CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

SRI
STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Menlo Park, California 94025 · U.S.A.
Progress Report No. 3
Covering the Period 1 April to 1 August 1974
Stanford Research Institute Project 3183
PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES
by
Harold E. Puthoff
Client Private
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0-
SEC. CL.
ORIGIN Vis, DJORD
8
Stanford Research Inet.
CONTROL NO.
DDB&T-1018-76
Dec. 1975
DATE REC'D
2/26/76
DATE OUT
SUSPENSE DATE
CROSS REFERENCE OR
POINT OF FILING
ToExecutive Officer, DDS&T
FROM
Herold E. Puthoff & Russell Targ
SUBJ. PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES
(Final Report)
Part One - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Part Two - RESEARCH REPORT
ROUTING
DATE ,
SENT
30/DOS&T
(oy/ 21)
(cy# 16)
Rec'd part 1 & 2
COURIER NO.
ANSWERED.
NO REPLY
4
SEC. CL.
S
ORIGIN -Via, LORD
Stanford Research Ina
CONTROL NO.
00SST-1018-76
"DATE OF DOC
Dec. 1975
DATE REC'D
2/25/76
DATE OUT
SUSPENSE DATE
CROSS REFERENCE OR
POINT OF FILING
ToExecutive Officer, DOSET
FROM Herold E. Futherf & Russell Targ
SUBJ. PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES
(Final Report)
Part One - EXECUTIVE SUMIART (cyf 21)
Pert Ivo - RESEARCH REPORT
ROUTING
DATE
SENT
(cyf 16)
Rec'd part 1 & 2
COURIER NO.
ANSWERED
. NO REPLY
5
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
DATE OF DOC

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
I
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of the program is to determine the characteristics of
those perceptual modalities through which individuals obtain information
about their environment, wherein such information is not presented to
any known sense.
The program is divided into two categories of investigation of
approximately equal effort, applied research and basic research.
The
purpose of the applied research effort is to explore experimentally
the potential for applications of perceptual abilities of interest,
with special attention given to accuracy and reliability. The purpose
of the basic research effort is to identify the characteristics of
individuals possessing such abilities, and to identify neurophysiological
correlates and basic mechanisms involved in such functioning.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
A.
Applied Research
1.
Remote Viewing
(a)
Project Atlas Remote Viewing
A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client-
designated target of interest, a European R&D test facility. The experiment,
carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility
of remote-viewing under operational conditions.
In phase I, map coordinates were furnished to the experimenters
the only additional information provided being the designation of the target
as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing
*
experiment with Subject 1 (Price) on a double-blind basis. The results of the
ING
names
experiment were turned over to client representatives for data evaluation.
Figure 1 shows the level of detail for a sample early effort.
at building layout, and Figure 2 shows the subject's first effort at drawing
a gantry crane he observed, both results being obtained on a double-blind
basis before exposure to client-held information. An artist's conception of
the site as known to the client (but not to contract personnel) prior to the
experiment is shown in Figure 3.
Were the results not promising, the experiment would have
stopped at this point. The results were judged to be of sufficiently good
quality, however, that Phase II was entered in which the subject was made
witting by client representatives.
A second round of experimentation ensued with participation
*
Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787-R000100020001-0
MIL
3
Se000ulm
5
7
STAT.
200490
AIN
.
.
GANTRY
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
E
FIGURE 1 SUBJECT EFFORT AT BUILDING LAYOUT
JUL 10 ! :
DAY
fe

PM
JUL 10 15
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-0078 R000100020963-0
00
00
.
c
Approved For Release 20659/08/102. CSAPJEST EFFORT AT CRANE CONSTRUCTION
96-00787R000100020001-0

1
et.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
FIGURE 3

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
of client representatives. The Phase II effort was focussed on the generation
of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in
the process. The end of Phase II gradually evolved into the first part of
Phase III, the generation of unverifiable data not available to the client,
but of interest nonetheless. Evaluation of the data by the client is under-
way .
:
(b)
Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment
Subjects In and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment
involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the
experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on a
combination business/pleasure trip. That is all that was known to the subjects
Had
1
-
either be
to conta
Rua ?
..
NO
about the traveler's itinerary. The experiment called for Dr. Puthoff to
keep a detailed record of his location and activities, including photographs,
each day at 1330 PDT.
Six daily responses were obtained from Subject 1, five
from Subject 4.
The results were of high quality and are presently being
evaluated in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material.
1
Samples of that data are as follows.
how?x
when
available
Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two
were in excellent agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear
correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the first of the two matches,
Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at the base of a volcano
(Figure 4) and the subject's response was "large
bare table mountain,
How did #11 de?
mixed
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
To au

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
jungle below, dark cool moist atmosphere," a match both with regard to
. topography and ambience. In the second match the subject submitted that
all she got was a "picture of Dr. Puthoff sitting in a beach chair by a
pool," which was entirely correct.
During the course of the Central America experiment, on one
occasion when the test subject was unavailable, an experimenter volunteered
a drawing of an image he obtained at the beginning of one of the daily ex-
periments. (The target for that day was an airport, an unexpected target
associated with a side excursion at midpoint of the week's activity.) The
match was good, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. The transcript data will be
examined further to determine fine structure, resolution, etc.
(c)
Local Targets with Feedback
In this series of experiments, designed to give immediate
data to experimenters, a subject is asked to take part in a remote viewing
experiment under the following conditions.
The subject and two experimenters (one of whom was R.T.)
are in a first floor laboratory in building 30 at SRI. A second experimenter
(H.P.) leaves the area and proceeds to a remote location of his choosing ..
None of the experimenters with the subject knew of the remote target location.
H.P. and R.T. are in two-way radio communication via walkie-talkie, (a) to
provide the experimenter at the target location real-time data and (b) to give
the subject immediate feedback after he has made his assessment of the target.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Should mitule
The target relecture
& security
procedures

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1
-
FIGURE 4
TERRAIN AT BASE OF VOLCANO USED AS
REMOTE VIEWING TARGET
4.1.
AEROPUERTO SESQUICENTETE
SA-2613-19
FIGURE 5
AIRPORT IN SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

F
1
- -
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Zuday
4/12/73
1:25 - 1:30
ocean
Honger or
Airport Bldg
grass
concrete
overhang
DARK
run way
BRIGHT
grass
Sand
SA-2613-20
FIGURE 6
SKETCH PRODUCED BY SUBJECT FROM SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, AIRPORT
USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
By this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from
imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonstration-of-ability
test, but rather a training step on a gradient scale of ability. In many
of these experiments we monitor physiological correlates as discussed in
Section B.3 (b). (Nine of these experiments have been completed to date,
seven with the measurements of physiological correlates.)
The following is a sample of an experiment with Subject 4.
In this experiment we monitored physiolocial correlates of the remote
viewing activity.
As is apparent in the following text, the subject initially
had only a fragmentary picture of the remote site, but with what we judge to
be a small amount of feedback, the subject was able to put images together
into a correct description. Accompanying the verbal description presented
below is a photograph of the actual scene at the remote location (Fig. 7).
The experimenter with the subject (R.T.) was, as always, kept ignorant of the
target location to prevent guidance in the questioning. The capital letters
signify walkie-talkie communication.
R.T .:
It is now 12:35.
S-4:
..
. very strong diagonal ..
. like a zigzag that goes this way, vertically.
R.T .:
S-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STRONG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOING
VERTICALLY. OVER. (Talking on walkie talkie to H.P.)
-
H.P .:
THERE IS A STRONG ZIGZAG AT MY PLACE, BUT IT IS NOT VERTICAL BUT RATHER
HORIZONTAL; BUT IF SHE IS LOOKING FROM THE AIR, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT
WOULD LOOK LIKE. OVER.
R.T .: . Can you tell what the zigzag is attached to? Whether it's part of a
building or a fence on the ground?
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

18/10] GIA-RDP46-067
A-REF 6-
FIGURE 7

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
R.T .:
It's 12:41.
S-4:
My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal.
I
usually think of a fence.
R.T .:
Why don't you go up and look down and view the whole thing from above
and see if you can get the whole gestalt of where he is.
S-4:
.... definitely a non-vegetation .. . almost no vegetation around. It's
mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is -- either water or steel -- shiny,
zigzag, .. definitely shiny.
R.T .:
7267, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR
S-4:
Water ..
R.T .:
WATER, WE CAN'T TELL. IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATION -- NO
VEGETATION AROUND:
.
S-4:
Mostly concrete. . .
R.T .:
IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE.
S-4:
He's standing on concrete.
..
R.T .:
YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE. OVER.
H.P .:
IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS IS SHINY AND IN MY NEAR VICINITY IT IS
BARREN AND CONCRETE OR CONCRETE-COLORED EARTH. SHE SAID THAT IT LOOKED
LIKE STEEL OR WATER. CAN SHE MAKE THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE TWO?
R.T .:
He wants to know whether it looks more like steel or water.
S-4:
It seems to have movement -- that's why I would deduce that it's water.
R.T .:
What if you try to look at the whole thing.
S-4:
I'm trying to get an eagle's eye view. That's a waterworks.
R.T .:
Why does it look like a waterworks?
In what way?
S-4:
There seems to be a man-made layout of channels and connections to conduct
it.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
R.T .:
S-4 SEES MOVEMENT IN THE ZIGZAG THING, SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S
WATER, AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN-MADE
WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER.
H.P.
.
THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT. IT IS A ZIGZAG MAN-MADE WATER CHANNEL WITH
CONCRETE SIDES. OVER.
:
S-4:
I can't believe it.
THAN ?
The above is an excerpt from an early experiment, and is typical, rather
-
a sample of exceptionally good quality. That experiment continued with four
more site descriptions, three of which were of equal quality.
One experiment of this nature has been carried out with Subject 1,
one with Subject 2, two with Subject 3, and five with Subject 4. A number
of descriptions were essentially free of error and with no feedback other than
1
verification following the remote viewer's description.
others of
quality !
equal
How?
Details
не лсявал,
evals, vous
- when ?
A complete analysis is to be carried out on these transcripts following
more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the :
following areas:
(a) perspective and dimension are often distorted (an
eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation between
buildings may appear to be 100 feet, etc.) and,
(b) written material
generally cannot be read.
(d)
Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing
scale item by
item. To
easy for
matelné
In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was
clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to determine
whether in driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine
the location of the target team by triangulation with a bearing compass. The
triangulation lines were essentially uncorrelated with each other and with
the target location, and therefore provided a null result.
-
1 minumentes
Il there
on
-
* newvertrag why ? what
data hypothesis?
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-
which?

