CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

SRI
STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Menlo Park, California 94025 - U.S.A.
31 October 1974
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
Russell Targ
Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory
Client Private
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
CONTENTS
I
OBJECTIVE.
1
II
PROGRESS DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD
2
A.
Applied Research.
2
1.
Remote Viewing
2
(a)
Project Atlas Remote Viewing.
2
(b)
Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment.
6
(c)
Local Targets with Mid-Test Feedback.
7
(d)
Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing.
11
B.
Basic Research.
11
1.
Criteria for the Determination of Gifted
Individuals.
12
(a)
Remote Viewing of Natural Targets
16
(b)
Line Drawings
17
(c)
Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus
Generator
18
2.
Identification of Measurable Characteristics
Possessed by Gifted Subjects (20%)
22
(a)
Medical Evaluation.
22
(b)
Psychological Evaluation,
24
(c)
Neuropsychological Evaluation
41
3.
Identification of Neurophysiological
Correlates Which Relate to Paranormal
Activities (20%) .
41
(a)
Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe
Experiment.
42
(b)
Physiological Correlates of Remote
Viewing
43
4.
Identification of the Nature of Paranormal
Phenomena and Energy (10%)
44
(a)
Universal Randomization Protocol.
46
(b)
Experiments with Develco Superconducting
Differential Magnetometer (Gradiometer) .
50
ii
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
(c)
Experiments with Laser-Monitored
Torsion Pendulum. .
55
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
59
5.
Basic Research Summary
60
Appendix 1 -- RANDOMNESS TESTS OF FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM
STIMULUS GENERATOR.
61
Appendix 2 -- PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE
FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
.
66
Appendix 3 -- SAMPLE OF RAW DATA -- MEDICAL EVALUATION OF
SUBJECT 1
80
Appendix 4 -- PRELIMINARY NOTES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING.
103
N
-
iii
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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.
,
-
1
.
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
II
PROGRESS DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD
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 determina-
tion of the utility of remote-viewing under operational conditions.
In Phase I, map coordinates were furnished to the experi-
menters, 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 on a double-blind basis.
The results of the 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 per-
sonnel) prior to the experiment is shown in Figure 3.
*
Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B.
2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
W

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
2
JUL 10 1- 2
3
3
WINDOWS
3
M
MiL'
.
RIVER
N
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
-
hva
FIGURE 1 SUBJECT EFFORT AT BUILDING LAYOUT
,
5
L

PM
JUL 10 1974
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
FIGURE 2 SUBJECT EFFORT AT CRANE CONSTRUCTION
3,0
00
4
00
JUL 10 19M
PM K.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
5
SA-3183-11
FIGURE 3
ARTIST'S CONCEPTION OF TARGET SITE (ATLAS EXPERIMENT)
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
. ..

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 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 1 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 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.
Samples of that data are as follows.
Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two
were in good agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear
correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the first of the two
reasonably good matches, Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at
the base of a volcano and the subject's response was "large bare table
6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
mountain, jungle below, dark cool moist atmosphere," a reasonable corre-
spondence 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.
The
transcript data will be examined further to determine fine structure,
resolution, etc.
(c)
Local Targets with Mid-Test 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 experi-
menter (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. 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 physiological correlates of the remote
viewing activity.
7
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
. -
SA-3183-12
ZIGZAG WATERWAY
FIGURE 4
9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 DIFFERENTIA-
TION 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.
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 CHANNEL WITH
CONCRETE SIDES. OVER.
S-4:
I can't believe it.
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.
-
10
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 verification following the remote viewer's description.
A complete analysis is to be carried out on these trans-
cripts following more experimentation. To date it appears that the
viewing is weak in the following areas: (a) perspective and dimension
are often distorted (an 8-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
In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was
clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to de-
termine 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.
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, 50 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%).
11
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be fulfilled
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 in-
dividual may be compared to himself at different times to determine
whether paranormal functioning occurs in an altered neurophysiological
state; (3) specific validation experiments must be conducted with suffi-
cient control to ensure that all conventional communication paths are
blocked, with outcomes sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether
paranormal functioning occurred; (4) obtain neurophysiological data during
experimentation to 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
research program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accor-
dance 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 who are 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 in-
dividuals did exceedingly well on at least one of the tests, whereas the
results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from chance
.
12
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
TABLE 1
PROGRAM SCHEDULE - II
M
A
M
J |
JASOND
J F
MONTHS
1 2 3
4
5
6789
10
11
12
13
1. Set up neurophysiological lab with computer
processing debugged.
V
V
2. W.A. I.S. testing of subjects by client
V
3. Measure neurophysiological correlates during
paranormal experimentation
a) paranormal EEG experiments
b) other paranormal experimentation
·
13
4. Work to determine nature of energies involved
(gradiometer, etc.)
5. Medical testing, including special testing
D
V
6. Neuropsychological testing
7. Psychological testing, including in-depth
interview
8. Correlate data and consider theoretical models
9. Prepare final report
DI
45
D
4
V
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 electronic 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
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-
0
sults at a level of statistical significance p ≤ 10 in comparison with
14
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
I

