Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT that the etfect is really ther, although it is ‘shy und currently cluding detection. People who believe no one elsc will obtain Ux sazue results presumahly are: less liknly ro fake outcomes since their own results will be called into question by the failure of others. On the other hand, it could be argued that somc researchers may be motivated to produce chance results siuce Ibvy would then be regaried hy many as excellent scientists, who are doing a fair evaluation ot the phenomena but using methodologically superior procedures, providing an important public service in @ Uifficull area. This might he tre as well for researchers who do not expect to get good results but suddenly find the results starting to be positive, and who arc thus threatened with the likelihood that their cigorous colleagues will regard them as fraudulent or-al least incompetent, and will regard them as having been closet "true believers" ull along. Thus, individual rescarchers may thcir motives questioned and be under suspicion uf fraud regardless of their results. This is more Ukely al earller stages of research when consistent patterns of findings among researchers have not yet cmerged. Such accusations, even when indirect and merely implied, may serve to damage a line of rescarch, hy casting unwarranted aspersions upon a researcher. This may thus change the social dynamics of future research attempts in ways that raight reduce the likelihood of replication and extension of findings. Given the possibility of attribution of fraud or procedural deviation, ideally one would wish to employ procedures that climinate thesc, without hopelessly constiaininy die procedures to those that have no real ccnlagical validity and for which one would have little reason to expect success. If the procedure's virtues could casily bc made obvious to all potential critics, all involved may be more able ww relax, enjoy their participation in the study, and fecl confident that whatever results emerged would nat lead to unfounded accusations. In practice such perfecuon is undoubtedly impossible and can only be approximated. The mast effective solutian, in parapsychology as well as other research, is natural replication and extension, with many participants and rescarchers involved. But it is also important and useful lo have piucudures as well safeguarded as possihtc even at carly stages, for several reasons: 1) as a sign ot general competence; 2) to minimize unfair accusations; 3) 10» help all concerned feel comfortable with the way thc results are going at various stages of the study; 4) to provide conditions that will not need to be altered substantially in later stages, following reasonable criticism of carlicr studics; 5) to discouraec fraudulent individuals frou participating and wasting researchers valuable time; 6) to encourage others to feel confident in replication attempts; and 7) to encourage potential sources of funding to feel confident that their funds will be intelligently spent. In the remainder of the paper we will consider the autoganzfeld procedure currently in use at Edinburgh University as an cxample of attenipts Wu couftont these issues using a procadire that has received considerable praise and criticism in the course of its development. Development The automated ganzfeld system of the Koestler Chair of Parapsychology at Edinbureh University is a computer based system that provides anramatic data recording, highly effective shielding against sensory Cues, and resistance to both subject and experimenter fraud. The program is run ona 33MHz 80386DX Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT computer, equipped with a 210 MB lixed disk, § MB DRAM, four RS 232 serial ports, an 80387 numeric coprocessor, and a super VGA monitor. The target presentation sysiem is an NEC PC/VCR, a frame-accurate NTSC videocassetie recorder equipped with un RS 232 sorial interface. All VCR functions are controlled by computer sofiware, aud videu, audio and computer graphics are routed ta the appropriate rooms (sender, receiver, or experimenter), through computer control. The system at Edinburgh was originally conceived by Chuck Honorton, re- designed by Dean Radin and Rohin Taylor to improve security features and sensory shielding, and initially programmed and documented by Dean Radin. For a description of the Girst operational system at Edinburgh. see Mortis, et al, 1993. Adtditiona) security features and sensory shielding have been implemented by Kathy Dalton, who also performed the neccssary up-grading of programming and documentation. Consultations from Richard Wiseman were of great help in improving security