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
B.
Basic Research
In addition to the testing of individuals under conditions which
yield data indicating the feasibility of the application of paranormal
abilities to operational needs, fifty percent of the effort is devoted
to:
1.
Identification of measurable characteristics possessed by
gifted individuals (20%) ;
2.
Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate
to paranormal activities (20%) ;
3.
Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy
(10%).
To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful-
filled during the course of experimentation: 1) establish and apply criteria
to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered
to be functional and those for whom it is not; 2) obtain sufficient medical
and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against which
(a) one individual may be compared with another, and (b) an individual
may be compared to himself at different times to determine whether para-
normal functioning occurs in an altered neurophysiological state, 3) specific
validation experiments must be conducted with sufficient control to ensure
that all conventional communication paths are blocked, and with outcomes
sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether paranormal functioning
occurred; 4) obtain neurophysicological data during experimentation to
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R00010002006 and statement

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
CLASSIFICATION
determine those correlates, if any, which relate to paranormal activity.
In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn
and the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re-
search program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance
with the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and
funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives.
=
1.
Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals
One of the key issues in the program is the establishment of
criteria capable of differentiating individuals apparently gifted in
paranormal functioning from those who are not.
Three experimental paradigms were chosen to act as screening
tests on the basis that these tests had been useful for such purposes
prior to this program ( in the sense that certain apparently gifted
individuals did exceedingly well on at least one of the tests, whereas
the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from
chance expectation) . The tests are (a) remote viewing of natural targets,
(b) reproduction of simple line drawings hidden from the subject but viewed
by an experimenter, and (c) determination of the state of a four-state elec-
tronic random stimulus generator.
The first test constitutes a so-called "free-response" paradigm
in which the subject originates freely about contents of his awareness;
furthermore, the channel in general may involve both direct perception
of the remote site and perception of the mental contents of an observer
CLASSIFICATION
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
RS 18

TABLE 1
PROGRAM SCHEDULE - II
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
F
M.
A
M
J
JASON DJ F
MONTHS
1
2
3
4
5
6789
10
11
12
13
1. Set up neurophysiological lab with computer
processing debugged.
2. W.A. I.S. testing of subjects by client
3. Measure neurophysiological correlates during
paranormal experimentation
a) paranormal EEG experiments
b) other paranormal experimentation
D
4. Work to determine nature of energies involved
(gradiometer, etc. ) C
5. Medical testing, including special testing
D
7
7
7. Psychological testing, including in-depth
interview
8. Correlate data and consider theoretical models
9. Prepare final report
V
D
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
7
de
6. Neuropsychological testing

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
at the site. The second test is more constrained than the first in that
the target information is more analytical or abstract, being associated
with a graphical representation of an item of interest rather than the
item itself. The third test is the most constrained in that the target
is blind to all participants in the experiment and the subject's choice
is precisely constrained. The details of these tests are given below.
For the purpose of screening the criteria as to what constitutes
a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily, viz:
-
For the purpose of screening a result is to
be considered paranormal if the a priori
probability for the occurrence of the result
by chance, under the null hypothesis, is
p <10-6.
Although the above requirement is exceedingly strict by usual psycho-
physiological standards, it is chosen here (a) because the controversial
nature of the subject requires strict handling, and (b) in our work and
elsewhere, a bimodal distribution has been observed empirically in which
a subset of individuals participating in paranormal research produce re-
sults at a level of statistical significance p = 10
-6
in comparison
with the bulk of individuals who cluster about the mean as expected.
Therefore, we base our criteria on an observable natural division into
clearly functional and non-functional categories.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
I thought, per
telecom, luz
all nie !
had
Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects 1 -3
considered gifted, subjects 4 - 6 acting as learners or controls.
Subject 1 qualifies as a gifted subject on the basis of remote viewing ;
subject 2 qualifies as gifted on the basis of the random generator test;
subject 3 is tentatively classed as gifted in remote viewing, although
not yet completing the screening series, based on client evaluation of
highly successful remote-viewing experiments carried out for the client
in the previous program, and also on the basis of meeting the p< 10
-6
criterion in experimentation at another laboratory.
Subject 5 (learner/control), a male, age 54, is paired with gifted
subject 1, a male, age 55. Learner/control subject 6, a female, age 34, is
by age, background, and temperament paired with gifted subject 2, a male, age
-
2
e
31. Learner subject 4 (female, age 53) and gifted subject 3 ( male, age 41)
are paired on the basis of artistic occupations (professional photographer
and painter, respectively) and similar emotional and psychological makeup.
9
Earlier in the program nine subjects were to be placed in three categories,
three subjects each; gifted subjects, learners, and controls.
However,
experience in the early part of the program indicated that (a) a best effort
would require spending more time with fewer people, and (b) the distinction
between learners and controls was arbitrary in comparison with the distinction
between these categories and that of gifted subjects as defined above.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
RS 18
DATA?

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(a)
Remote Viewing of Natural Targets
The first screening test is based on previous SRI research
results which indicate that it is possible for a subject to describe
randomly-chosen geographical sites located several miles from the subject's
position and demarcated by some appropriate means.
This experiment consists of a series of double-blind tests
involving local targets in the San Francisco Bay area which can be docu-
mented by independent judging. Target locations within thirty minutes
driving time from SRI are randomly chosen from a list of targets kept
blind to subject and experimenters and used without replacement.
Hour many times --
out of how many
posible targets?
To begin an experiment, an experimenter is closeted with a
subject at SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin a narrative description of
the remote location.
A second experimenter obtains a target location
from the target pool and proceeds directly to the target without communi-
cating with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. The second
experimenter remains at the target site for an agreed-upon thirty-minute
period following the thirty minutes allotted for travel. During the
observation period, the remote viewing subject is asked to describe his
impressions of the target site into a tape recorder.
A comparison is
made when the experimenter returns.
Following a series of nine experiments, the results are sub-
jected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists
not otherwise associated with the research,
The judges are asked to blind
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
.
RS 18
(

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
match locations, independently visited, against typed manuscripts of
tape-recorded narratives of the remote viewer. A given narrative can
be assigned to more than one target location. A correct match requires
that a transcript of a given date be associated with the target of that
date. Probability calculations are on the basis of the a priori proba-
bility of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively assuming
assignment without replacement on the part of the judges.
As indicated in Report # 1
-
Subject 1 has completed
Details of
this series, obtaining a result significant at the p = 8 x 10
-10
leve 1. scoring x
Experimentation is in progress with Subjects 2 and 4, two transcripts
this is hares?
having been obtained from each to date.
DATA a wheel
(b)
Line Drawings
A pool of fifty simple line drawings of everyday objects has
been drawn, randomized, and placed in a secure location.
During experimentation, experimenters and subject are separated
by either an experimenter or subject entering a shielded room so that
from that time forward the subject is at all times visually, acoustically,
and electrically shielded from personnel and material at the target
location.
Following isolation a target is chosen by means of the universal
randomization protocol technique described in Section 4(a), used in this
case to generate a two-digit number modulo 50. The subject's task is
then to reproduce with pen on paper the line drawing now displayed at
the torget location.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
RS 16

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Following a period of effort not to exceed half an hour, the
subject may either pass (when he does not feel confident) or indicate
he is ready to submit a drawing to the experimenters, in which case the
drawing is collected by an experimenter before the subject is permitted
to see the target. The experiment is then repeated with replacement
until ten drawings have been obtained from the subject.
To obtain an independent evaluation of the correlation between
target and response data, the experimenters submit the data for judging
on a blind basis by two SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the
research. The judges are asked to match the response data with the
corresponding target data (without replacement) .
Such experimentation is presently in progress, a number of
drawings having been obtained from
several of the subjects but not yet
submitted for judging.
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(c)
Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
The determination of the state of a four-state electronic
random stimulus generator comprises the third screening test. The target
is in the form of one of four art slides chosen randomly (p = }) by an
electronic random generator. The generator does not indicate its choice.
until the subject indicates his choice to the machine by pressing a button
(See Figure
8
).
As soon as the subject indicates his choice, the
target slide is illuminated to provide visual and auditory (bell if correct)
feedback as to the correctness or incorrectness of his choice.
Until
that time both subject and experimenter remain ignorant of the machine's
choice, so the experiment is of the double-blind type. Five legends at
the top of the machine face are illuminated one at a time with increasing
correct choices (6,8, 10, .... ) to provide additional reinforcement. The
machine choice, subject choice), cumulative trial number, and cumulative
hit number are recorded automatically on a printer. Following trial number
25, the machine must be reset manually by depressing a RESET button.
A methodological feature of the machine is that the choice of
a target is not forced. That is, a subject may press a PASS button when
he wishes not to guess, in which case the machine indicates what its
choice was, and neither a hit nor a trial is scored by the machine, which
then goes on to make its next selection.
Thus the subject does not have
to guess at targets when he does not feel that he has an idea as to which
to choose.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
.
Figure 8. ESP Teaching Machine used in this experiment. An
incorrect choice of target is indicated. Two of
the five "encouragement lights" at the top of the
machine are illuminated. The printer to the right
of the machine records data on fan-fold paper tape.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with probability
¿ and no learning, the probability of observing 2 k successes in n trials
is approximated by the probability of a normal distribution value
//3/16
For the purpose of screening, each subject is required to complete
100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2500 trials). To date, subjects 1,
2, and 6 have completed this phase of the screening program, and their
results are tabulated in Table 2. Subject 4 has completed 2100 trials with
.
mean scores of 25.71 (p = 0.20).
Table 2
Screening Data: Four-state Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
Subject
PER
Mean Score/100 Trials
Over 2500 Trials
Binomial Probability
1
25.76
0.22
2
29.36
%
-7
3 x 10
6
25.40
0.33
?
Break-out
On the basis of this test Subject 2. whose scores are plotted in Fig.
9, qualifies as a gifted individual, having satisfied the criterion of
producing a result whose: a priori probability under the null hypothesis is
P < 10.
-6
Of further interest are this subject's personal observations
of subjective experiences during the screening test, presented in Appendix
2.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
50
- Out of 100 trials/run.
:40
/N+ 20
30
2
HITS/RUN
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
RUN NUMBER - 100 Trials/Run.
p = ¿ per trial
FIGURE 9 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
2.
Identification of Measurable Characteristics Possessed by
Gifted Subjects (20%).
a)
Medical Evaluation
The medical evaluation of program participants has been
assigned to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program
is being handled by Dr. Robert Armbruster, Director of the Clinic's
Department of Environmental Medicine. The Clinic, in turn, has subcontracted
certain special tests to the Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University.
One visual sensitivity test is being administered by the Bioengineering
Group of the Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory of SRI ..
The testing procedures, outlined in Table 3 fall into seven categories:
1)
General physical examination, including complete medical
and family history;
2)
Laboratory examinations, including SMA-12 panel blood
chemistries, protein electrophoresis, blood lipid profile,
urinalyses, serology, blood type and factor, pulmonary
function screening, and 12-lead electrocardiogram;
3)
Neurological examination, including comprehensive and
electroencephalogram (sleeping and routine) ;
4)
Audiometric examination, including comprehensive, Bekesy
bone conduction, speech discrimination, and impedance
bridge test;
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

#
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-09
For Rel || | |2 00787ROY6), abject
ersonne] (subjects, learners,
controls, experimenters)
1
2
3
4
5
1
6
MEDICAL EXAMINATION
Personnel #1 - 3, subjects; #4 - 6, learners/controls;
7, 8, experimenters.
1. General Physical Examination
Complete medical
Family history
2.
Laboratory Examinations
SMA-12 panel blood chemistries
Protein electrophoresis
Blood lipid profile
Urinalyses
Serology
Blood type and factor
Pulmonary function screening
Electrocardiogram 12-lead
3. Neurological Examination
Comprehensive
Electroencephalogram, sleeping and routine
4. Audiometric Examination
Comprehensive
Bekesy bone conduction
Speech discrimination
Impedance bridge test
5.
Opthalmologist Examination
Comprehensive
Card testing
Peripheral field test
Muscle test
Dilation funduscope
Indirect opthalmoscopic and fundus examination
6.
Special Visual Examinations
Electroretinogram (Stanford Med.)
Dark adaptation test (Stanford Med.)
Visual contrast sensitivity (SRI)
7.
EMI Brain Scan
C
Palo Alto Medical Clinic
Stanford Medical Center
SRI
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
4-Completed
Scheduled ->
Opthalmologist Examination
Special Visual Examinations
EMI Brain Scan
#1
#2
#3
General Physical Examination
Laboratory Examinations
Neurological Examination
Audiometric Examination