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
the bulk of individuals who cluster about the mean as expected.
There-
fore, we base our criteria on an observable natural division into clearly
functional and nonfunctional categories.
Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects
1, 2, and 3 considered gifted, subjects 4, 5, and 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, al-
though 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
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 31. Learner subject 4 (female, age 53) and gifted subject
3 (male, age 41) are paired on the basis of artistic occupations (pro-
fessional photographer and painter, respectively) and similar emotional
and psychological makeup.
*
Earlier in the program nine subjects were to be placed in three cate-
gories, 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.
15
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
(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 ran-
domly 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 30 minutes driving
time from SRI are randomly chosen from a list of targets kept blind to
subject and experimenters and used without replacement.
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 communicating
with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. The second experi-
menter remains at the target site for an agreed-upon 30-minute period
following the 30 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
subjected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists
not otherwise associated with the research.
The judges are asked to
blind 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
16
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
probability of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively
assuming assignment without replacement on the part of the judges.
As indicated in Report No. 1, Subject 1 has completed this
series, obtaining a result significant at the p = 8 x 10
-10
perimentation is in progress with Subjects 2 and 4, two transcripts
level.
Ex-
having been obtained from each to date.
(b)
Line Drawings
A pool of 50 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
1
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 target location.
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
17
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
1
.
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 have not
yet been submitted for judging.
(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 = 1/4) 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 5). 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
18
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
SYSA SVI
.
Figure 5.
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.
19
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
to guess at targets when he does not feel that he has an idea as to which
to choose.
Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with
probability 1/4 and no learning, the probability of observing zk successes
in n trials is approximated by the probability of a normal distribution
value
1
2(k-A-)/30/16
For the purpose of screening, each subject is required to
complete 100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2,500 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
2,100 trials with mean scores of 25.71 (p = 0.20).
Table 2
SCREENING DATA:
FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
Subject
Mean Score/100 Trials
Over 2,500 Trials
Binomial Probability
1
25.76
0.22
2
29.36
3 X 10-7
6
25.40
0.33
On the basis of this test Subject 2, whose scores are
plotted in Figure 6, 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.
20
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
50
- Out of 100 trials/run.
N+ 20
40
30
HITS/RUN
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
RUN NUMBER - 100 Trials/Run
p = ¿ per trial
FIGURE 6 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2
₣
21
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
¥

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 Depart-
ment 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, urinalysis, serology, blood
type and factor, pulmonary function screening,
and 12-lead electrocardiogram.
(3)
Neurological examination, including comprehen-
sive and electroencephalogram (sleeping and
routine).
(4)
Audiometric examination, including comprehensive,
Bekesy bone conduction, speech discrimination,
and impedance bridge test.
(5)
Ophthalmologist examination, including compre-
hensive, card testing, peripheral field test,
muscle test, dilation funduscope, and indirect
ophthalmoscopic and fundus examination.
(6)
Special visual examinations, including electro-
retinogram, dark adaptation test, and visual
contrast sensitivity.
(7)
EMI brain scan.
22
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
2
3
4
5
6
MEDICAL EXAMINATION
Table 3
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
Stanford Medical Center
SRI
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
#10
#2º
#3
#4 ..
#5 元
#6
#7
#8
Scheduled ->
+Completed
Special Visual Examinations
1
Personnel (subjects
controls, experimenters)
General Physical Examination
Laboratory Examinations
Neurological Examination
Audiometric Examination
Opthalmologist Examination
EMI Brain Scan
Palo Alto Medical Clinic
learners,

