CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3

3300 Parapsycho
Approved For Release 2000/08/9964MRDP8-03920000109999
Aug 1990
"VISAGES": A COMPUTER-BASED TEST
OF FACE PRECOGNITION
MARIO VARVOGLIS & MICHEL-ANGE AMORIM
LABORATOIRE DE RECHERCHE SUR LES INTERACTIONS PSI
A computer-based psi experiment was conducted to explore
whether subjects could precognize the features of a randomly
composed face. The experiment was based upon a subset of the
"Photo fit" Kit used by police to help identify the facial
characteristics of a missing person or a criminal. Forty
subjects participated, each contributing a minimum of four
runs (16 trials).
Subjects were presented with 4 target packs each containing
16 different Instances of a particular facial feature (eyes,
nose, mouth and facial-outline with halr). The instances for
each element were grouped, so as to suggest different
degrees of resemblance between them, and, hence, between the
subject's choice and the target.
There were two task-modalities. In the Scanning psi task
instances were arranged as a 4 x 4 Image array, allowing the
subject to consciously choose a particular image using the
computer "mouse". In the Timing psi task, the images were
presented in a rapidly shifting sequence; here the subject
could only choose when to stop the "image roulette" with the
mouse. Once the subject had chosen all elements of the face,
the program randomly selected an Instance for each of the
four elements, constructed the target face, and presented it
to the subject.
Results
were evaluated through
goodness-of-flt
tests,
comparing the obtained distribution of hits, for 5 different
levels of scoring, against the expected distribution. The
global
test
yielded a significant chi-square
for
the
experimental condition (p =. 013), and chance results for a
simulation study. Further analyses, examining scoring under
the two different task-modalltles, yielded a
significant
chi-square for the Timing task modality alone (p =. 006).
(i) Main author and experimenter
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
329
d
on
ts
our
-ion
at
1
in the
,
e over
ecific
y
cion.
icate,
t of,
bly
n to
After
the
cher is
rced.
.nd

.
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
INTRODUCTION
The possibility of applied parapsychological research has
been receiving considerable attention in recent years, both
in the U.S. (Agor, 1984; Harary, Targ and White, 1985;
Mishlove, 1986; Morris, 1986) and in Europe (Amorim, in
press). An application
which seems to hold particular
promise is the use of psi to help locate missing persons or
identify criminals. A number of popular or semi-popular
accounts have referred to Instances in which psychics helped
the police, but little has been done by way of experimental
research. One of the few systematic investigations in this
area is reported by Reiser et al (1979) who presented 12
psychics with sealed envelopes containing Information on two
solved and two unsolved crimes. According to the authors,
the elicited "psychic impressions" offered little support
for the claim that psychics could contribute Information
necessary for the resolution of crimes. However, in their
book "Psychic Criminology", Hibbard & Worring (1982) cite a
number of cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
criticize the Reiser et al approach as being Insensitive to
psychological and Interpersonal factors. Osis (1984) also
cites numerous cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
emphasizes the
difficulties
involved
in
attempting
to
address this topic in laboratory contexts.
It is clear that the motivational characteristics of real -
life situations cannot be reproduced in the artificiality of
laboratory contexts. On the other hand, even if it is impos-
sible to recreate the motivational dynamics of real-life
psychic
criminology,
laboratory
experimentation
could
explore certain facets of this area. One such facet is the
Identification of an Individual . In many crimes, police rely
upon eyewitnesses to try to reconstruct the facial characte-
ristics of the criminal. However, witnesses may not be avai -
lable, or may be unrellable. Can "psychic witnesses" be
reliably used to Identify the facial characteristics of an
unknown person?
The exploration of facial characteristics as psi targets is
also interesting in and of Itself, Independently of any
immediate applications. Our perception of the face appears
to be a very basic process in human beings; like language,
It may constitute an Inborn, "hardwired" function, rather
than being an acquired capacity. Could the fact that we are
"primed" toward face-recognition translate into a special
sensitivity toward face -precognition or -clairvoyance? If
experimental data were to indicate that faces constitute
unusually good psi targets, then this would lend some
credence to the idea that psi capacities are tied in to
basic neurophysiological and cognitive functions.
