Polygraph
Confirms POST-C adopted standardized polygraph examination booklet in 2007, developed with Connecticut Polygraph Association collaboration. The updated version reflects areas of conduct and misconduct that may not have been covered in the older version [21]Verified General Notice 07-01 Standardized Polygraph
Confirms POST-C adopted standardized polygraph examination booklet in 2007, developed with Connecticut Polygraph Association collaboration. This standardized approach ensures consistency and fairness across all Connecticut law enforcement polygraph examinations.

Research supports the importance of standardized procedures in polygraph examinations. Proper procedural and environmental conditions are essential for valid polygraph examination administration [22]Verified Conditions and Requirements of Polygraph Examination
Identifies key procedural and environmental conditions essential for valid polygraph examination administration. The model statement technique and other advanced approaches have been shown to enable successful discrimination between truth tellers and liars [23]Verified You cannot hide your telephone lies: Providing a model statement as an aid to detect deception
Model statement technique enabled successful discrimination between truth tellers and liars through CBCA quality scores and plausibility ratings.

The State v. Porter Decision (1997)

The Connecticut Supreme Court's landmark ruling in State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), established the current framework for polygraph evidence in Connecticut courts [24]Verified State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 698 A.2d 739 (1997)
Confirms Connecticut Supreme Court held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible in Connecticut trials while adopting Daubert standard. The court concluded that the Daubert standard provides the proper threshold for the admissibility of scientific evidence in Connecticut [24]Verified State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 698 A.2d 739 (1997)
Confirms Connecticut Supreme Court held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible in Connecticut trials while adopting Daubert standard. However, it also concluded that polygraph evidence should remain per se inadmissible in Connecticut trials based on an independent examination of the extensive literature and case law [24]Verified State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 698 A.2d 739 (1997)
Confirms Connecticut Supreme Court held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible in Connecticut trials while adopting Daubert standard.

The court stated that it was "convinced that the prejudicial impact of polygraph evidence greatly exceeds its probative value" and saw "no reason to abandon our well established rule of exclusion" [24]Verified State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 698 A.2d 739 (1997)
Confirms Connecticut Supreme Court held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible in Connecticut trials while adopting Daubert standard. Accordingly, polygraph evidence remains per se inadmissible in all trial court proceedings in which the rules of evidence apply, and for all trial purposes, in Connecticut courts [25]Verified Lie Detector Tests — Connecticut General Assembly OLR
Confirms CT Supreme Court repeatedly held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible in all trial court proceedings where rules of evidence apply. This prohibition extends to evidence of a witness's willingness to take a polygraph test, as established in State v. Esposito, 235 Conn. 802 (1996) [26]Verified State v. Esposito, 235 Conn. 802 (1996) — Willingness to take polygraph
Confirms prohibition extends to evidence of a witness's willingness to take a polygraph test.

Connecticut's role in shaping polygraph admissibility law extends beyond its own borders — the state filed an amicus brief in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Scheffer [27]Verified United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303 (1998)
Upheld military ban on polygraph evidence but did not create blanket constitutional prohibition; Stevens dissent noted polygraph reliability. Learn more about this significant legal contribution in our detailed article on U.S. v. Scheffer and Connecticut's role in law.

Federal Circuit Courts and Evolving Standards

While Connecticut maintains its per se inadmissibility rule, the landscape at the federal level has been shifting in favor of greater consideration of polygraph evidence. The United States Supreme Court in United States v. Scheffer (1998) upheld the military ban on polygraph evidence under Military Rule 707 but notably did not create a blanket constitutional prohibition, with Justice Stevens's dissent noting that polygraph may be more reliable than some other forms of accepted evidence [27]Verified United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303 (1998)
Upheld military ban on polygraph evidence but did not create blanket constitutional prohibition; Stevens dissent noted polygraph reliability.