1
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 comprehensive 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 enlarge-
ment of the entire right lateral ventricle, while the left appears normal
in size. An asymmetry in alpha development between left and right hemi-
spheres is also indicated. Also noted is some concern about the EKG sug-
gesting 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.
(b)
Psychological Evaluation
The psychological evaluation of program participants con-
sists 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 identi-
fying baseline characteristics possessed by gifted subjects.
The ongoing
testing associated with daily experimentation (e. g., Mood Adjective Check-
lists) 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.
24
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
The baseline evaluation, outlined in Table 4, con-
.-
sists of
-
(1)
In-depth interviews, including objective
events and subjective views relating to
the discovery and enhancement of paranormal
capacities; socioeconomic, cultural,
familial, religious environment; outstanding
peaks, traumas; values, motivation, inter-
personal style.
(2)
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (W.A.I.S.).
(3)
Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory
(M.M.P.I.).
(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 under way.
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 these data in Appendix 4 as a sample
of the type of analysis that will become available.
(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.
25
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 :4CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
Personnel #1 - 3, subjects;
#4 - 6 learners/controls; #7 - 8, experimenters.
1
2
3
8
6
8
7
9
Cognitive Style Preference Test
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
SRI
Palo Alto Medical Clinic
Approved For Release 2000/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Personnel (subjects, learners,
controls, experimenters )
In-depth interview
W.A.I.S.
M.M.P.I.
Benton Visual Memory Test,
Wechsler Memory Scale
T.A.T. and Rorschach
Bender Gestalt Test
Strong Aptitude/Values Test
Luscher color test

.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
In his capacity as consultant, Dr. Ornstein has pro-
vided an instrument named the Cognitive Style Preference Test. This test
was developed for use in differentiating between individuals preferring
a structure-oriented cognitive style as compared with a verbally oriented
cognitive style. For the purpose of the program, this instrument is ad-
ministered to determine whether individuals exhibiting paranormal func-
tioning prefer, as a group, one style of cognitive functioning predomi-
nantly 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 7),
but further data are required before any significance is to be attached
to the results tabulated thus far.
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. ,
to determine whether other individuals sharing the profile also exhibit
paranormal functioning.
27
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
!

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECT: COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE TEST
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?
28
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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.
.
29
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
bean
bean
bean
O calm
calm
0
calm
be
bel
bell
because
window
door
00
.
horse
saddle
fault
city
town
smile C
street
color
avenue
name
HJname
Tomei
trout
nickel
dime
tobacco
church
smoke
Eat
dog
shirt
pump
.
bee
5
sting
1
30
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
pepper
sock
salt
butter
bread
4
Sheep
Aable
duck
Stable
chair
scissors
fiddle
cut
city
town
smile
run
Shorts
book
boy
sour
sweet
Tap
sheep
cold
wool
0
0
slow
fast
steel
key
shell
lock
Soldier
army
butter
-
℮
LC
pat
story
spider
web
0
wave
house
cot tuge
stave
caff
hot
7
twin
Twin
twin
-
swift
fast
thief
4
steal/
desk
smart
(green
(grass
modern
modern
modern
hammer
pickle
mail
31
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
land
carpet ... >
rug
.
.
child
:
girl
.
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
foot
hand
milk
WW
soft
thirst
water
clock
spinach
command
order
drink
5
plant
whiskey
£
heavy
myth
light
slide
angry
mad
food
witch
hunger
sad
clean
bath
toy
low
Shigh
snow
snow
snow
joy
bricks
S
"happy
bed
sleep
jelly
find
9
find
find
color
bitter
Sweet
fourth
lamp
light
black
r
white
look
Spigot S
king
queen
Eriver
5
C
2 club
streams
healthy)
rifle
rough
Squeeze
Smooth
lion
figer
fall
32
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
kcheese
pain
cracker
-
rd
.
question
flower
5
3
2
S