The current study, then, was conceived as a preliminary step
In exploring the use of faces as psi-targets. Specifically,
we explored "face precognition" through a computer-based
version of the "Photo-fit" Kit, employed by police to Inter-
rogate eyewitnesses, and explored in a number of investiga-
330
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
tions of face recall and recognition (e.g., Ellis, Sheperd &
Davies, 1975; Sergent, 1984). This kit contains a very wide
range of noses, eyes, mouths, jaws, etc., drawn on transpa-
rencies; it thus allows an Interviewer to "mix and match"
different
instances of facial features,
SO
as
to
approximate the face recalled by a witness.
In our study, we selected a subset of facial features ( face-
outline, eyes, nose, mouth) and a small subset of Instances
for each feature, and passed these into the computer. Then,
we created a program which can randomly mix and match these
instances, and compose a face. The subject's task was to
attempt to choose the facial characteristics which would
most approximate the features of the computer-chosen face.
Despite certain superficial similarities, however, this task
was not quite analogous to psychic criminology. For one
thing, we used "normal" (rather than special) subjects.
Also, the psi task was "elementaristic" in nature, insofar
as subjects would be focusing upon facial features, rather
than attempting to precognize the face as a whole. Some
researchers (e.g., Ellis, 1975; Sergent, 1984) suggest that
important facets of face perception are holistic, and are
not captured by elementaristic approaches. In order to
compensate somewhat for
this problem, we decided not to
provide "plecemeal" feedback following each trial, but give
feedback only once the entire face has been composed (I.e.,
after all four elements have been chosen). Though subjects
would still make their selections one feature at a time, at
least
the moment of
feedback would involve a holistic
perception; if precognitive information derives from this
feedback point, then it would orient the person's psi toward
the whole face, rather than an Isolated feature.
A more important deviation from psychic criminology, in our
approach, was that the experimental context Included none of
the human elements which lend meaning and significance to
the task in real life. Rather, It Involved guessing the
features of a fictional face, one stripped of any meaningful
descriptors or history. To address this, we sought to give
the fictional target-face some Identity, associating it with
a randomly selected name and biography; these were derived
from a large pool of possibilities. The relevance of this
"meaningfulness" device was to be explored by comparing
subject scoring with the biography present vs. absent.
Another factor explored, "psi - task modality", was meant to
address the potential problem of response blases. There is
little doubt that, to different degrees, we are attracted or
repelled by different faces (or facial characteristics). In
a psl task in which subjects can freely choose from among
all possibilities within a target pack, such aesthetic
factors could easily drown out subtle psi information,
leading people to choose Images they like and avoid those
they dislike. As it seemed that this could not be completely
avoided, as long as the subject is free to choose among the
possibilities, we decided to add a psi-baskowoDR000701060001-3
which the subject could
an
image.
Approved For Release 2000/98/15 16JAKDEhoose

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
This second modality was a "timing" psi task, demanding of
the the subject only a decision as to when to stop a rapidly
changing "image roulette"
containing all possibilities.
Thus, there were two task-modalitles: one based upon the
implicit question "when is
the target passing by" (the
timing task), the other based upon the question "where is
the target", and Involving the usual scanning of possibi-
litles in order to make a choice (the scanning task).
METHOD
Subjects
The subjects of
this study
were
35 female and 5 male
volunteers, ranging In age from 19 to 59 years old. Thirty
four of these participants came to the laboratory following
an article in a popular woman's magazine, which presented
the laboratory's computer-based psi research. The remaining
6 subjects were either acquaintances, or had heard about the
laboratory through acquaintances. Personal and psychological
data on all subjects were collected using french versions of
the Personal Inventory Form (PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-
Inventory (MBTI); these data have not yet been analyzed.
Hardware
The experiment was run using an Amiga 1000 with a color
monitor, two disk-drives, a 2-megabyte random-access memory
extension, and a "mouse" for subject Inputs. The transfer of
Photo-fit images into the computer was accomplished using a
surveillance camera and an interface which permits the
"digitization" of video inputs.