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
5)
Opthalmologist examination, including comprehensive, card
testing, peripheral field test, muscle test, dilation
funduscope, and indirect opthalmoscopic and fundus examin-
ation;
6)
Special visual examinations, including electroretinogram,
dark adaptation test, and visual contrast sensitivity;
7)
EMI Brain scan.
As indicated in Table 3, medical testing is currently in progress.
To date the return information is sparse, having to be collated from
several clinics before a complete analysis can be completed. To provide
an indication of the type of raw data that is to be collated, a small
sample of data obtained on Subject 1 is presented in Appendix 3. As
indicated, the EMI computerized brain scan reveals a slight enlargement of
the entire right lateral ventricle, while the left appears normal in size.
An asymmetry in alpha development between left and right hemispheres is
also indicated. Also noted is some concern about the EKG suggesting a
coronary artery problem. The significance of these factors for our interest
will be developed under the direction of Dr. Armbruster and made available
to the client as available.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Hour Salfaut
Holsted Reitan?
See auder
Neurophysi
b)
Psychological Evaluation
The psychological evaluation of program participants consists
of both baseline personality evaluation, and of ongoing testing associated
with daily experimentation. The collection of baseline data (e.g., in-
depth interview, W.A. I.S., etc.) is for the purpose of identifying base-
line characteristics possessed by gifted subjects. The ongoing testing
associated with daily experimentation. (e.g., Mood Adjective Checklists)
is for the purpose of identifying psychological correlates of successful
versus unsuccessful performance tasks.
1)
Baseline Data
The bulk of the baseline evaluation has been assigned to the
Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program is being handled by
Dr. J.E. Heenan, Chief Clinical Psychologist of the Department of Psychiatry.
The baseline evaluation, outlined in Table 4, consists of
1
(1)
In depth interviews, including objective events and subjective
views relating to the discovery and enhancement of paranormal
capacities; socio-economic, cultural, familial, religious
environment; outstanding peaks, traumas; values, motivation,
interpersonal style;
(2)
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (W.A.I.S.);
(3)
Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (M.M.P.I.)
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
2)
Cognitive Style Preference Test
In connection with testing hypotheses associated with hemispheric
specialization of the brain, Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter
Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, San Francisco, has
been brought into the program as a consultant.
In his capacity as consultant, Dr. Ornstein has provided an instru-
ment named the Cognitive Style Preference Test .. This test was developed
for use in differentiating between individuals preferring a gestalt-
oriented cognitive style as compared with a verbally-oriented cognitive
style. For the purpose of the program this instrument is administered
to determine whether individuals exhibiting paranormal functioning prefer,
as a group, one style of cognitive functioning predominantly as compared
with individuals in a control group. The test is administered once to
each individual. A sample of the test is included below.
Preliminary results indicate some preference for a verbally-oriented
cognitive style on the part of good subjects (Figure 10),
but further
data is required before any significance is to be attached to the results
tabulated thus far.
M
Should a correlation of test results with paranormal functioning be
found, it would be appropriate in later work to determine whether this
test instrument would be useful as a screening device, i.e., determine
. whether other individuals sharing the profile also exhibit paranormal
functioning.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1
50
40
"No. Verbal :Preferences
.30
20
10
0
10
No. Gestalt Preferences
20
-
30
40
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Gifted Subjects
Learners/Controls Experimenters
FIGURE 10
SUMMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

INSTRUCTIONS TO SUB
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787R000100820001-0
Please do not turn over the pages until I ask you to do so. On each
page of this booklet there are sets of three items arranged in rows. Two
of them are alike or fit together in some way. Your task is to select
which one is different and doesn't belong with the other two. The two
columns on the first page are samples. There are three designs or shapes
in each row. Each design has a word printed on it. In the first row of
the first column all the words are the same. Most people would say that
the first and second shapes go together and the third one doesn't belong.
Would you agree? (If not, explain. ) Mark the third one with an X then.
In the second row most people would say that the first one is different
and the last two go together. Do you agree? Then mark the first one
with an X.
In the third row the shapes are all the same, but the words HORSE
and SADDLE go together and the world FAULT doesn't belong. Do you agree?
(If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X.
Which would you pick as the odd one in the 4th row?
[Color (2nd
one)]
In the 5th row you could choose either a word that doesn't belong
or a shape that doesn't belong. Which is the odd word? (TROUT.) Which
is the odd shape? [the CIRCLE (DIME)]
Either one of these answers is
right. Mark either one of them.
The last row also has two possible right answers.
Which is the odd
word?
(SHIRT.) Which is the odd shape? [The second one (DOG)]
Mark
either one of them with an X.
On some of these sets people find it easier or more natural to pick
out the odd word, and one some they find it easier to pick out the odd
shape .
Either way is correct.
We want you to make your selections
whichever way seems most comfortable and natural to you. Mark only once
in each row, and go as fast as you can. Any questions so far?
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
The second column has more samples.
When I say begin, please mark
an odd member in each row, and say "STOP" as soon as you finish this
sample column. BEGIN.
(Check forced choices -- )
Any questions? Then when I say "BEGIN" turn over the next page.
Work as fast as you can, and continue until you have finished the booklet,
then say "STOP". Ready? BEGIN.
..
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

,
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1
bean
bean
bean
O calm
calm
0
calm
:
0
bell
bell
bell
because
window
door
00
O
O
horse
saddle
fault
city
town
Smile C
street
color
avenue
6
name
"name
Tome
trout
nickel
dime
tobacco
church
smoke
doq
shirt
pump
5
.
bee
sting
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
.
#
pepper
Sock
salt
bread
butter
child
Sheep
wool
table
duck
Stable
chair
Scissors
Fiddle
cut
city
town
run
shorts
book
boy
girl
sour
sweet
lap
sheep
cold
wool
slow
Stast G
steel
0
key
shell
lock
soldier
army
butter
hat [
pat
old
story
spider
web
0
wave
house
cottuge
stave
caff
hot
×
twin
Twin
twin
0
swift
fast
steal
desk
smart
green
( grass
modern
moden
modern
hammer
pickle
nail
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
land
carpet ...
(
rug
0
L
C
thief
4
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
foot
1 hand
milk
Cheese
pain
tracker
3
hard
soft
thirst
water
clock
Spinach
command
Corder
drink
plant
whiskey
heavy
myth
light
slide
angry
mad
food
witch
hunger
sad
clean
bath
toy
low
high
snow
snow
snow
joy
brick
Shoppy
bed
sleep
jelly
find
9
find
find
color
bitter
sweet
fourth
lamp
flight
M
white
look
spigot
king
queen
question
flower
river
club
stream
healthy
rifle
rough
squeeze
Smooth
tion
tiger
Fall
5
e
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
0

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
craft
short
print
dream
Jsleep
soft
loud
po duty
dut
duty
woman.
eagle
bird
march
lazy
lazy
lazy
eating
food
stars
moon
foot
shoe
cake
mountain
grommet
floor
wedle
thread
ocean
amile
water
rock
fat
then
Tad
quiet
loud
.
deep
shallow
flower
doctor
(street
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
apple
fruit
silence
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
3)
Midtesting (SRI-administered)
Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation is carried
out to provide indicators as to the effects of mood and conceptualization
on success in experimentation. Conclusions will be drawn in the final stage
of project effort.
Test: Mood Adjective Checklist
Source: Psychology Department, Stanford University (Hypnosis Lab)
Purpose: The Mood Adjective Checklist is one of a number of pre-experiment
instruments designed to provide a measure of a subject's feelings
of the moment as he enters the experimental situation. The purpose
is to determine whether measures of success in the experimental
phase correlate with pre-experiment mood indicators.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
MOOD ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST
Each of the words in the following list describes feelings or mood.
Please use the list to describe your feelings at this moment. Mark
each word according to these instructions:
If the word definitely describes how you feel at the moment you read
it, circle the double check (VV) to the right of the word. For example,
if the word is calm and you are definitely feeling calm at the moment,
circle the double check as follows:
calm
?
no
(This means you definitely
feel calm at this moment.)
If the word only slightly applies to your feelings at the moment, circle
the single check as follows:
calm
VV
?
no
(This means you feel
slightly calm at this
moment.)
If the word is not clear to you or if you cannot decide whether or not
it describes your feelings, circle the question mark as follows:
calm
VV
no
(This means you cannot
decide whether you are
calm or not.)
If you clearly decide that the word does not apply to your feelings at
this moment, circle the no as follows:
calm
TV
?
no
(This means you are sure
you are not calm at this
moment.
Work rapidly. Your first reaction is best. Work down the first column
before going to the next. Please mark all the words. This should take
only a few minutes.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
angry
VV
v
?
no
energetic
VV V ?
no
concentrating
VV V ?
no
playful
VV
V ?
no
drowsy
VV
V
?
no
suspicious
VV
V
?
no
affectionate
VV
V
?
no
startled
VV V
?
no
apprehensive
VV V
?
no
relaxed
VV V
?
no
blue
vV V
?
no
defiant
VV V
?
no
boastful
VV V
?
no
engaged in
thought
VV
V
?
no
elated
VV V
?
OU
active
VV V
?
no
pleased
VV V
?
no
nonchalant
VV
V
?
no
tired
VV
V
?
no
skeptical
VV
V
?
no
fearful
UV
V
?
no
sho cked
VV V
?
no
regretful
VV V
?
no
calm
VV V
?
no
egotistic
VV V
?
no
bold
VV V
?
no
overjoyed
VV
V
?
no
earnest
VV V.
?
no
vigorous
VV
V
?
no
sluggish
VV V
?
no
witty
VV
V
?
no
· forgiving
VV V
?
no
serene
VV V
?
no
clutched up
VV V
?.
no
rebellious
VV
?
no
lonely
VV
no
serious
VV V
no
cocky
VV V
?
no
warmhearted
VV V ?
no
lighthearted
-
VV
9
no
insecure
VV
V ?
no
quiet
VV V
?
no
self-
centered
VV
?
no
still
VV
V ?
no
V
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Test: Semantic Differential Checklist
Source: SRI Urban and Social Systems Division
Purpose: The Semantic Differential Checklist is one of a number of pre-
experiment instruments designed to provide a measure of subject
conceptualization about an experiment in which he is about to
participate. The purpose is to determine whether measures of
Success in the experiment correlate with pre-experiment conceptualization.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
:

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Semantic Differential Checklist
The purpose of this rating sheet is to obtain your candid reactions
regarding the conditions surrounding the experiment.
For each numbered item you will find a concept to be judged. You are to
rate each in order.
This is how you are to use the scales: If you feel that the concept
is highly or closely related to one end of the scale, you should place your
checkmark as follows;
impractical
.
practical
impractical
practical
If your feelings on the concept are neutral, place your checkmark in the
middle space, etc.
Work at fairly high speed through this rating sheet. Do not puzzle over
individual items. Give your first impressions, your immediate feelings about
each item.
Conditions surrounding experiment
1. good
bad
2. unfriendly
friendly
3. stimulating
dull
4. positive
negative
5. unhelpful
helpful
6. right
wrong
7. uninteresting
interesting
8. unorganized
organized
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
9. satisfying
disappointing
10. unprepared
prepared
My involvement in experiment
1. good
bad
2. useless
valuable
3. stimulating
dull
4. positive
negative
5. passive
active
6. capable
incapable
7. important
unimportant
8. unsuccessful
successful
9. prepared
unprepared
10. impractical
practical
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
TABLE 4
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
Personnel #1 - 3, subjects;
#4 - 6 learners/controls; #7 - 8, experimenters.
1
2a
2b
3
$
5
6
1
8
9
M.M.P.I.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
.
#7
#8
SRI
Palo Alto Medical Clinic
Client
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Personnel (subjects, learners,
controls, experimenters )
In-depth interview
W.A.I.S. (Clinic-administered)
W.A.I.S. (Client-administered)
Benton Visual Memory Test,
Wechsler Memory Scale
T.A.T. and Rorschach
Bender Gestalt Test
Luscher color test
Strong Aptitude/Values Test
Cognitive Style Preference Test

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(4) Benton Visual Memory Test and Wechsler Memory Scale;
(5) Thematic Apperception Test (T.A.T.)
and Rorschach projective tests
(6)
Bender Gestalt Test,
(7)
Luscher color test
(8)
Strong Aptitude/Values Test
(9) Cognitive Style Preference Test
As indicated in Table 4, the psychological testing is well underway.
There is, of course, a considerable lag between testing and results. To
date, only a partial analysis of data from Subject 1 is available. We
present this data in Appendix 4 as a sample of the type of analysis that
will become available. We note in passing that the data on Subject 1
from the W.A. I.S. appears to correlate with that obtained from the
client-administered W.A.I.S., an indication of the uniformity of results
*
available from such testing.
Private communication.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(c)
Neuropsychological Evaluation
In addition to the measurement of the physiological components
of the neurological system covered in the medical evaluation, a neuro-
psychological profile is being obtained by the administration of the
Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery, which includes the Category
1
Recognition Test, Tactual Performance Test, Halstead-Wepman Aphasia
Screening Test, and other appropriate measures. This phase of the
program is being handled by Dr. Donald Lim of the Palo Alto Veteran's
Administration Hospital, who has personally consulted with Dr. Reitan
on testing procedures and interpretation. The neuropsychological evaluation
program is scheduled for the first half of September.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
3. Identification of Neurophysiological Correlates Which Relate to
Paranormal Activities
High on the list of priorities for the program is the identification
of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal activity. The
purpose of this part of the study is twofold: (a) to obtain information
about the neurophysiological state associated with paranormal activity
in general, and (b) to obtain indicators which differentiate between
correct and incorrect responses to a paranormally applied stimulus, so
that an independently-determined bias factor can be applied during the
generation of data by the subject.
Two facilities are in use for the purposes described above. One
is a standard EEG facility under the direction of Dr. Jerry Lukas,
head of SRI's Sleep Studies program. This facility consists of two
sound-isolated rooms with appropriate signal lead connections, an
eight-channel polygraph for visual recording, and a magnetic tape/
computer processing/ printer readout which provides on-line processing
of the polygraph data. In our configuration we obtain a hardcopy
printout of 5-second averages of eight channels of polygraph information
fifteen minutes following a fifteen minute run. At present we monitor
broadha.
alpha (7-14 Hz) and beta (14-34 Hz) brainwave components from
the left and right occipital regions, galvanic skin response, and two
channels of plethysmograph data (blood volume and pulse height).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
The second facility is a smaller semi-portable four-channel polygraph
with a GSR channel, reflected-light plethysmograph indicating blood volume/
pulse height, one channel of unfiltered EEG activity, and a fourth EEG
channel with zero-crossing digital filtering. The latter permits
percent-time measurements in any band, with upper and lower band edge
settings in 1 Hz increments.
Considerable data has been obtained with both facilities. The bulk
of the data awaits further analysis which will occur at completion of
various series : underway.
However, several results have been obtained
which we describe below.
(a) Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe Experiment
As discussed in Report #2, a variety of evidence from clinical and
neurosurgical sources indicates that the two hemispheres of the human
brain are specialized for different cognitive functions. The left
-
hemisphere is predominantly involved in verbal and other analytic
functioning, the right in spatial and other holistic processing.
In consultation with Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter
Neuropsychiatric Institute, an hypothesis was formed based on certain
observed characteristics that paranormal functioning might involve
right hemispheric specialization. To test this hypothesis, the EEG
remote strobeflash experiment, discussed in the original proposal and in
the paper attached to Report #1, was repeated with Subject 4 three times
in the sleep lab under the direction of Dr. Lukas with monitoring of
right and left occipital regions. Each experiment consisted of twenty
=
60
15-second trials, with ten no-flash trials, and ten 16-Hz trials randomly
intermixed. Reduction of alpha activity (arousal response) correlated
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
with remote stimuli was observed as in previous experiments, but essentially
only in the right hemisphere (average alpha reduction 16 percent in right
8-12 H2
hemisphere, 2 percent in left, during the 16-Hz trials as compared with
was
the no-flash trials). The trial-to-trial variation is larger than in
- new = 9-114
previous work, however, due to use of a wider-band filter for the alpha
- How?
band, and therefore the system is being modified before further work. "
(b) Physiological Correlates of Remote Viewing
For use w/
all sulys?
- Criteria /a
eval. ?
In this series of experiments a subject takes part in a remote
viewing protocol as described in Section A.1. (c) (Remote Viewing with
Feedback) ..
In this case, however, the subject is connected to the.
physiological recording instruments of the smaller semi-portable
four-channel polygraph described above.
Baseline and experimental
measures of the following observables are made: 1) Galvanic skin response
(GSR) is recorded using finger electrodes taped in place on second and
fourth finger; 2) Blood volume/pulse height is recorded using a
reflected-light plethysmograph; 3) Unfiltered EEG is recorded from the
right occipital region; 4) Percent-time in alpha (8-12 Hz) is recorded
on the fourth channel. The alpha filter is a sharp cut-off digital type
with essentially zero-pass outside the prescribed bandpass limits.
During the course of an experiment the subject is asked to describe
his perceptions as to the nature of the remote target. His comments are
tape recorded and noted on the polygraph, along with the time. A
correlation is then attempted between those descriptions which are found
to be uniquely correct and accurate, and the corresponding sections of
polygraph recording.
K
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1

POSSIBLY because"success" requires a
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001000/200010 fatalistic/don't.care
state ?!
In our investigations to date we have not found a strong correlation
between the observed physiological states and the subjects' descriptions.
Of the correlates being monitored, the one which seems the most promising
is the unfiltered EEG, , In our preliminary analysis of the data it appears
that there is often an overall reduction in EEG power in the twenty-second
period just before a subject renders a correct description.
Subsequent
to this observation, we have learned that Janet Mitchell at the American
Society for Psychical Research, made similar observations in her work with
Subject 3 (Swann), also in remote viewing experiments. A sample chart
record is shown in Figure 11. (Time runs from right to left.)
Speculation
con signy?
The traces, top to bottom, are the unfiltered EEG, blood volume/pulse
height, GSR, and filtered (alpha) EEG. Protocol, verbal description, and
photograph of the location accompanying this chart are given in Section
A. 1. (c).
Seven experiments of this type have been completed as a pilot study.
Upon completion of the analysis of this data, any findings will be
tested under rigorous no-feedback conditions.
4.
Identification of the Nature of Paranormal Phenomena and Energy (10%)
This portion of the program, is devoted to efforts to understand the
nature and scope of paranormal phenomena, including investigation of the
physical and psychological laws underlying the phenomena, determination
of the manner and degree to which known processes are mediated by little
understood or undiscovered mechanisms or energies, definition of the
prrcise nature of the channels involved, etc.
At this point in the effort three "psychokinetic" tasks have been
Approved ForRelease 2000/08/10 CIA RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
and are reported below.

Approved For Release 2000108/1GRACIA-ROP9630787R000100020001-0
-
Vi
water
QUESTION
45
44
42
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 ; CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
:
.....
-
!
-
-
REATY
-
--
CIB
--
-
-
€
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(a) Universal Randomization Protocol
It was deemed desirable in our work to establish a universal randomi-
zation protocol independent of the particular experiment under consideration.
The only exceptions were to be automated experiments where target selection
is determined by radioactive decay or electronic randomization.
The randomization procedure is designed around a ten-unit base, e.g.,
ten targets, ten work periods, etc. A ten-digit sequence governing an
experiment is blind to both experimenter and subject, and is uncovered by
means of the following procedure. A three-page RAND Table of Random Digits
(Table 5) is entered to obtain the ten-digit sequence, the entrance point
being determined by four throws of a die,
the first 1, 2, or 3 determining
+
page, the next 1, 2, 3, or 4 determining column block, and the final throw
determining from which of the first six rows in the block the ten-digit
sequence is to be taken.
An opaque card with a single-digit window is
then moved across the row to uncover digits one at a time. If a multiplicity
of targets exist, the digits 0 through 9 are employed directly. If a binary
command is required (e.g., increase/decrease or activity/no activity) the
parity of the digit (even or odd) is employed.
+ A technique found in control runs to produce a distribution of die faces
differing nonsignificantly from chance expectation.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
TABLE 5
CPYRGHT
Table of Random Digits
*
11 16 43 63 18
76 83 15 86 78
40 94 15 35 85
69 95 86 09 16
10 43 84 44 82
66 55 83 76 49
73 50 58 34 72
55 95 31 79 57
36 79 22 62 36
33 26 66 65 83
39 41 21 60 13
11 44 28 93 20
73 94 40 47 73
12 03 25 14 14
57 99 47 67 48
61 83 45 91 99
15 46 98 22 85
49 56 31 28 72
41 70 17 31 17
91 40 27 72 27
79 51 62 10 07
64 20 84 82 37
38 60 52 93 41
58 29 98 38 80
20 12 51 07 94
51 48 67 28 75
64 51 61 79 71
40 68 49 99 48
33 88 07 64 13
71 32 55 52 17
13 01 57 29 07
75 97 86 42 98
08 07 46 20 55
65 28 59 71 98
12 13 85 30 10
34 55 63 98 61
88 26 77 60 68
17 26 45 73 27
38 22 42 93 01
16 38 11 50 69
25 41 68 78 75
95 63 99 97 54
31 19 99 25 58
52 45 88 88 80
78 35 26 79 13
61 55 57 64 04
86 21 01 18 08
33 00 78 56 07
92 00 84 48 97
78 13 79 87 68
04 68 98 71 30
84 98 72 87 59
38 71 23 15 12
08 58 86 14 90
62 49 09 92 15
21 28 30 70 44
58 72 20 36 78
19 18 66 96 02
24 21 66 34 44
33 22 65 59 03
26 18 86 94 97
51 35 14 77 99
59 13 83 95 42
71 16 85 76 09
12 89 35 40 48
07 25 58 61 49
29 47 85 96 52
50 41 43 19 66
33 18 68 13 46
85 09 53 72 82
96 15 59 50 09
27 42 97 29 18
79 89 32 94 48
88 39 25 42 11
29 62 16 65 83
71 02 01 72 65
38 64 80 92 78
81 31 37 74 00
14 54 43 71 34
54 71 40 24 01
04 29 24 60 28
75 66 62 69 54
83 40 38 88 27
09 83 41 13 33
17 02 64 97 37
85 87 51 21 39
67 64 20 52 04
30 69 74 48 06
61 04 02 73 09
48 07 07 68 48
02 53 19 77 37
64 04 19 90 11
97 44 45 99 04
30 15 99 54 50
83 77 84 61 15
93 03 98 94 16
52 79 51 06 31
12 14 89 22 31
31 36 16 06 50
82 24 43 43 92
96 60 71 72 20
73 83 87 70 67
24 86 39 75 76
96 99 05 52 44
97 30 38 87 01
07 27 79 32 17
79 42 12 17 69
09 11 97 48 03
47 58 97 83 64
65 12 84 83 34
07 49 32 80 98
57 66 64 12 04
26 72 95 82 72
31 92 17 64 58
73 72 00 86 57
08 43 31 91 72
86 05 44 11 90
57 23 82 74 64
61 48 75 23 29
10 01 17 50 04
16 53 00 55 47
24 21 94 10 90
08 53 16 15 78
92 42 06 54 31
07 30 44 70 10
31 30 94 93 87
02 33 00 24 76
86 59 52 62 47
18 55 22 94 91
20 75 09 70 24
72 61 96 66 28
72 11 53 49 85
58 03 69 91 37
28 53 78 43 95
26 65 43 78 51
. This table appears through the courtesy of The RAND Corporation and the
McGraw-Hill Bouk Company, Inc. and is reprinted by permission from The Compleat
Strategyst, by J. D. Williams, pp. 219-221 [44].
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
62 96 61 24 68
48 44 91 51 02
44 12 61 94 38
12 63 97 52 91
94 20 50 42 59
68 98 35 05 61
17 04 89 45 23
70 69 32 52 55
73 54 74 37 59
95 63 23 95 55
46 49 26 15 94
08 32 02 08 39
38 71 66 13 80
60 21 20 50 99
35 54 25 58 65
75 06 13 76 74
40 60 31 61 52
83 23 53 73 61
21 21 59 17 91
14 06 39 31 04
54 62 74 85 11
99 75 62 63 60
65 99 05 70 48
25 06 77 75 71
16 97 59 54 28