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
craft
short
print
dream
-
sleep
.
soft
loud
bo duty
dut
duty
woman
eagle
bird
Zmarch
.
lazy
lazy
blazy
eating
Jake
food
Istars
moon
foot
Shoe
cake
)mountain
grommet
4
fruit
silence
-
floor
needle
thread
ocean
smile_
water
Trock
fat
thin
L Fad
quiet
Could
deep
shallow
flower
doctor
street
.
33
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
5

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
50
No. Verbal Preferences
40
30
20
-
10
0
10
No. Structure Preferences
20
30
-
40
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Gifted Subjects
Learners/Controls
Experimenters
FIGURE 7
SUMMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE
-
3
34
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
(3)
Mid-Testing (SRI-Administered)
Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation
is carried out to provide indicators as to the effects of mood and con-
ceptualization 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 experi-
mental situation.
The purpose is to determine whether
measures of success in the experimental phase correlate
with pre-experiment mood indicators.
-
35
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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
VI
V
?
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
V
?
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
VV
V
?
no
(This means you are sure
vou 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.
-
36
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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
2
?
no
apprehensive
VV
V
?
no
relaxed
VV
V
?
no
blue
VV
?
no
defiant
VV V
?
no
boastful
VV V
?
no
engaged in
thought
vV v ? no
elated
VV V
?
no
active
VV V
?
no
pleased
VV V
?
no
nonchalant
VV V
?
no
tired
VV V ?
no
skeptical
VV V
?
no
fearful
VV V ?
no
shocked
VV V
?
no
regret ful
VV V
?
no
calm
VV V
?
no
egotistic
VV V
?
no
bold
VV
V
?
no
overjoyed
VV
v
?
no
earnest
VV
?
no
vigorous
VV V
?
no
sluggish
VV
?
no
witty
VV
V
?
no
· forgiving
vV
V
?
no
serene
V
?
no
clutched up
VV
V
?
no
rebellious
VV V
?
no
lonely
vV
V
?
no
serious
VV V
?
no
cocky
VV V
?
no
warmhearted
VV
V
?
no
lighthearted
VV .
?
no
insecure
VV
V
?
no
quiet
VV v ? no
self-
centered
VV
?
no
.
still
vV
V
?
no
-
-
37
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
.
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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.
-
-
a
38
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release $2000/08/10 ffGtA-RDP96.00791R000100430001-0
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
39
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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
-
40
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
(c)
Neuropsychological Evaluation
In addition to the measurement of the physiological com-
ponents of the neurological system covered in the medical evaluation, a
neuropsychological profile is being obtained by the administration of the
Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery, which includes the Category
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 Administra-
tion 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.
3.
Identification of Neurophysiological Correlates Which Relate
to Paranormal Activities (20%)
High on the list of priorities for the program is the identifi-
cation of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal activity.
The purpose of this part of the study is twofold: (a) to obtain informa-
tion about the neurophysiological state associated with paranormal ac-
tivity in general, and (b) to obtain indicators which differentiate be-
tween 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 poly-
graph data.
In our configuration we obtain a hardcopy printout of 5-second
41
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
--
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
averages of eight channels of polygraph information 15 minutes following
a 15 minute run. At present we monitor broad 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).
The second facility is a smaller semiportable, 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 last per-
mits percent-time measurements in any band, with upper and lower band
edge settings in 1-Hz increments.
Considerable data have been obtained with both facilities.
The
bulk of the data awaits further analysis which will occur at completion
of various series under way.
However, several results have been obtained
which we describe below.
(a)
Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe Experiment
As discussed in Report No. 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 in-
volve right hemispheric specialization. To test this hypothesis, the
EEG remote strobeflash experiment, discussed in the original proposal and