Software
The program controlling the present experiment was based
upon a compiler-language named "The Director", similar to
BASIC, but explicitly oriented toward graphics- and sound-
manipulations.
Pseudo-Random function: The random numbers for the program
are generated by
the Director
language's pseudo-random
function, reseeded every cycle by the Amiga clock (read in
in micro-seconds).
A
"Cyclic Redundancy Check" scheme
scrambles the clock values and ensures the adequacy of the
random
distribution.
In
personal communication,
the
a
creator of the Director language stated that tests of the
random function have shown that it yields the expected range
and frequency of values. While no detalled assessment of the
random function was undertaken by the experimenter, a one-
line program was written to at least ensure that the
function was reseeded each time. Run immediatly after the
"booting" of the computer,
this program served to verify
that the pseudo-random function was indeed being reseeded.
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 c GIA RDP96.00792R000701060001-3
332
# V
th
pa
el
pr
SL
pr
S
11
ar
p:
a
A
c
p
t
t
t
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
"Visages" program: The Visages precognition test, written by
the first author, presents subjects with 4 graphic target
packs, each containing 16 distinct instances of
a facial
element, and, on
the basis
of the subject's choices,
progressively constructs
a graphic face. Then, once the
subject
is satisfied with the face as constructed, the
program uses the Amiga's pseudo-random function four times,
selecting, for each facial element, one of 16 possible
Instances. Finally, the program calculates feedback scores
(i.e., measures of the proximity between the subject-chosen
and the randomly-chosen elements), stores the r
results,
provides feedback (showing the target-face and the score),
and offers the subject options to continue or quit.
A slightly modified version of the program serves to collect
control or "simulation" trials, in which no subject is
present. The program essentially creates two faces, on the
basis of two sets of random numbers; the first set substi-
tutes for the subject's guesses, while the second defines
the target face as described above.
A more detailed description of the program's operation is
given in the Target-preparation and Procedure sections.
Target-preparation
The Target pool was based upon a portion of the Penry Photo-
fit Kit, kindly provided by the central police department of
Paris (Ministere de l'interleur), In photocopy form. The kit
involves transparencies showing different male facial ele-
ments
(eyes, noses, mouths,
etc. );
these can be freely
combined and mixed, and so as to produce a very wide range
of possible male facial types.
Four facial elements were used for this study: eyes, nose,
mouth, and facial outline (showing hair, forehead, and jaw).
To select from among the many Instances provided, we used
our subjective judgement and several criteria; for example,
selection of as wide a range of characteristics as possible,
for each facial element and avoidance of facial characteri-
stics which are too striking or weird. We then passed this
subset of photo-fit images
into the computer through
a
"digitization" process, and each digitized image was treated
with diverse computer graphic tools, so as to maximize
definition and clarity. Then, for each element, we selected
16 different instances (I.e., sixteen noses, sixteen mouths,
etc. ), and arranged these images into 4 computer bit-map
screens or "pages", which would serve as target packs (Two
of these pages are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2).
am
om
in
me
he
.he
che
ige
che
le-
the
the
ify
ed,
The 16 Instances of each page were arranged in a 4 x 4
array, images being grouped according to different levels of
resemblance between them. Taking Figure 1 as an example, we
see
that the top two rows are distinguishable from the
bottom two ( "little hair" vs. "lots of hair"). Then, the 4
Instances of a facial element
ApprovedtFor Release 2000/08/15- CIA-RDP96-06792R000701060001e3
(near-bald, short hair,
333

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
Figure 1. Target pack for
face-outline
A1
A2
A
A4
B1
B2
B3
B4 7
C1
C2
C3
C4
D1
D2
D3
D4
Figure 2. Target pack for Lips
A1
A2
A3
A4
Bİ
B2
B3
B4
C1
C2
C4
DI
D2
D3
D4
Figure 3. Face with three
elements selected
334
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
ful
arr
Th
wh
-x
Tr
fe
tì
ri
0
D
i
C
j

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
full hair and long-hair). Finally, within each row, 2 groups
are distinguishable (e.g., in row D, D1 / D2 and D3 / D4).