..
- Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
CPYRGHT
07 42 85 88 63
96 02 38 89 36
97 92 94 12 20
86 43 19 44 85
35 37 92 79 22
28 90 65 50 13
40 56 83 32 22
40 48 69 11 22
10 98 22 28 07
10 92 02 62 99
41 48 39 29 35
17 06 17 82 52
90 12 73 33 41
77 80 61 24 46
23 51 06 87 74
93 04 06 64 76
24 99 04 10 99
63 00 21 29 90
48 45 46 52 69
02 98 25 79 91
50 76 59 19 30
43 21 61 26 08
18 16 78 46 31
94 47 97 65 00
39 17 00 66 29
96 16 76 43 75
74 10 89 36 43
52 29 17 58 22
95 96 69 09 47
70 97 56 26 93
35 68 47 26 07
03 68 40 36 00
52 83 15 53 81
85 81 26 18 75
23 57 07 57 54
58 93 92 83 66
86 76 56 74 65
37 10 06 24 92
63 64 24 76 38
54 72 35 65 27
53 07 63 82 35
53 40 61 38 55
38 51 92 95 00
84 82 88 12 48
25 54 83 40 75
55 17 28 15 56
18 85 65 90 43
65 79 90 19 14
81 36 30 51 73
40 35 38 48 07
47 76 74 68 90
87 91 73 85 49
48 21 37 17 08
18 89 90 96 12
77 54 15 76 75
26 90 78 81 73
71 18 92 83 77
68 14 12 53 40
92 55 11 13 26
68 05 26 54 22
88 46 00 63 52
51 55 99 11 59
81 31 06 32 51
42 58 76 81 49
88 14 79 97 00
92 21 43 33 86
73 45 97 93 59
97 17 65 54 16
67 64 20 50 51
15 08 95 05 57
33 16 68 70 94
53 29 58 71 33
38 26 49 47 08
96 46 10 06 04
11 12 02 22 54
23 01 19 41 08
29 19 66 51 87
28 17 74 41 11
15 70 57 38 35
75 76 84 95 49
24 54 36 32 85
66 95 34 47 37
81 12 70 74 93
86 66 87 03 41
66 46 07 56 48
19 71 22 72 63
84 57 54 98 20
56 72 77 20 36
50 34 73 35 21
68 75 66 47 57
19 98 79 22 22
27 93 67 80 10
09 61 70 44 08
75 02 26 53 32
98 60 62 94 51
31 99 46 90 72
02 98 59 53 03
89 96 51 02 06
95 83 09 54 06
11 47 40 87 86
05 59 46 70 45
45 58 72 96 11
98 57 94 24 81
81 42 28 68 42
60 99 77 96 69
01 07 10 85 30
74 30 57 75 09
21 77 17 59 63
23 15 19 02 74
90 20 96 85 21
14 29 33 91 94
42 27 81 21 60
32 57 61 42 78
04 98 26 84 70
27 87 51 54 80
17 69 76 01 14
63 24 73 20 96
19 74 02 46 37
97 37 73 21 12
05 68 63 02 43
34 13 40 29 36
50 19 77 98 69
86 49 76 87 09
52 99 24 66 50
89 91 05 73 95
46 95 46 75 36
28 96 88 19 36
94 51 89 39 84
81 47 86 77 50
82 54 96 26 76
31 12 34 98 99
00 18 47 21 86
78 90 67 54 80
61 79 88 16 00
80 01 88 47 42
87 46 26 31 65
79 81 66 16 30
57 66 62 90 55
46 51 80 14 87
88 69 25 87 16
12 27 34 81 76
29 80 56 49 94
66 87 26 22 30
20 09 44 29 62
41 38 21 67 68
06 71 13 49 39
19 59 97 62 47
60 93 58 15 04
50 52 08 21 53
13 93 44 68 85
58 31 58 83 66
11 32 37 00 69
90 26 98 92 66
37 35 49 30 25
15 18 25 01 66
55 20 86 34 70
18 15 82 52 83
76 86 93 93 00
84 97 80 75 04
40 77 98 63 82
2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

-
-Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
CPYRGHT
51 39 28 59 36
43 89 85 05 96
28 54 99 83 27
99 94 32 53 77
54 23 94 19 18
79 52 64 62 74
40 87 16 18 03
25 76 75 54 84
57 89 27 33 94
07 16 09 02 62
47 70 43 83 55
71 70 88 01 17
02 33 07 47 36
53 27 44 44 68
62 61 11 96 98
09 30 42 92 65
76 11 52 92 47
55 34 25 12 99
03 04 78 39 81
11 91 60 92 67
63 31 28 18 86
29 08 52 01 01
26 46 05 05 01
31 73 11 89 38
27 63 22 15 70
34 27 45 64 26
01 76 42 59 59
69 29 38 98 75
06 33 56 21 11
44 01 45 25 67
11 76 25 48 06
02 65 15 29 12
64 14 28 76 76
21 35 88 87 73
31 73 63 16 95
11 52 36 42 13
28 43 62 54 68
75 23 57 53 70
97 15 54 87 06
52 23 92 18 31
09 52 28 38 55
85 97 31 58 88
31 18 14 96 72
17 23 70 40 24
93 71 41 54 14
93 71 20 27 42
32 11 58 26 83
67 18 28 90 30
15 68 15 35 99
58 18 57 38 40
07 06 87 59 47
71 74 36 92 85
77 71 22 39 14
08 90 74 37 68
26 62 27 41 84
75 16 69 67 48
78 45 35 48 44
61 50 90 12 45
02 80 55 26 76
22 51 94 78 48
24 86 06 82 84
19 36 72 90 73
32 30 15 87 01
04 19 33 01 42
37 28 40 68 44
78 88 75 72 76
26 33 95 69 09
39 33 14 21 01
35 48 85 24 73
37 63 43 25 69
95 27 40 95 08
81 01 24 24 13
51 59 55 99 09
35 22 34 49 91
24 27 53 96 32
09 77 79 88 00
90 66 03 51 71
30 02 19 11 20
36 11 64 21 28
65 40 19 41 99
47 50 50 20 08
20 30 08 71 88
96 19 50 70 59
13 26 63 13 89
13 35 00 84 14
64 04 99 43 77
22 40 89 49 58
19 09 55 80 35
33 00 69 26 90
69 24 89 74 43
53 89 62 35 08
16 22 75 69 29
55 21 66 38 86
06 80 41 18 61
14 80 11 91 92
49 43 82 07 72
60 84 66 97 32
71 02 52 82 12
10 47 42 75 22
65 62 03 46 84
00 21 00 48 63
65 52 21 52 42
84 55 47 45 60
20 24 62 69 41
41 29 80 47 63
27 97 55 49 23
90 65 00 61 70
09 43 30 91 67
35 16 63 27 31
07 30 00 97 04
36 09 96 15 77
95 55 27 34 56
16 57 88 81 40
54 35 71 36 89
19 56 90 38 14
76 05 30 51 50
69 12 56 94 42
00 97 70 44 81
42 04 40 86 49
34 82 23 58 43
78 46 88 23 80
13 92 07 87 61
12 31 19 28 08
07 75 30 40 73
58 52 08 00 22
08 39 53 70 43
37 88 03 41 72
04 20 49 44 34
62 79 88 19 02
46 16 66 72 06
01 61 94 37 69
03 74 20 16 13
96 77 01 94 40
29 70 04 20 93
87 76 77 76 07
21 64 44 65 87
65 98 96 28 43
06 64 49 47 84
66 99 56 18 12
36 24 83 66 66
14 89 45 92 73
88 95 04 60 77
34 65 11 20 38
12 38 62 96 56
30 47 42 59 64
21 48 29 54 22
02 00 23 36 71
52 06 87 38 01
52 18 81 94 91
55 13 76 10 39
02 00 66 99 13
41 72 75 21 71
56 71 90 60 54
98 44 18 15 29
59 60 76 52 25
3
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
22 56 50 24 75
00 25 87 90 18
21 99 12 62 28
10 91 73 44 58
29 88 09 52 88
..