in the paper attached to Report No. 1, was repeated with Subject 4 three
42
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
..
1
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
times in the sleep lab under the direction of Dr. Lukas with monitoring
of right and left occipital regions.
Each experiment consisted of twenty
15-second trials, with ten no-flash trials, and ten 16-Hz trials randomly
intermixed. Reduction of alpha activity (arousal response) correlated
with remote stimuli was observed as in previous experiments, but essen-
tially only in the right hemisphere (average alpha reduction 16 percent
in right hemisphere, 2 percent in left, during the 16-Hz trials as com-
pared with the no-flash trials). The trial-to-trial variation is larger
than in previous work, however, due to use of a wider-band filter for the
alpha band, and therefore the system is being modified before further
work.
(b)
Physiological Correlates of Remote Viewing
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 semiportable 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
fingers; (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 cutoff 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
43
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
are found to be uniquely correct and accurate, and the corresponding sec-
tions of polygraph recording.
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 20-second period just before a subject renders a correct description.
Subsequent to this observation, we have learned that Ms. Janet Mitchell
at the American Society for Psychical Research made similar observations
in her work with Subject 3, also in remote viewing experiments. A sample
chart record is shown in Figure 8. (Time runs from right to left. )
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 these 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, determina-
tion of the manner and degree to which known processes are mediated by
little understood or undiscovered mechanisms or energies, definition of
the precise nature of the channels involved, etc.
44
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
0
(a) PERCENT ALPHA (5 sec INTEGRATION)
(b) GSR
8 2
verhot RRRRBY-
(c) PLETHYSMOGRAPH
(d) RAW EEG
t,
AB
SA-3183-10
FIGURE 8
POLYGRAPH DATA
Correct verbal description given during time interval tAB.
45
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
At this point in the effort three "psychokinetic" tasks have
been investigated beyond the pilot stage, and are reported below.
(a)
Universal Randomization Protocol
It was deemed desirable in our work to establish a uni-
versal randomization protocol independent of the particular experiment
under consideration. The only exceptions were to be automated experi-
ments where target selection is determined by radioactive decay or elec-
tronic 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.
46
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
CPYRGHT
Table 5
Table of Random Digits
**
11 16 43 63 18
75 06 13 76 74
40 60 31 61 52
83 23 53 73 61
21 21 59 17 91
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
64 20 84 82 37
41 70 17 31 17
91 40 27 72 27
79 51 62 10 07
51 48 67 28 75
38 60 52 93 41
58 29 98 38 80
20 12 51 07 94
99 75 62 63 60
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
65 99 05 70 48
25 06 77 75 71
95 63 99 97 54
31 19 99 25 58
16 38 11 50 69
25 41 68 78 75
61 55 57 64 04
04 68 98 71 30
33 00 78 56 07
92 00 84 48 97
78 13 79 87 68
62 49 09 92 15
84 98 72 87 59
38 71 23 15 12
58 72 20 36 78
19 18 66 96 02
16 97 59 54 28
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
27 42 97 29 18
33 18 68 13 46
79 89 32 94 48
88 39 25 42 11
29 62 16 65 83
62 96 61 24 68
48 44 91 51 02
44 12 61 94 38
12 63 97 52 91
71 02 01 72 65
94 20 50 42 59
68 98 35 05 61
14 54 43 71 34
54 71 40 24 01
09 83 41 13 33
04 29 24 60 28
75 66 62 69 54
83 40 38 88 27
30 69 74 48 06
17 02 64 97 37
85 87 51 21 39
64 04 19 90 11
61 04 02 73 09
48 07 07 68 48
02 53 19 77 37
17 04 89 45 23
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
70 69 32 52 55
73 54 74 37 59
95 63 23 95 55
09 11 97 48 03
97 30 38 87 01
07 27 79 32 17
65 12 84 83 34
07 49 32 80 98
46 49 26 15 94
26 72 95 82 72
38 71 66 13 80
31 92 17 64 58
57 23 82 74 64
61 48 75 23 29
10 01 17 50 04
86 05 44 11 90
24 21 94 10 90
08 53 16 15 78
35 54 25 58 65
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. 219-22] [44].
47
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
52 45 88 88 80
78 35 26 79 13
08 58 86 14 90
24 21 66 34 44
21 28 30 70 44
38 64 80 92 78
81 31 37 74 00
67 64 20 52 04
47 58 97 83 64
60 21 20 50 99
08 43 31 91 72
08 32 02 08 39
73 72 00 86 57
92 42 06 54 31
16 53 00 55 47
79 42 12 17 69
57 66 64 12 04
85 09 53 72 82
96 15 59 50 09
86 21 01 18 08
54 62 74 85 11
49 56 31 28 72
14 06 39 31 04
W