The Idea behind this arrangment was to create a psl task
which could allow for different degrees of psi -accuracy or
-resolution - from vague feelings to detailed information.
The scoring scheme, accordingly, was meant to reflect dif-
ferent degrees of resemblance between subjects' choices and
the target image. For example, let us assume that the target
for facial-outline were D2. Selection of any Instance within
row C - the other row of the same half-page - implies having
correctly identified that the target-face generally has
"lots of hair"; this would be a "half-page" hit. Selecting
D3 or D4 - the other pair on the same row, or a "row" hit -
Implies having identified the target face as having specifi-
cally long hair. Selecting D1, the other member of the pair,
would be a "pair" hit - whereby the subject has found the
instance which most resembles the actual target. Selecting
D2, of course, is a direct hit.
As mentioned in the Introduction, the target face was
accompanied by a name and, In half the trials, a biography.
The names were drawn from a file containing 80 names com-
monly found in France. The biography was drawn from a second
file, containing 200 statements, organized into 10 theme-
related groups (sports and leisure, living quarters, child-
hood and education, mood and temperament, social life, para-
normal experiences, reactions to world events, beliefs and
philosophy, favorite sayings, health).
Procedure
Upon arrival at the laboratory and preliminary exchanges,
the subject was placed in front of the Amiga, and Instructed
on the utilisation of the mouse. The subject then took
computer-based
(French) versions of
the
PRL Personal
Inventory Form
(PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-Inventory
(MBTI). Following feedback on the MBTI, the subject was
switched to the Apple-based computer-RNG test "Volition" .
Then, after a minimum of two Volition runs, the subject was
brought back to the Amiga, for the Visages precognition
test ;
the experimenter remained present throughout
the
Visages session.
The subject was told that, unlike Volition, the Visages test
was geared toward receptive psi. It was explained that the
computer would create a face, randomly selecting instances
for the four facial elements; the person was asked to use
their intuition to guess which instances of each element
would be selected by the computer. It was emphasized that
the computer would not select those instances on the basis
f any aesthetic criteria, but on the basis of random
decisions.
The run, consisting of four trials (one for each facial
element), begins with the presentation
of
870.8860001-3
Lyes
Approved For Release 2000/08/15urCIA-RDP96-09792800070
335

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
"Nose", "Lipa", The program awaits the subject's selection
of one of these, using the mouse. (For the first run, the
experimenter encouraged the subject to start with face-
outline, and progressively fill in the other elements of the
face). Once an element is selected, the computer presents
the subject with the target pack, I.e., the 16 Instances of
that element.
Depending on the psi-task modality, the target-pack
is
presented in one of two different ways. In the scanning
condition, all 16 possibilities are present on the screen
simultaneously, arranged in the 4x4 array described above;
the person uses the mouse to place the cursor over one of
these 16 instances and then "clicks" to select it. In the
timing condition, only one of the 16 instances is visible on
the screeen at any moment; the Images succeed each other
very rapidly in a random sequence (giving the impression of
a nose changing shape, a mouth talking, etc. ), and selection
is made by clicking on the mouse and stopping the "image
roulette" at some particular Image. The image actually
selected, however, is not the one last seen by the subject,
but rather one which is randomly generated just after mouse
Input; irrespective of how fast their reaction time might
be, subjects cannot consciously select a particular target.
The order of task presentation, fixed across subjects, was
based upon a predetermined schedule allowing for different
permutations of the biograhpy and task-modality variables.
The first four ,runs were scanning/blography, scanning/no
biography, timing/biography, timing/no biography.
In both scanning and timing modes, the specific Instance
chosen by
the
is
person
Immediately
added
to
those
previously selected. Thus, as subjects proceed through the
four facial elements and select a particular face-outline,
set of eyes, nose, and mouth, they see the face being
constructed. (Figure 3 Illustrates a
face with
three
features already chosen and lips not yet selected), The
process of face construction is automatic: placement of the
feature chosen on the face depends not upon the subject, but
upon predefined coordinates.
