Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200600001-1
B.
Viewer Dependencies
Viewers 002,
009, and 372 have produced consistent remote viewing results
for many
years—since 1972 for viewers 002 and 009, and since 1979 for viewer 372. Viewer 389 is a recent
addition, and has produced examples of excellent remote viewing in the only experiment in which
he has participated; however, he has produced significant results in another laboratory. Whereas
viewer 002 produced the largest z-score
(Zs - 2,653), viewer 009 produced the smallest
(Zs = -0.524). The combined effect size for the experienced viewers is 0.621, and is 0.559 for the
inexperienced viewers.
The difference
is not significant.
There are two considerations that prevent drawing conclusions about the viewer dependence
of the data.
The number of independent samples
is small, but the most compelling argument
against drawing conclusions is that placement of the sensor array is a seriously confounding factor.
As stated in Section II, we positioned the array in a location that maximized the response to a DS.
This may not be the appropriate positioning for everyone.
Indeed,
it might not be optimal for
anyone.
To determine if there were any “obvious" spatial dependencies that might indicate a more
optimal array placement, we computed a complete set (all sensors) of Monte Carlo distributions for
one session for viewer 002.
Figure 19 shows the single-tailed p-values for the RMS phases for the
RS and PS. They are displayed in the standard sensor-array configuration. The pattern for the RS
suggests that a more optimal positioning of the array would be
in the sensor 2-7 direction as
indicated by an arrow in Figure
19.
Remote Stimuli
Pseudo Stimuli
\
0.002
0.126
—
0.128
0.184
0.572
0.238
0.848
0.710
mmmI
0.854
0.668
0.684
0.700
Figure
19.
Phase p-values for Viewer 002:
8/25/88
C.
Pseudo Stimuli
It was initially thought that the PS would act as a within-run control. The results indicate,
however, that there was, on the average, a larger response to the PS than to the RS.
While the
difference was not significant,
it is important to note that both of the responses are considered
statistically robust (effect sizes of 0.599 and 0.924 for the RS and PS, respectively). A number of
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200600001-1
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200600001-1
viewers’ responses appear to produce phases on opposite sides of the Monte Carlo distributions
(e.g., viewers 002 and 007), but there is no overall correlation between the RS and PS p-values.
A brief description of the hardware and software that is responsible for stimulus generation
may help in understanding this outcome.
The stimuli and their timing are imitated by an HP
computer, but are controlled by an IBM PC. Each stimulus type has its own frame buffer within the
PC. Our RS consists of a pattern of Is and 0s that represent a sinusoidal grating in the center of an
otherwise blank field.
The PS pattern, a blank field that consists of all Os, resides in a separate
buffer. An interface board between the PC and a standard video monitor has
its own internal
frame buffer, which
is automatically and continuously scanned at 30 Hz to provide a standard
NTSC interleaved video signal. See Figure 20.
Main HP
Stimulus
Type RS/PS
Stimulus Initiation
IBM PC
Monitor
ZiM
i iimwimu
Output
Frame
Buffer
is!
NTSC 30 Hz
Interleaved
Figure 20
. Sequence of Events for Stimuli Generation
When the HP computer signals the PC to provide the appropriate stimulus, the following
sequence of events are followed
(see Figure 20)
:
(1)
Phase locked to 60 Hz, the
interface frame buffer
is loaded with a copy of the
appropriate stimulus frame buffer (either RS or PS).
(2)
The interface board automatically sends this pattern interleaved at 30-Hz.
(3)
After a preset time, approximately 100-ms
in our experiment,
the PC
resets the
interface frame buffer to zero (blank screen), and waits until another stimulus signal is
received.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200600001-1