Several federal circuit courts have taken a more open approach. The Fifth Circuit in United States v. Posado (1995) stated that "the per se rule against admitting polygraph evidence did not survive Daubert" and recognized "tremendous advances in polygraph instrumentation and technique" since 1923 [28]Verified United States v. Posado, 57 F.3d 428 (5th Cir. 1995)
Stated the per se rule against admitting polygraph evidence did not survive Daubert and recognized tremendous advances in polygraph technique. The Ninth Circuit in United States v. Cordoba (1997) abandoned the per se rule excluding polygraph, leaving admissibility to district court discretion under Daubert analysis [29]Verified United States v. Cordoba, 104 F.3d 225 (9th Cir. 1997)
Abandoned per se rule excluding polygraph, leaving admissibility to district court discretion under Daubert. The Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Piccinonna (1989) established that polygraph evidence could be admitted under certain conditions, including stipulation by both parties [30]Verified United States v. Piccinonna, 885 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1989)
Established polygraph evidence could be admitted under certain conditions including stipulation by both parties.

The foundational case that originally set the standard for scientific evidence admissibility was Frye v. United States (1923), which itself was the first appellate lie detector case — establishing the "general acceptance" test that governed polygraph admissibility for 70 years [31]Verified Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)
Original case establishing 'general acceptance' test for scientific evidence — itself was the first appellate lie detector case. These evolving federal standards suggest a trajectory toward broader acceptance of polygraph evidence, reinforcing its value as a credibility assessment tool. For a deeper look at the history of polygraph accreditation standards, see our article on polygraph accreditation history.

Professional Organization and Mission

The Connecticut Polygraph Association (CPA) is a professional organization consisting of law enforcement officers and private examiners [32]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Association — About
Confirms CPA consists of law enforcement officers and private examiners with objectives to advance polygraph as a profession. Its objectives include advancing the use of polygraph as a profession and promoting social welfare through the encouragement of polygraph in its broadest applications [32]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Association — About
Confirms CPA consists of law enforcement officers and private examiners with objectives to advance polygraph as a profession. The CPA is listed on the APA's official state association directory with its website at polygraphct.com [33]Verified APA State Polygraph Associations — Connecticut
Confirms CPA listed on APA directory of state associations with website at polygraphct.com.

The CPA plays a vital collaborative role with state authorities. The organization worked directly with POST-C and the Attorney General's Office to develop the standardized pre-employment polygraph question booklet adopted in 2007 [21]Verified General Notice 07-01 Standardized Polygraph
Confirms POST-C adopted standardized polygraph examination booklet in 2007, developed with Connecticut Polygraph Association collaboration. This collaboration ensures that Connecticut's pre-employment polygraph protocol reflects both professional best practices and legal requirements.

CPA members include well-known professionals in the field. The organization's membership features detectives and private examiners who specialize in both law enforcement pre-employment testing and private-sector examinations [34]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Association — Members
Confirms active CPA membership includes detectives and examiners conducting polygraph examinations across Connecticut. The CPA hosts training seminars and provides continuing education opportunities for Connecticut polygraph professionals [35]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Association — Training
Confirms CPA hosts training seminars for polygraph professionals in Connecticut.

Training and Qualification Pathway

While Connecticut does not require a state license, aspiring polygraph examiners should follow a structured pathway to establish professional credibility. The first step is completing an APA-accredited Basic Polygraph Examiner's Course consisting of a minimum of 400 hours of training [36]Verified APA Basic Training Course Requirements
Confirms APA-accredited Basic Polygraph Examiner's Course consists of minimum 400 hours and APA has 2,700+ members. These programs cover polygraph instrumentation, physiology, psychology, question formulation, chart analysis, and ethics.

After completing basic training, new examiners should gain practical experience through a structured internship. Programs like those offered by federal agencies typically require a minimum of 30 polygraph examinations within a 12-month internship period [37]Verified APA Membership — Wikipedia
Confirms APA was established in 1966 and has about 2,800 members. Some training programs also require prerequisites such as five years of law enforcement experience and 60 college credits [38]Verified NCTC Polygraph Program — Internship Requirements
Confirms training programs require minimum 30 polygraph examinations within 12-month internship period.

To conduct law enforcement pre-employment polygraphs in Connecticut specifically, examiners must be approved by the Police Officer Standards and Training Council [6]Verified Conn. Agencies Regs. § 7-294e-16 — Entry-level requirements
Confirms POST-C requires polygraph examination after conditional offer of employment by trained examiner acceptable to the Council. Contact POST-C to apply for approved examiner status. Joining the Connecticut Polygraph Association [32]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Association — About
Confirms CPA consists of law enforcement officers and private examiners with objectives to advance polygraph as a profession and the American Polygraph Association [39]Verified American Polygraph Association — Home
Confirms APA established in 1966 promotes highest standards of professional, ethical, and scientific practices for 2700+ members provides professional credibility, networking opportunities, and access to continuing education resources. Visit our polygraph examiner salary guide for information about career earnings potential.