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(b)
Experiments with Develco Superconducting Differential Magnet-
ometer (Gradiometer)
One of the first psychoenergetically-produced physical effects
observed by SRI personnel in early research (1972) was the apparent
perturbation of a Josephson effect magnetometer. The conditions of that
pilot study, involving a few hours use of an instrument committed to
other research, prevented a proper investigation.
The number of data
samples was too few to permit meaningful statistical analysis, and the
lack of readily available multiple recording equipments prevented in-
vestigation of possible "recorder only" effects.
Therefore, at the suggestion of the client, a series of
experiments were carried out using a client-supplied Develco Model
8805 superconducting second-derivative gradiometer manufactured by
Develco, Inc., Mountain View, California.
The assembled device is
shown in Figure 12.
Basically, the gradiometer is a four-coil Josephson effect
magnetometer device consisting of a pair of coil pairs wound so as to
provide a series connection of two opposing first-derivative gradiometers,
yielding a second-derivative gradiometer (i.e., a device sensitive only
to second and higher order derivative fields). As a result, the device is
relatively insensitive to uniform fields and to uniform gradients. This
arrangement allows for sensitive measurement
of
fields from nearby
sources while discriminating against relatively uniform magnetic fields
produced by remote
sources.
The device is ordinarily
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

.
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
OTTICO
MEDICAL GRADIOMETER
SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER
FIGURE 12
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
used to measure magnetic fields originating from processes within the
human body, such as action currents in the heart which produce magneto-
cardiograms. The sensitive tip of the instrument is simply placed near
the body area of interest.
In our application, however, the subject is located at a distance
of four meters from the gradiometer probe. As a result the Subject is
located in a zone of relative insensitivity; e.g., standing up,
sitting
down, leaning forward, and arm and leg movements produce no signals.
From this location the subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the
probe. The results of his efforts are available to him as feedback from
three sources:
an oscilloscope, a panel meter, and a chart recorder,
the latter providing a permanent record.
After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF interference
effects, which required modificaton by the manufacturer, the gradiometer
was available for use by the contractor from June 10 to June 21. Some
RF interference effects remained, due in part to environmental proximity
to other instrumentation, but the device was usable nonetheless.
Protocol for subject participation was instituted as follows.
The subject removes all metal objects, and the effects of body movements
are checked at the start of each experimental period. The subject then
works with the machine in a learning mode, observing effects being produced,
if any, via feedback from the instrumentation. Once satisfied that a
possibility exists of producing effects on command under experimenter
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
control, the experimenter announces the start of the experiment. The
universal randomization protocol (discussed in previous section) is then
used to generate ten activity/no activity periods of equal length (e.g.,
twenty-five seconds) pre-determined by the experimenter.
A sample run (Run 1, Subject 1) is shown in Figure 13. The
randomly-generated ON (activity) periods are Nos. 2, 8, and 9, As
observed, signals appear in each of these three periods. The signal
appearing in period 9 was strong enough to cause loss of continuous
tracking. This latter type of signal can be the result of an exceptionally
strong flux change, or an RF burst whether subject-generated or artifactual,
and are handled on the basis' of statistical correlation as discussed below.
An artifact due to the passage of a truck in the parking lot adjacent to
the laboratory (under continuous surveillance by the experimenter) is
noted in period 6. Each of the signals on scale corresponds to an input
2
~ 1.6 x 10-
9
Gauss/cm (second derivative
2"B /02),
equivalent to
-
2
n "text"
run ?
.
Hair
about
rough data
on all other
~ 3.5 x 10-
7
Gauss referred to one pickup coil.
The interpretation of such observations must be subjected to careful
analysis. For example, the emphasis on "corresponds to" is based on the
following: although the probe is designed to register magnetic fields,
and the simplest hypothesis is that an observed signal is such, in a
task as potentially complex as "psychokinesis", one must be cautious about
assigning a given observed effect to a specific cause. Therefore, without
multiple measurement employing equally sensitive apparatus, which time and
lack of instrument availability did not permit, one can only conclude
that generation of a magnetic field is the most probable cause. With
Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
gyal was observed simultaneously on three
recording devices, and thus a "recorder only" effect can be considered

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
BASELINE
END
OFF
ON
ON
OFF
TRUCK
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
ON
OFF
BASELINE
START
FIGURE 13 GRADIOMETER DATA
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
low probability, although an electronics interference effect ahead of all
display cannot be ruled out. We therefore treat the magnetic cause as
tentative, although most probable, and concentrate our attention on
whether a correlation exists between system disturbances and subject
efforts.
Subject 1 logged the most time in controlled runs, thirteen ten-trial
runs. Each of the ten trials in the run lasted fifty seconds each, *
the activity/no activity command for each trial being generated by the
universal randomization protocol technique. In the 13 x 10 = 130 trials,
consisting of a random distribution of 64 activity and 66 no-activity
periods, 63 events of signal-to-noise ratio > 1 were observed. Of these
63 events, 42 were distributed among the activity periods, 21 among the
no-activity periods, a correlation significant at the p = 0.004 level.
2
Subjects 2 and 6 also interacted with the device. Although subject
efforts and observed perturbations sometimes coincided, activity was
generally low and did not appear to be a signature of correlated activity
under control. A controlled ten-trial run with Subject 2 and two such
runs with Subject 6 yielded non-significant results.
Given the limited availability of the instrument and somewhat
noisy environment, from our best effort we nonetheless conclude that
for Subject 1 the observed number of precisely timed events in pilot
work coupled with the statistically significant (p 0.004) correlation
between subject effort and signal output in controlled runs indicate a
also suunto a
control "um
tafe when
1 Pat not
there !
* With the exception of the first run where 25-second trials were used.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Stacey?
Tom =

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
highly probable cause-effect relationship. Thus it appears that a gifted
subject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of
1
sensitivity ~ 10
-9
Gauss/cm
2
from a distance of four meters. Further work
would be required to determine absolutely the precise nature of the
interaction, although given the equipment design the generation of a
magnetic field is the most probable mechanism.
(c) Experiments with Laser-Monitored Torsion Pendulum
In this series of experiments we examine the possibility that a subject :
may be able to exert a physical influence on a remotely located physical
system. The target is a torsion pendulum suspended by a metal fiber inside
a sealed glass bell jar. The pendulum consists of three 100 gram balls
arranged symetrically at 120° angles on a 2 cm radius. The entire apparatus
is shock mounted, and protected from air currents by the enclosing bell
jar.
The angular position of the pendulum is measured by means of an
optical readout system. The system consists of a laser beam from a lo ..
power argon laser
+
reflected from a small mirror on the pendulum onto a
position sensing silicon detector
1.5 meters from the pendulum. The
detector yields an output voltage proportional to spot position. The
output from the detector is monitored by a chart recorder
ttt
which provides
a continuous sine wave record of pendulum position.
+
Spectra Physics Model 262
tt United Detector Technology Model SC/10
tti Brush Model Mark 200
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
The system exhibits a sensitivity of approximately 10 microradians.
Under typical experimental conditions random accoustical fluctuations
drive the pendulum in its torsional normal mode of 10 second period to
a level ~ 100 microradians angular deviation. During control runs
the pendulum executes harmonic motion with a maximum variation in
amplitude of ± 10 percent over an hour period. Sudden vibrational
perturbations in the environment produce oscillation of the pendulum
in the vertical plane at a frequency of 1 Hz, as contrasted with the
torsional mode in the horizontal plane at 0.1 Hz.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
The subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the pendulum motion,
the results of which would be available as feedback from the chart recorder
The subject is then encouraged to work with the pendulum from a distance
of 1 meter, observing effects being produced. If satisfied that there
is a possibility of producing effects (typically following a week's activity,
a couple of hours per day), an experiment is begun.
As in other experiments, subject efforts to increase or decrease
oscillation amplitude are determined by an experimenter utilizing the uni-
versal randomization protocol described in (a). Each experiment lasts one
hour and consists of six 5-minute work periods alternated with six 5-minute
rest periods.
In later work, the subject is removed to a room 12 meters down the
hall with three intervening office spaces to determine whether effects can
be produced from a remote location. The subject is provided feedback at
the remote location either by closed circuit video or by a second chart
recorder in parallel with the recorder in the enclosed target laboratory.
The remote aspect was instituted both to prevent artifactual effects from
body heat, etc., and also to determine whether energy can be coupled via
the remote viewing channel to a remote location.
+_ Both experimental evidence and theoretical work indicate that distance
may not be a strong factor in paranormal phenomena. See, for example,
E.H. Walker "Properties of Hidden Variables in Quantum Theory: Impli-
cations for Paraphysics", U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratories,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
In pilot studies we observed considerable evidence indicating that a
gifted subject located in the same room is able, by concentration, to increase
or decrease pendulum motion on command while sitting quietly one meter from
the bell jar. The change-to-baseline ratio is often 5:1 or better so the
effects are not small. A sample chart showing a rest period followed by a
decrease period is given in Figure 14.
Vibrational artifacts can be ruled out on the basis that when such inputs
occur, a marked 1 Hz oscillation signal due to vertical motion is superimposed
on the 0.1 Hz torsional motion.
What is especially interesting are the
decreases which take the motion below that generally observed due to en-
vironmental noise driving. Such observations indicate the application of
a constraint which couples energy out of the pendulum motion.
Similar ob-
servations have been observed with the subject removed to the second location
12 meters away. Although less pronounced (change-to-baseline ratios typically
2:1), the effect remains easily observable.
The universal randomization protocol is used throughout to determine
increase/decrease periods. Control run data are being collected to be sub-
jected to the same analysis. Multiple recording is used throughout to rule
out artifacts due to recorder effects.
Finally, an electrometer with the
base of the bell jar serving as one electrode. is monitored to record acoustic
vibration independently. Due to the potential significance of such findings,
considerable data is being taken in order that the matter can be subjected to
statistical analysis over a large sample involving hundreds of work periods.
A few hundred data samples have already been collected for this purpose, an
?
the results will be published when available.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-0078-R000100020001-0
quien to sponsor?
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/40 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
#111
--
----
---
1.1.
Large amplitude variation corresponds to 0.1 Hz torsional mode
FIGURE 14 PENDULUM MOTION
Approved For Release 2000/08/10- CIA RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
As part of a continuing search for mechanisms involved in para-
normal phenomena, a series of experiments were conducted with Subject 1
to determine whether a geiger counter in the y - ray
mode (i.e.,
beta shield in place) would register subject-directed efforts.
The output of a geiger counter,
fed into a Monsanto Model
+
1020 counter/timer, indicates a background count due to cosmie rays
~ 35 counts/minute. Experimental protocol requires the subject to try
to change the registered count by concentration on the geiger counter
probe from a distance ~ 0.5 meters.
Each run consists of 15 60-second
trials, with 10-second separations between the trials.
Preceding each
subject run is a control run of equal duration.
In four runs to date the results, shown in Table 6, indicate
no effect of statistical significance, neither in the mean nor standard
deviation of counts.
+
OCDM Item No. CD V-700, Model No. 66, Electro-Neutronics, Inc.,
Oakland, CA.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
RS 18