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
,
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
93 04 06 64 76
24 99 04 10 99
63 00 21 29 90
23 51 06 87 74
76 86 93 93 00
84 97 80 75 04
40 77 98 63 82
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
37 35 49 30 25
11 32 37 00 69
90 26 98 92 66
02 98 59 53 03
15 18 25 01 66
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
48
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
55 20 86 34 70
18 15 82 52 83
89 96 51 02 06

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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
22 56 50 24 75
00 25 87 90 18
21 99 12 62 28
14 80 11 91 92
49 43 82 07 72
60 84 66 97 32
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
96 77 01 94 40
29 70 04 20 93
87 76 77 76 07
03 74 20 16 13
65 98 96 28 43
10 91 73 44 58
29 88 09 52 88
21 64 44 65 87
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
49
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
71 02 52 82 12
10 47 42 75 22
65 62 03 46 84

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
(b)
Experiments with Develco Superconducting Differential
Magnetometer (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 equipment prevented investi-
gation 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
9.
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 used to measure
magnetic fields originating from processes within the human body, such as
action currents in the heart which produce magnetocardiograms. The sensi-
tive 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
50
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
.
-
DIVULCO
MEDICAL CRADIOMETER
FIGURE 9
SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER
-
,
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 5CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

3
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 last providing a permanent record.
After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF
interference effects, which required modification by the manufacturer,
the gradiometer was available for use by the contractor from 10 June to
21 June. Some RF interference effects remained, due in part to environ-
mental proximity to other instrumentation, but the device was usable
nonetheless.
Protocol for subject participation was instituted as fol-
lows.
The subject removes all metal objects, and the effects of body
movements are checked at the start of each experimental period.
The sub-
ject 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 control, the experimenter announces the start of the experi-
ment.
The universal randomization protocol (discussed in previous sec-
tion) is then used to generate ten activity/no activity periods of equal
length (e. g., 25 seconds) predetermined by the experimenter.
A sample run (Run 1, Subject 1) is shown in Figure 10.
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 signals can be the result of an excep-
tionally strong flux change, or an RF burst whether subject-generated or
artifactual, and are handled on the basis of statistical correlation as
52
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
:

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
+
+
BASELINE
END
-
- OFF
ON
1
FIGURE 10
OFF
TRUCK
+ -+
OFF
ʻ
+
- OFF
1
- OFF
F
- OFF
-
- ON
- OFF
- BASELINE
+
- START
-
SA-3183-13
53
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
GRADIOMETER DATA
ON
ł