Following the subject's selection of all four elements, and
thus the completion of the face, the individual is presented
with options 5: "Review Face", and 6: "See target", Option 5
allows subjects to review the face constructed, in case
they've changed their mind about a particular selection (in
which case, they can re-initiate the selection process by
clicking on the corresponding number in the Menu).
Option number 6, once clicked, launches the construction of
the target face. The program generates four random numbers,
between
and 16, each
corresponding to a particular
instance of the four features. The program also randomly
selects a name out of the name-file, and, In the "biography"
condition, constructs a biography by randomly selecting 6
statements from the 20 categories of statements. The program
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 dCJA-RDB96-00792R00070106000-3
336

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
the target face on the screen, along with a name, a graphic
"button" for re-viewing the subject-chosen face, and another
button for reading the biography ( *).
The screen with the subject-chosen face allows for compa-
risons with the target-face; it also shows the scores
obtained for each of the four elements. These scores give
subjects a numerical estimate of the proximity of their
choices
to the target-instances. For each element, the
possible scores are 0 (no relation between
target
and
choice), 2 (half-page success), 4 (row success), 8 (pair
success) and 16 (direct hit). Thus, the total score for the
run could range from 0 to a very unlikely 64 (direct hits on
every trial ).
Subjects were asked to complete at least four runs (sixteen
trials), but were allowed to contribute additional runs, if
so desired. Thus, following feedback they could either click
on a Replay button, to initiate a new run, or, If they had
completed 4 runs, click on a Stop button to close the
Visages program and end the session.
Simulation Runs: In order to ensure that the RND function of
the Amiga operates correctly, and that
there were
no
problems In the program's logic, we conducted a simulation
study, based upon a slightly modified version of the Visages
program. In this progam, the subject's scanning or timing
guesses for each element were replaced by the generation of
random numbers between 1-16.
Thus, the program would
construct a face on the basis of 4 random numbers, and then
a second, target-face on the basis of 4 more random numbers.
Once launched, the simulation program ran automatically,
until it completed 9 runs; it was then re-launched by the
experimenter. This process continued until the number of
runs accumulated equalled the total of experimental runs.
* The screen with the biography text was intended to examine
the meaningfulness factor mentioned in the Introduction.
From the first few sessions, subjects appeared to be con-
fused as to the role and purpose of the statements; the
biography seemed incongruent with the stated nature of the
task-precognizing a randomly constructed face. Following
repeated negative comments by several subjects, the experi-
menter realized that the biography was not appropriate for
assessing meaningfulness, and decided to drop assessment of
this factor from the study. From that point on, he no longer
directed subjects to click on the biography button, and
practically no one did.
337
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
RESULTS
Collectivly, the 40 participants contributed a total of 212
experimental runs (848 trials). Individuals' contribution to
this database was quite uneven: 28 of the 40 participants
completed just the minimum of 4 runs each, while the remai-
ning 12 contributed between 5-14 runs. Using subjects' mean
feedback score as an index of individual performance, we
find that the average score for the group contributing 4
runs is 10.16, while for the group contributing more runs it
is 9.18. A t-test for independent means shows no difference
between the two groups (t =. 752, 38 df, ns). Figure 4, depic-
ting mean feedback scores for all subjects, also shows that
there are no consistent trends distinguishing the scores of
the 28 subjects who contributed exactly 4 runs, from the 9
contributing 5-9 runs, and the 3 contributing 10-14 runs.
The evaluation of overall results, utilizing the trial as
unit, was based upon two goodness-of-fit
tests - one for
experimental and one for simulation data. These analyses
examine whether the observed distribution of hits, for all
scoring levels, conforms to the binomial
expectation (the
probability corresponding to each scoring level multiplied
by the number of trials). The probabilities used to estimate
expectation for each scoring level represent the likelihood
of obtaining exactly (rather than "at least" ) a pair hit, a
row hit, etc .; they thus allow each scoring level to be
treated independently. The probabilities corresponding to
each level of hitting are direct hit, 1/16; pair hit, 1/16;
row hit, 1/8; half-page hit,
1/4; and miss, 1/2. (For
example, in the facial-outline example cited earlier, with
D2 as target, there Is exactly 1 way to obtain a direct hit,
1 way to obtain specifically a pair hit (D1), 2 ways to ob-
tain a row hit (D3, D4), 4 possibilities for a half-page hit
(all of row C) and 8 ways to obtain a miss (rows A and B) ).