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
TABLE
6
Geiger Counter Experiment
Control
Runs
Experimental
Runs
Run
Mean
Standard Deviation
Mean
Standard Deviation
1
36.07
5.73
35.33
6.00
2
34.87
6.23
33.87
7.27
3
33.87
5.88
34.00
5.25
4
35.20
5.09
35.67
5.77
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
5.
Basic Research Summary
The basic research program to date has been spread over a number
of subjects and over number of activities, generating a considerable amount
of data. It was deemed desirable in the first half of the research program
to cover as much material as possible in a horizontal development in order
to determine the best subjects and the fruitful directions for concentrated
effort in the second half of the program.
We intend to concentrate on analysis of the large amounts of data
already obtained while subjects are involved in extramural medical and psy-
chological testing. Based on the findings, a few carefully-chosen items
will be culled for final specific testing following discussion with client
representatives.
:
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
APPENDIX 1
Randomness Tests of Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
The design objective was to build a four-state machine, with each
state equally likely to occur on each trial, independent of the past
sequence of states.
If the machine meets this objective, it should not
be possible to devise a rule for future play that significantly differs
from chance. A simple example of such a rule would be to select the machine
state observed in the preceding trial; if this strategy were to produce
scores significantly above chance (25 percent hits), we would reject the
hypothesis of randomness of the machine under test.
Before experimentation, four machines, purchased from Aquarius
Electronics, Albion, California, were extensively tested for randomness.
Data were analyzed on a CDC-6400 computer, and three machines finally
selected for use in screening met established criteria for randomness.
In developing randomness tests, werare guided in part by a knowledge
of the machine logic. When one of the four choice keys or the pass key is
depressed, the current machine state is displayed; then a brief time after
release of the key, a new machine state is established (but not shown to the
subject) by sampling the instantaneous state of a high-speed four-state elec-
tronic counter. For the machine to be random, the times of dwell of the
counter in each of the four states must be precisely equal; otherwise, the
distribution of outcomes will be biased. The first randomness test is thus
based on tallying the number of occurrences of each of the four states. This
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

To test for
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020901-0
test should detect a stable bias, yet may miss a'
this second possibility we also tally the distribution of outcomes in each
group of 100 trials, then compute a likelihood ratio test statistic (see below)
for each group. Under the null hypothesis of equal likelihood of the four
states, these statistic values are distributed approximately as chi-square
with three degrees of freedom and their sum for m groups distributed approxi-
mately as chi-square with three m degrees of freedom. This test may also detect
stable bias, but is not as powerful for this purpose as the first test.
Variable bias of still shorter period, if substantial, can be tested for by
tallying the frequency with which the previous machine state is repeated; an
overall repeat ratio ("all") significantly above 0.25 is indicative of such bias.
If for any reason the machine were to fail to sample the counter to
establish a new state, the previous machine state would be repeated. To test
for this possibility, we tally the number of repeats following the depression
of each key. A repeat ratio significantly greater than 0.25 should be con-
sidered a danger signal.
We also tally the initial machine states following reset and the tran-
sitions between states .. In each case, the number of occurrences of each of
the four possible outcomes should be approximately equal. When repeats are
deleted from the sequence of trials ("nondiagonal transitions"), the four states
should also be approximately equal in frequency.
In testing the null hypothesis of four equally likely outcomes of a
trial, a likelihood ratio test is used. The statistic
+
Alexander Mood, Introduction to the Theory of Statistics
(McGraw Hill,
New York, 1950).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
-2
4
Σ n,
i=1
1
ln
-
n
n/4
1
under the null hypothesis is distributed approximately as chi-square with
three degrees of freedom, with rejection for large values of this statis-
tic. The computer program used in testing randomness includes a subroutine
for computing the probability of a chi-square value as large or larger
than that observed.
In testing the null hypothesis that the probability of a
repeat is 0.25, the binomial probability of obtaining the observed number
K or more repeats in N trials is computed. For K greater than 1000, a
normal distribution approximation is computed, assuming the statistic
K - 1/2
N
- 0.25
-
3/16
N
to be approximately normal with mean zero and standard deviation one.
The typical test pattern used was six passes followed by
twenty-five choices of one color, repeating this for each of the four
colors. In this way each of the five keys other than rest were given
approximately equal use. Typically, 2,000 to 6,000 trials were made,
in each sitting. In the absence of any unusual results in the randomness
tests, a minimum of 10,000 trials were made before using a machine with
experimental subjects. With 10,000 trials, the expected fraction of re-
peats is 0.25 with a standard deviation of 3/200 = 0.00866.
A sample computer listing of the results of randomness
tests on Machine 4 is included in Table 1. Of the four machines tested,
three were found suitable for use in screening activity. The fourth machine
was returned to the manufacturer for adjustment.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Table 1
RANDOMNESS TESTS -- MACHINE 4
Buttons
Yellow
Green
Blue
Red
Number
of
Trials
Chi-Sq.
Binom.
Prob.
Initial states
107
116
113
128
464
1.996
0.57
Transitions
728
764
765
790
3047
2.573
0.46
777
784
773
863
3197
6.745
0.08
776
796
·810
773
3155
1.158
0.76
787
852
803
805
3247
2.877
0.41
All states
3175
3312
3264
3359
13110
5.667
0.18
Nondiagonal
transitions
2340
2412
2341
2426
9519
2.630
0.45
Diagonal
transitions
Key
N-Trials
Repeats
Ratio
Binomial
Prob.
Yellow
2774
705
0.2541
0.313
Green
2755
67.4
0.2446
0.748
Blue
2761
706
0.2557
0.250
Red
2742
667
0.2433
0.793
Pass
1614
375
0.2323
0.953
A11
12646
3127
0.2473
0.763
Randomness in groups of 100 trials:
Chi-sq. = 299.6141
D.F. = 345
Prob. = 0.9628
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Appendix 2
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR-STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR *
-
The following notes are based solely upon my experience and I there-
fore make no claim that they are generalizable to other persons. Since
I am still learning about ESP phenomena, I am confident that additional
work in this area will expand, modify, and refine the perceptual processes
discussed below. While I have tried to describe these experiential
processes with as much precision as possible, the use of seemingly precise
language should not leave the impression that the perceptions themselves
were equally precise. To the contrary, I found these perceptions to be
delicate, transient and ephemeral -- and yet, at the same time -- and somewhat
surprisingly -- unmistakably real.
....
1.
Perceptual Processes
Working with the ESP machine proved to be a venture into unfamiliar
perceptual territory which functioned according to new and different
rules. It took some time ( five hours or so with the ESP machine) to begin
to learn not only which perceptual processes would work but, equally
important which would not work.
There was clearly a learning process
in finding those delicate and subtle internal cues that would allow me
to make perceptually based choices. After approximately 1000 trials
with the ESP machine, five dominant perceptual modes emerged.
Subsequent
Prepared by a policy research analyst at SRI, who was a high-scoring
subject (p < 10-)
with the four-state electronic random stimulus generator.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
work with the machine seemed to essentially expand and refine these
perceptual processes that emerged initially.
Direct Knowing (Used approximately 5 to 15 percent of the time) -- This
perceptual cue came as a "gift" that I did not have to work for. This
is not to say that this "cue" was always right, but when there was a
direct perception of the appropriate response unmediated by any of the
other cues described below, my chances of being right seemed quite high
(say 75 percent of the time). Internally, this was simply the feeling
that I should push one specific button and the knowing was almost
immediate. If it were not immediate then, typically, one of the other
cues would be used.
"Closure Cues" (Used perhaps 75 percent of the time) -- This cue
manifested itself in a variety of ways; a sense of "fullness" with respect
to a particular button, an internal anticipation of the bell ringing, a
sense of "hardness" or "firmness" and a sense of being "locked into" the
correct response. The validity of this cue could be tested by acting
and thinking as if I were going to push a particular button and then
noting the extent to which these "closure cues" became present. This
sense of active intentionality -- both physically and psychologically --
seems important in that it allowed me to sort out many real from imagined
perceptions. Also, this cue often gave a kind of veto power; i.e., it
did not necessarily assure me as to the right answer but it would tend
to tell me if I had picked the wrong one, i.e., I would not experience
the aforementioned cues.
Pattern Recognition (Negligible use initially, but then used
approximately 75 percent of the time during Phase IV) -- Although I used
this perceptual mode very infrequently during the initial stages of the
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
experiment, it emerged rather naturally toward the end. This was similar
to the "direct knowing" but not isolated to a single button; rather, there
was a sense of the next two to three buttons that would be the correct
responses. These perceptual cues were obtained in a less objective/
rational way and in more of a meditative state, highly concentrated but
without specific focus on a particular button. Interestingly, in using
this perceptual process, I was able to go somewhat faster and have greater
access to all of the buttons in an equivalent way (see the second point
under Section 2 next page). Thus, this mode had the advantage of loosening
habituated perceptual patterns but it also made selections less amenable
to conscious control and testing. This process proved to be either highly
accurate or highly inaccurate. Accuracy seemed to be a function of the
degree to which I could become synchronized with the evolving pattern of
machine selected choices -- and it was easy to get out of phase/sequence
with this pattern.
Rational Guessing (Used approximately 5 percent of the time) -- Although
I virtually never did try to superimpose some rationally predicted pattern
upon the random, machine selection of buttons, I would sometimes temper
my selections (very seldom for the better) by noting that one button had
come up too often for it to be likely on the next trial or, conversely,
it had come up so seldom that it should be given special consideration
as a likely possibility on the next trial. Again, although this was a
tempting strategy, I found that random processes were not amenable to
rational anticipations and my rational guesses seemed often to be wrong.
Tension/Vector Analysis (Used approximately 75 percent of the time) --
Here the cue was manifested as a sense of tension(s) pulling in one
direction or another with the selection buttons as the locus for that
tension. The cue was also manifested as a feeling of "emptiness" and
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
conversely as a sense of "fullness." To describe this process further,
it felt analogous to vector analysis in physics where, in sorting out
competing tugs and pulls, one finds the "dominant" vector; i.e., the one
with the strongest "pull" or the one that best "balances" the other vector
tensions. Figure A-l illustrates this phenomenon.
Although the tension/vector cues were very useful and among the
most reliable of all the cues, I found them to be at times quite mis-
leading. The source of confusion stemmed from the role of time as a
variable rather than a constant in extrasensory reality (discussed in
more detail under section "Comments on Perceptual Processes"). If my
assumptions as to the temporal nature of my perceptions did not fit with
the actual nature of those perceptions. then the perceptions were quite
misleading. (Recall that precognition refers here to a button that will
be selected in the future -- typically the next trial). The nine-cell
matrix shown in Figure A-2 may clarify the complexity of the perceptual
process, the need for discriminating awareness and the possibility for
error. Out of nine possible combinations of the assumed/actual nature
of perceptions, only three are matched or congruent and yield accurate
understandings. Each of these primary cases is discussed below:
0
Clairvoyant -- Here the feeling which allows sorting and
selection is like that described in Figure A-1 ...
·
Precognitive -- The feeling, sorting, and selection is like
that described in Figure A-l with clairvoyance; the primary
difference being a shift in the time dimension to refer, not
to the present target of the machine, but to the one to be
selected next. To act on this perception I would press the
pass button to bring the future into the present and then
press the button that corresponded to my precognitive per-
ceptions.
· Clairvoyant and Precognitive -- The perception is of a pattern
of buttons, distributed through time, that are and will be
selected by the machine -- the "pattern" usually consisted of
two to three buttons. Again, the time variable was most
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
LIGHT PULL/UNBALANCED
STRONG PULL OR/BALANCE
B
c
" EMPTY -
A
D
LIGHT PULL/
UNBALANCED
SA-2613-21
FIGURE A-1
ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS IN OPERATION
With Button C being the one selected using these cues.
ACTUAL
NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Clairvoyant
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Misperception
ASSUMED
NATURE OF
PERCEPTIONS
Precognitive
Misperception
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Misperception
Misperception
Correct
Perception
1
SA-2613-22
FIGURE A-2
MATRIX SHOWING CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION IN THE USE
OF TENSION/VECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND
ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
troublesome -- typically with greater difficulty in determining
the order in which the buttons would appear as targets and
lesser difficulty in determining which buttons were targets.
Confusion and error would arise when I assumed the tension/vector
perceptions were clairvoyant when in fact they were (say) clairvoyant
and precognitive. To explain how this felt, refer back to Figure A-1.
If the actual sequence of correct answers were Buttons B and D, and if
I were assuming the perceptions were clairvoyant only, then it was not
uncommon to have the perception that the intervening button (C) was the
correct choice. The rationale for this perception was that it felt like
a balance point between Buttons B (present target) and D (next target).
In retrospect, when I am more rationally aware of the room for
error in the use of this cue mechanism, I am somewhat surprised as to
how useful it was in operation.
It should be clear from the preceding descriptions that selections
were made by a variety of processes which were used sometimes in isolation
and oftentimes in combination. A typical sequence in the selection
process was: (1) Check for "direct knowing" cues, if not there, then
(2) Use "tension/vector" cues, then (3) Make final selection with "closure
cues."
: 2.
Comments on Perceptual Processes
Rather than work rapidly, I chose to work deliberately, consciously,
and therefore slowly. I would typically take five to thirty seconds
to select a button -- enough time to have a firm and conscious sense of
my internal cues and what I thought they meant. The typical sequence
would be as follows:
. Clear mind and become quiet
· Concentrate internal awareness
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
· Observe various cues
. Rationally interact with cues to sort them out
· Select a button and press it
· Integrate feedback from response
· Clear mind and become quiet.
Except during "pattern recognition," when all buttons seemed equally
accessible, I found that the top two buttons on the machine were much
more accessible than the bottom two. Three plausible explanations emerge
to account for this, First (and least likely I think) is a psychological
predisposition against the bottom two buttons -- perhaps because of the
color of the buttons or because of the pictures associated with the tar-
gets. Second is the possibility that the circuitry of the ESP machine
in some way favors the top two buttons or obscures the bottom two. Third
(and most plausible to me) is the possibility that to the extent I used
the "tension/vector" cue, then the bottom two buttons would be without
a vector below them -- making it more difficult to "bracket" the bottom two
buttons with this perceptual process. In later phases of the experiment,
I was more able to access the bottom two buttons and this seemed to cor-
respond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the
decreasing use of tension/vector cues.
The longer I worked with the ESP machine, the more apparent it be-
came that, in an extrasensory perception reality, time becomes fluid.
In other words, although the experiment was designed to test clairvoyance
(selecting the current target) only, I found that the perceptual cues
would oftentimes be equally applicable to precognition (selecting a future
target -- usually the next one). Therefore, making a correct selection
required doing two things; first, finding the correct "pattern" of buttons
that would be randomly selected by the machine (typically the pattern
consisted of two to three buttons) and second, associating a time component
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
with the buttons in that pattern.
Stated differently, the same cues
discussed above held equally well for precognition or for clairvoyance --
so the problem of making a selection was compounded by the additional
difficulty of having to determine whether a perceptual cue was associated
with the button that had already been selected by the machine or the
button that would be selected in the next or even subsequent trial. I
definitely felt that if I could consistently separate clairvoyant from
precognitive dimensions of identical cues, that I could substantially
increase the accuracy of overall scores.
The cues were not always consistent in their presence and meaning.
For example, I might be obtaining good results with the use of tension/
vector cues and then find them becoming ambiguous, with a commensurate
decline in my score. Then I would rely more heavily upon other cues.
Or, the cues might work well for clairvoyant perceptions for a while but
then shift to operate for precognition -- then I would have to "recalibrate"
myself to the cue mechanisms. So, it was a fluid, dynamic perceptual
process which required flexibility and patience. Highly significant
scores and perceptions seemed to go in spurts of ten trials or so, then
I would fall back to a chance level until I could resynchronize myself
· ith the machine and the character of my perceptual cues.
I tend to agree with the notion that it might be more appropriate
to call these processes "extraconceptual perception" rather than "extra-
sensory perception."
The perceptual cues were definitely present and
they had sensory dimensions even though they do not fit into our traditional
sensory categories. Just "where" and "how" these sensory cues were present
is not clear to me -- but these are essentially conceptual rather than
sensory issues.
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