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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
2
corresponds to an input ~1.6 x 10
-9
Gauss/cm
(second derivative a B_/a-),
Z
Z
which is equivalent to ~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 mag-
netic 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 regard to signal display, the signal was observed
simultaneously on three recording devices, and thus a "recorder only"
effect can be considered low probability, although an electronics inter-
ference effect ahead of all display cannot be ruled out. We therefore
treat the magnetic cause as tentative, although most probable, and con-
centrate our attention on whether a correlation exists between system
disturbances and subject efforts.
Subject 1 logged the most time in controlled runs, 13 ten-
*
trial runs.
Each of the ten trials in the run lasted 50 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
*
With the exception of the first run where 25-second trials were used.
54
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
63 events, 42 were distributed among the activity periods, 21 among the
no-activity periods, a correlation significant at the p = 0.004 level.
Subjects 2 and 6 also interacted with the device.
A1-
though subject efforts and observed perturbations sometimes coincided,
activity was generally low and did not appear to be that of a signature
of correlated activity under control. A controlled ten-trial run with
Subject 2 and two such runs with Subject 6 yielded nonsignificant results.
Given the limited availability of the instrument and some-
what 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 be-
tween subject effort and signal output in controlled runs indicate a
highly probable cause-effect relationship. Thus it appears that a gifted
subject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of
sensitivity ~10
Gauss/cm
2
-9
from a distance of four meters.
Further work
would be required to determine absolutely the precise nature of the inter-
action, 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 symmetrically 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
-
55
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
a low 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
which
provides a continuous sine wave record of pendulum position.
The system exhibits a sensitivity of approximately 10
microradians.
Under typical experimental conditions random acoustical
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 pertur-
bations 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.
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 universal randomization protocol described in (a). Each experiment
*
Spectra Physics Model 262.
+
United Detector Technology Model SC/10.
Brush Model Mark 200.
56
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
.-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 tar-
get laboratory. The remote aspect was instituted both to prevent arti-
factual effects from body heat, etc., and also to determine whether energy
*
can be coupled with the remote viewing channel to a remote location.
In pilot studies we observed considerable evidence indi-
cating that a gifted subject located in the same room is able, by con-
centration, 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 11.
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.
Especially in-
teresting are the decreases that take the motion below that generally
observed due to environmental noise driving.
Such observations indicate
the application of a constraint which couples energy out of the pendulum
motion.
Similar observations have been observed with the subject removed
*
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.
57
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
-

.
1
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
DECREASE
FIGURE 11 PENDULUM MOTION
Large amplitude variation corresponds to 0.1 Hz torsional mode
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 col-
lected to be subjected 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 are 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, and the results will be
published when available.
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
As part of a continuing search for mechanisms involved in
paranormal 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 cosmic 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 fifteen 60-second
trials, with 10-second separations between the trials.
Preceding each
subject run is a control run of equal duration.
*
OCDM Item No. CD V-700, Model No. 66, Electro-Neutronics, Inc. , Oakland,
California.
59
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
In four runs to date the results, shown in Table 8, indi-
cate no effect of statistical significance, either in the mean or standard
deviation of counts.
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
-
5.
Basic Research Summary
The basic research program to date has been spread over a number
of subjects and over a 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
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 psychological testing.
Based on the findings, a few carefully-chosen
items will be culled for final specific testing following discussion with
client representatives.
-
.
60
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
.-