Table 1 summarizes the results of the goodness-of-fit tests.
The first row represents the expected number of hits for
each scoring-level, given a total of 848 trials. The second
and third rows show the obtained number of hits for simula-
tion and experimental trials (respectively). As can be seen
from this table, simulation trials conformed quite closely
to expectation. In contrast, the distribution of scores in
experimental trials departs significantly from expectation
(chi-sq [4 df ] = 12.632; p =. 013). This latter result is
associated with
an effect size of
.076 (obtained by
converting the p-value to a one-tailed z-score, and dividing
the latter by the square root of N, I.e., of 848).
The significant effect for the experimental trials was
mainly due to a shift from the expected number of hits in
the three partial-hit levels (pair, row and half-page).
Post-hoc chi-square analyses, comparing each of the five
hitting levels with the other four, suggest that the main
effect was due to a shortage of hits at the pair-hits level
(chi-sq (1 df ]=5.813,, p=0.16), and an excess of hits at the
ApprovedFor Release 2000/08/15 : CIARDP96100792R00070106000qf3
338

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
FIGURE 4: MEAN FEEDBACK SCORES FOR 40 SUBJECTS
M
18
E
16
A
14
Z
N
12
S
8
C
6
0
4
R
2
E
81 1 89 | 85 1 87 89 | 11 | 13 1 15 | 17 1 19 21 1 23 1 25 | 27 1 29 | 31 1 33 | 35 | 37 | 39
02
.6
12
14 16 18
22 24
26
28 34 32
34 36
38 40
MEAN SCORE BASED UPON: 4 RUNS: . / 5-9 RUNS: X / 10-14 RUNS : X
Table 1: Frequency of hits for 5 scoring levels
for Experimental and Simulated trials
DIR
PAIR
ROW
H. PGE
MISS
CHI-SQ [4 DE ]
EXPECTED
53
53
106
212
424
SIMULATION
50
56
112
213
417
.799
EXPERIMENTAL
60
36
88
238
426
12.632
Table 2: Frequency of hits for 5 scoring levels
for Scanning and Timing task modalIties
DIR
PAIR
ROW
H.PGE
MISS
CHI-SQ [4 DF ]
EXPECTED
26.5
26.5
53
106
212
SCANNING
33
20
47
104
220
4.207
TIMING
27
16
41
134
206
14.453
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
1
x

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
1
aesthetic criteria, subjects consistently selected certain
instances and avoided other ones; whereas one would expect
each Instance of a particular element to be chosen about an
equal number of times - specifically 106/16, or 6.625 times-
there were Instances which had been chosen just once or
twice, and others chosen 15 or even 20 times! .
By comparison to the conflicts induced by the scanning task,
the timing task was effortless and entertaining. Given that
all subjects went through both conditions, it is possible
that the significant timing-task result simply reflects a
preferential effect: this condition may have fared better
because subjects perceived it as less frustrating. Alter-
natively, insofar as subjects had little control over their
selections during the timing-task, and just had to press the
button when they felt the time was "right", they were less
prone to counter-productive psychological sets (e.g., trying
too hard) and more apt to adopt a passive, "goal-oriented"
approach. The study's results may be seen as analogous to
those of RNG-PK studies suggesting the superiority of goal -
oriented over process-oriented strategies (Morris, Nanko and
Phillips, 1979; Levi, 1979), or of hidden RNG-PK tasks over
explicit ones (Berger, 1988; PRL, 1984; Varvoglis, 1989).
It should be noted, though, that the specific distribution
of scores in the timing task does not lend itself to any
simple Interpretations . It is not clear why hitting should
manifest at a level at which it is least rewarding, and at
which psi-information is least useful. Similarly, it is not
clear why the trend toward missing (most apparent in the
overall results) should manifest at the pair-level, at which
psi-information was quite precise, and a hit, presumably,
quite rewarding.