4
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
3.
Problems in Perceptual Translation
A basic problem in using the ESP machine was not so much the obtaining
of perceptual data as the translating of those data into sufficient
information to allow the action of selecting the correct button.
While
the act itself is so simple as to be trivial, the information processes
(gathering, filtering, dynamically translating) underlying that act
seemed to me very substantial. It is within this unseen and unrecorded
portion of the ESP testing process that most of the "action" takes place.
From this vantage point I would like to suggest two impediments that
might partially account for relatively low scores.
First, I am still not fluent in the "language" of extrasensory
perceptions -- analogously, it is like hearing many separate commands in
Russian (or another unfamiliar language), each time spoken in slightly
different ways and with different intonations and inflections. The
call for action may be clearly heard but the translation of that command
into operational reality is an imprecise process until the language can
be better understood.
Second is the problem created by shifting back and forth between
rational and intuitive knowledge processes during the course of the
experiment. In selecting a single button I would use intuitive knowledge
processes for perception and oftentimes, rational or semirational knowledge
processes to interpret those perceptions. This is not to say that the
rational component is absolutely necessary, but it did seem to be useful
for me. In any event, since the experiment covers thousands of trials
(button selections) it required thousands of translations from one knowledge
mode to another. Although the rational mode did seem helpful for inter-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
pretation, it was also "costly" (i.e., by shifting to a rational mode,
I could be thrown slightly off-balance in maintaining contact with the
subtle and delicate intuitive processes -- thereby introducing an additional
element of ambiguity and error).
Related to the problem of differential knowledge processes is the
problem of having to translate between states of consciousness in order
to act upon extrasensory perceptions. LeShan* analyzed the experiential
properties of what he has termed Clairvoyant Reality and found that while
certain events (such as telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance) are
"normal" to this reality, certain other events (such as being able to take
directed action toward a goal) are "paranormal." For me this was manifested
experientially as the feeling that when I obtain extrasensory perceptions,
I am so much a part of, and immersed in the Clairvoyant Reality that in
order to act, I must causally separate myself from the Clairvoyant Reality
and enter the dualistic, subject/object Reality that LeShan terms "Sensory
Reality." Encouragingly, the "pattern recognition" process seemed to
offer a means of both perception and action, which did not require the
same degree of transfer between these subtly different states of con-
sciousness.
The preceding points suggest that one difficulty in testing and
assessing extrasensory perception may be the apparent need to translate
it into an output that is not isomorphic with the perceptions themselves --
a person must translate the perceptual "language" to a familiar form,
across rational and intuitive dimensions, and relatedly, from one state
of awareness to another. Is it possible, then, that our means for testing
*
Lawrence LeShan, The Medium, The Mystic, and the Physicist (Viking Press,
New York, 1974).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
ESP may not be highly congruent with the nature of the phenomenon, and
this may inherently reduce the significance of the test results that
can be obtained?
.
4.
Two Views of the ESP Process
I suspect that, to an external observer, my work with the ESP machine
might appear as fairly consistent scoring slightly above chance -- the
logical inference could then be made that a small amount of extrasensory
perception was mixed with a substantial amount of pure guessing. While
the scoring data may support this inference, my awareness of the input
process does not. Consider the following: on the first run, a person
could get six "hits" out of twenty-five by pushing buttons at random; then
on the second run, he could get six "hits" out of twenty-five by using
extrasensory perception. To the statistician who looks only at the output,
the scores are identical -- they are no more than would occur by chance --
and the logical inference would be that the input processes were identical
or at least very similar. However alike they might appear externally,
internally they could feel like quite different runs. In the second
instance, the chance level of scoring would be the result of an imperfect
but operative extrasensory perception process. Obviously, then, measure-
ment of ESP by statistical output alone obscures the nature and extent
of the extrasensory input. A relatively modest score on the ESP machine
can -- I think -- substantially understate the amount of learning and perceptual
development that actually occurs. The foregoing is consistent with my
impression that my scores, though statistically significant, still did
not reflect the actual amount of learning that had occurred.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
5. Supportive Mind Set
There emerged, after a time, what seemed to be a series of pre-
conditions to good performance in terms of mind set. These were:
. A high level of motivation seemed essential. The task of
pushing one of four buttons over thousands of trials could
be rather boring -- enough to allow one's attention to wander.
With each trial, it was necessary to have a high level of
motivation to ensure adequate levels of concentration and
focused attention.
. Although motivation, concentration, and attention were
important, it was also necessary not to be too concerned
with the success or failure associated with each selection.
If I became "attached" to the outcome of a previous trial,
whether a success or a failure, it could divert a significant
amount of attention from the present trial. Therefore, each
trial must be separate/fresh/clear/unconditioned by the actual
success or failure of previous trials and separate from the
. imagined successes or failures of upcoming trials.
· A relatively stable, undisturbed emotional state also seems
important. I noticed the most substantial fluctuation in
my scores when I was emotionally stressed (angry, hassled,
and so on).
. Feeling rested physically also seemed important. This was
particularly true if I were to work with the machine for an
hour or two -- as this required a substantial amount of energy.
. A positive attitude -- a feeling that I could do well and could
always score at least at the chance level -- was also important.
A corollary to this was that I found I did better when I
"always liked myself" even if I did poorly. Self-deprecation
seemed to be a sure way of rapidly diminishing the accuracy
of the perceptual processes.
6. The Environment
There were attributes of the surrounding environment that seemed
to enhance the accuracy of my selections.
The more significant factors
seemed to be the following:
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
. It was helpful to have a relatively quiet working environ-
ment. Or, if there were noises, to have them of a sort --
fairly constant ones that remained in the background -- that
could be readily filtered out of my consciousness. My
impression was that external sensory information -- particularly
sounds -- could readily overload/override subtle and delicate
internal sensory information.
. It also seemed to help to have low light levels -- I would
always turn out the overhead lights in the testing room.
I
experimented with closing my eyes to further reduce external
sensory stimulation and I found that this would increase the
sensitivity of sensory cues, but this increase in sensitivity
was offset by a lack of visually based feedback to verify
the accuracy of the selections. As a consequence, I chose
to keep my eyes open.
. I found it essential to work with the ESP machine by sitting
somewhat above it so that I could look down on the face of
the machine. For some reason, perceptual discrimination seemed
much more difficult when I would sit at a lower level which
placed the buttons in a plane more nearly horizontal to my
face and upper body.
7. Transferability of Processes
The perceptual learning gained in this experiment seemed generally
transferable to other situations where I might use ESP abilities, in
particular, telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance. The inference
is that a process or faculty is being developed which has numerous appli-
cations in other situations which would rely upon ESP. Analogously,
just as jogging could exercise muscles to make a person more adept at
. playing football, dancing, swimming, and the like, the use and development
of these "psychic" muscles seems to have some degree of transference to
other situations.
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
8. Conclusions
I found the experiment to be a very substantial learning experience
in which, I feel, I learned much more than was reflected in the scores.
It allowed me to begin to identify an ability which I presume was largely
latent within -- never having had a prior opportunity for overt expression.
Finally, it suggests to me that this must be a common ability among many
people that they simply do not recognize -- primarily because they have
1
never had the opportunity to explore it as a legitimate and "real"
phenomenon.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
APPENDIX 3
SAMPLE OF RAW DATA - MEDICAL EVALUATION OF SUBJECT 1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Next 14 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0