- --
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Appendix 1
RANDOMNESS TESTS OF FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
-
-
61
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 the three machines finally
selected for use in screening met established criteria for randomness.
In developing randomness tests, we are 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 electronic 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 test should detect a stable bias, yet may
miss a drifting bias. To test for this second possibility we also tally
the distribution of outcomes in each group of 100 trials, then compute a
62
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 approximately 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 a 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 considered a danger signal.
We also tally the initial machine states following reset and the
transitions 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 transi-
tions"), 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
-2
4
i
n
i=1
n
n/4
i
under the null hypothesis is distributed approximately as chi-square
with three degrees of freedom, with rejection for large values of this
-
63
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
statistic.
*
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 dis-
tribution 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 25 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, 2000 to 6000 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 repeats 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 A-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.
-
.
*
Alexander Mood, Introduction to the Theory of Statistics
(McGraw Hill,
New York, 1950).
64
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
65
Table A-1
RANDOMNESS TESTS -- MACHINE 4
Buttons
Yellow
Green
Blue -
Red
Number of
Trials
Chi-Square
Binomial
Probability
Initial states
107
116
113
128
464
1.996
0.57
Transitions
728
764
765
790
3,047
2.573
0.46
G
7771
784
773
863
3,197
6.745
0.08
P
776
796
810
773
3,155
1.158
0.76
R.
787
14
852
803
805
3,247
2.877
0.41
All states
3,175
3,312
3,264
3,359
13,110
5.667
0.18
Nondiagonal transitions
2,340
2,412
2,341
2,426
9,519
2.630
0.45
Key
N-Trials
Repeats
Ratio
Binomial
Probability
Diagonal transitions
Yellow
2,774
705
0.2541
0.313
Green
2,755
674
0.2446
0.748
Blue
2,761
706
0.2557
0.250
Red
2,742
667
0.2433
0.793
Pass
1,614
375
0.2323
0.953
A11
12,646
3,127
0.2473
0.763
1
Note:
Randomness in groups of 100 trials: Chi-square = 299.6141; D.F. = 345;
Probability = 0.9628.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
-
Appendix 2
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR-STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
66
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 :
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 experimental
processes with as much precision as possible, the use of seemingly pre-
cise language should not leave the impression that the perceptions them-
selves 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 im-
portant 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 work
*
Prepared by a policy research analyst at SRI, who was a high-scoring sub-
ject (p < 10-6)
with the four-state electronic random stimulus generator.
67
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 im-
mediate.
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 mani-
fested 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 im-
portant in that it allowed me to sort out many real from imagined per-
ceptions. 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 approxi-
mately 75 percent of the time during Phase IV) -- Although I used this
perceptual mode very infrequently during the initial stages of the
-
68
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 objec-
tive/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. 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) -- Al-
though 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 direc-
tion or another with the selection buttons as the locus for that tension.
The cue was also manifested as a feeling of "emptiness" and conversely as
a sense of "fullness." To describe this process further, it felt analogous
69
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
4
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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-1 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 misleading.
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 2, "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.
(Re-
call 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:
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-1 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 precog-
nitive perceptions.
·
Clairvoyant and Precognitive -- The perception is of a pat-
tern 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 vari-
able was most troublesome -- typically with greater difficulty
70
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
LIGHT PULL/UNBALANCED
STRONG PULL OR BALANCE
B
c
D
LIGHT PULL/
UNBALANCED
EMPTY
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
-
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
71
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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, I 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 un-
common 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 isola-
tion 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 "clo-
sure 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
72
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
· 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 corre-
spond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the de-
creasing 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 selec-
tion 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
5
*
73
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
time component 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 in-
crease 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 become 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
with 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 tradi-
tional 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.
74
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 in-
formation 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 per-
ceptions -- 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 ex-
periment.
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 interpretation, it was also "costly" (i.e., by shifting to a rational
mode, I could be thrown slightly off-balance in maintaining contact with
75
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 mani-
fested experientially as the feeling that when I obtain extrasensory per-
ceptions, 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 re-
quire the same degree of transfer between these subtly different states
of consciousness.
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
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?
*
Lawrence LeShan, The Medium, the Mystic, and the Physicist
(Viking Press,
New York, 1974).
76
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

,
L
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 6 "hits" out of 25 by pushing buttons at random; then on the
second run, he could get 6 "hits" out of 25 by using extrasensory per-
ception. 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, measurement of ESP by
statistical output alone obscures the nature and extent of the extrasen-
sory 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.
5.
Supportive Mind Set
There emerged, after a time, what seemed to be a series of precondi-
tions 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
77
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
--
t
1
-
motivation to ensure adequate levels of concentration and
focused attention.
.
Although motivation concentration, and attention were im-
portant, 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 signifi-
cant 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 "al-
ways 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:
.
It was helpful to have a relatively quiet working environment.
Or, if there were noises, to have them of a sort -- fairly con-
stant 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 sen-
sory information.
. It also seemed to help to have low light levels -- I would al-
ways turn out the overhead lights in the testing room.
I
78
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

1
-
-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
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 sensi-
tivity 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 applica-
tions 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.
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
never had the opportunity to explore it as a legitimate and "real"
phenomenon.
79
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
1
Appendix 3
SAMPLE OF RAW DATA -- MEDICAL EVALUATION OF SUBJECT 1
-
80
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Next 21 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
-
4
-
Appendix 4
PRELIMINARY NOTES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
..
103
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0

SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0