CONCLUSION
It is obvious that this study's results, though significant,
are not particularly encouraging for psychic criminology
applications. The overall patterning of experimental scores
Seems to have been due to a combination of hitting and
missing, with the most conspicuous hitting occurring at too
low an informational level to be especially useful.
On the other hand, it should be stressed that the task was
as removed from real psychic criminology as could be -
involving repeated trials, "normal" subjects, and fictional
faces, rather than a single trial by a "psychic" attempting
to describe a dangerous criminal. Also, insofar as
the
procedures encouraged subjects to focus upon facial-features
rather than upon the face as a whole, our tasks may have
been simply too elementaristic to fairly assess the utility
of faces as psl targets.
Be that as it may, we are looking to shift our approach with
Visages. Leaving aside psychic criminology, for now, we are
Approved for Release:2000/08/199 CTA RDP96-00792RG60701060001-3
Perhaps
the
very response biases which
341
1
3
t
e
0
le
in
he
ut
nd
d,
of

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
block subjects' receptivity to psi Information would render
them effective PK agents. Next time, rather than asking
participants to fight their. feelings and preferences and
response biases, we're going to tell them to go for it, and
(try to) have it their' way ...
REFERENCES
Agor, W.H. (1984).
Intuitive management: integrating left
and right brain management skills. Prentice Hall Press: NY
Amorim, M.A. (in press), Applications et apprentissage en
parapsychologie. Revue Francaise de Psychotronique, Vol 3.
Berger, R. (1988). Psi effects without real-time feedback.
Journal of Parapsychology, 52, 1-28.
Ellis, H. (1975). Recognizing faces. British Journal of
Psychology, 66, 409-426.
Ellis, H., Sheperd, J. & Davies, G. (1975). An investigation
of the use of the Photo-fit technique for recalling faces.
British Journal of Psychology, 66, 29-37.
Harary, K., Targ, R., & White, A. (1985). An applications
orientation to psi research. In R.White and J. Solfvin ( Eds. )
Research in Parapsychology 1984, (pp. 119-120). Scarecrow
Press: Metuchen, NJ.
Hibbard, W.S. & Worring, R.W. (1982). Psychic criminology.
An operations manual for using psychics in criminal investi-
gations. Springfield, Ill: Charles C. Thomas
Levi, A. (1979). The influence of imagery and feedback on PK
effects. Journal of Parapsychology, 43, 275-289.
Morris B., Nanko, M. and Phillips, B. (1979). Intentional
observer influence on measurements of the quantum mechanical
system: a comparison of two imagery strategies. In W. G. Roll
(Ed) Research in Parapsychology 1978 (pp.146-150). Scarecrow
Press: Metuchen, NJ
Mishlove, J. (1986). Psionics: the practical application of
psi. In B. Shapin and L. Coly (Eds. ) Current trends in psi
research (pp . 130-136) . Parapsychology Foundation: New York.
Csis, K.
(1984).
The
application of ESP to criminal
investigations, locating missing persons, and cases
of
airplane disasters. In the Proceedings of a Symposium on
Applications of Anomalous Phenomena (pp.241-274).
Psychophysical
Research
Laboratories (1984).
1983 Annual
Report. Princeton, NJ: Psychophysical Research Laboratories.
Reiser, M., Ludwig, L., Saxe, S. & Wigner, C. (1979). An
evaluation of the use of psychics in the Investigation of
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
1

Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
major crimes. Journal of Police Science and Administration,
7, 18-25.
Sergent, J. (1984).
An Investigation
Into component and
configural processes
underlying face perception. British
Journal of Psychology, 75, 221-242.
Varvoglis, M. (1989). A "psychic contest" using a computer-
RNG task in a non-laboratory setting". In L. Henkel and
R. Berger (Eds) Research in Parapsychology
1988 (pp.10-15).
Scarecrow Press: Metuchen, NJ.
-
1
-
K
1
1
1
W
>f
31
al
of
on
al
S.
An
of
343
Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3