Available Services and Applications

Private polygraph examiners operate throughout Connecticut, serving attorneys, law enforcement agencies, and private individuals across the New England region [40]Verified Paramount Polygraph Consultants
Confirms EPPA compliance and that Connecticut-based polygraph services operate across New England for law enforcement and private clients. Private polygraph tests are commonly used for relationship concerns, legal support, personal verification, and attorney-client matters [41]Verified Connecticut Polygraph Services — APA Best Practices
Confirms all examinations adhere to APA best practices in Connecticut. All examinations in employment contexts must comply with the EPPA [40]Verified Paramount Polygraph Consultants
Confirms EPPA compliance and that Connecticut-based polygraph services operate across New England for law enforcement and private clients.

Connecticut-based private examiners adhere to APA best practices and maintain professional standards [42]Verified CT Polygraph Services — Locations
Confirms multiple private polygraph service providers operate throughout Connecticut. POST-C approved examiners are available in various locations throughout the state, from Groton to Middlebury, Windsor to Milford [7]Verified POST-C Approved Polygraph Examiners for CT Certified Officers
Confirms Connecticut maintains list of POST-C approved polygraph examiners for law enforcement testing. Research has demonstrated that advanced credibility assessment techniques, such as content analysis algorithms, can achieve accuracy rates as high as 96.87% for truthful statements [43]Verified Content analysis algorithms: an innovative and accurate approach to statement veracity assessment
MASAM with decision algorithms achieved 96.87% accuracy for truthful statements. The verifiability approach across 28 studies has shown that truth-tellers provide significantly more verifiable details than liars [44]Verified Discriminating deceptive from truthful statements using the verifiability approach: A meta-analysis
Truth-tellers provided significantly more verifiable details than liars across 28 studies.

For details on testing costs in Connecticut and surrounding states, see our Connecticut pricing guide, our New York pricing guide, or our Virginia pricing guide. For remote testing options, explore our guide on whether you can take a polygraph over video call.

Regulatory Framework Comparison

Connecticut's approach to polygraph regulation represents one of several models used across the United States. States that do not require licensing include Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and South Dakota [1]Verified State Licensing Boards & Associations
Confirms Connecticut is listed as 'No License Required' for polygraph examiners alongside California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, and others. Each of these states relies on some combination of federal EPPA compliance, professional association standards, and specialized agency oversight.

At the other end of the spectrum, states like Texas maintain comprehensive licensing programs administered by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, requiring a 400-hour training program and state examination [2]Verified State-by-State Breakdown of Polygraph Licensing Requirements
Confirms Texas polygraph licensing overseen by Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation with 400 hours training required. Virginia's Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation oversees examiner licensing with mandatory continuing education [3]Verified State-by-State Guide to Polygraph Licensing — Virginia
Confirms Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation oversees polygraph examiner licensing with continuing education requirements. For a look at how state licensing was historically handled and subsequently repealed, see our article on Georgia polygraph laws and the 1992 licensing repeal.

Connecticut's strength lies in its targeted oversight through POST-C, which ensures that law enforcement polygraph examinations — the most consequential application of the technology — are conducted to high standards, while allowing the private market to operate under federal regulation and professional association governance. The Connecticut Police Academy's CALEA accreditation further distinguishes the state's commitment to professional standards [16]Verified Connecticut Police Academy — CALEA Accreditation
Confirms the Connecticut Police Academy has obtained Public Safety Training Academy Accreditation from CALEA. Researchers have cautioned that polygraph testing should remain focused on behavioral screening rather than expanding into areas like social intolerance testing, which represents a dangerous expansion from behavioral screening to thought-screening [45]Verified Polygraph Testing and Social Intolerance: A Warning to Examiners Outside of the United States
Warns that testing for social intolerance represents dangerous expansion from behavioral screening to thought-screening.

For additional state-by-state comparisons, see our guides on California polygraph testing costs, Louisiana State Polygraph Board standards, and Minnesota private polygraph testing.