measures, and Deborah Delanoy provided helpful insights ia the carly conception of the automated ganzfeld security. Bob Morris was involved in all stages of development. LABORATORY LAYOUT The Video Ganzfeld laboratory consists ot tour rooms, shown in Figure 1, and lobelled as RECEIVER (R), EXPT (E), VIDEO (V), and SENDER (8). Receiver R's room is double walled, double-doored, electromagnctically and acoustically insulated. lt attenuates airborne sounds betwcon R’s and S’s rooms by a minimum of 60 dB aud w waxdwum of 100 UB over the andio specrnim (50 Az to 8000 Hz, MacKenzic, 1992). Some very low frequency vibrations can be felt inside R's room if people in thc Experimenters room jump up and down, and faint acises can heard. When R is wearing rhe headphones, listening 10 white noise, and silling in the reclining chair (i.c., in ganzfeld stimulation), R's ability to hear any airborne sounds or vibrations originating in the experimental suile is substaudally reduced. In any event no sound or vibration can be heard or felt in R's room that originated trom S’s room. Experimenter E’s room is adjucent to R’s. It contains the computer that controls the audio/video target presentatiun, audio mixing equipment, and other assorted audio/video hardware (shown in detail in Figure 2), Video Room The viden room is double walled, elecromagnetically and acoustically insulated, and contains the target presentation system. This consists of two NEC PC- VCRs, which are computer-contiolled NTSC-furmat video lape recarder/players. One. PC-VCR is used only to send the target clip to S$; the other is used to play the four judging clips to R. No sound from the VCR's can be detected outside the room when the doors are closed. Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT Sender 5 is placed in a room located about 25 meters. and thiguyls fuur doors, from R. S's room is not acoustically or electromagnetically shielded. ‘Ine ‘l'V monitor which conveys the target material in S's room is positioned in the far corer away from the door, with a ftve foot partition between it aud the door, effectively shielding against any extraneous light or color from the monitor being viewed through any cracks around or under the door. The sound amplifier is similarly positioned, aud all suunds tu die souin are conveyed ihrongh the headphones. This ensures that no airborne sounds of vibrations can be heard outside of the senders room through the arca around the door. Thus, anyone slanding or lying outside Ue senders room door carmot see ar hear the display to the sender. The skylight pictured in $'s room is completely covered by an opaque dark green window shadc. Additionally, new locks have been instalicd on S's door, with uuly reyearch personnel actively involved in the ongoing Studies having acress to the keys. outside wall 2FRER 2 TE ONO ee a me 25 meters skylight Figure 1. Laboratory layout. Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT SENDER VIDEO ROOM Figure 2. Audio, viden, and digita! communications layout This design 1solates the audio and video (a/v) paths for S and R/E to avoid introducing sensory cucs. The only direct connection betweca S's and R's a/v systeius is che vutpul of the andio mixer intn the input of the § audio mixer. HARDWARE The automated ganzteld system at the Koestler Chair uses the following systcm hardware: « 2 NEC PC-VCRs (NTSC video format) ¢ 3NTSC video monitors (R, 5, E) e | Technics stereo casselte ape recorder (for the mentation & judging) e 1 Realistic stereo cassette tape recorder (for playing relaxation instructions ond white noisc) e 2 miciophunes (clip-on for R, handheld for B) « 2 Realistic four-channel stereo mixcrs « 2 Realistic sterco audia amplifiers 6 3 headphunes « 1 MJN brand 33MHz S$0386DX computer equipped with a 210 MB fixed disk, 8 MB DRAM, four RS 232 serial ports. 80387 numeric cuprucessor, super VGA monitor, and printer e { red incandescent bulb and flexipose lamp « audio cassette tape with relaxation iustructions & whi noise Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT SOFTWARE ‘The program runs under a combination of Microsoft Visual Basic 1.0 and Windows 3.1/DOS 5, and is passworded. Tue program produces a darafile during each session which is stored ta both the hard drive and a floppy disk, and is sent for immediate printout to the printer at scasion conclusion. All target prescotations. VCR video and audiu sizuals, as well as computer graphics, are computer-controlled, The larget presentation system involves two separate NEC PC/VCR's, which are frame accurate NTSC videocassette recorders equipped with RS 232 serial interfaces. SECURITY MEASURES The automated ganzfeld procedure developed at PRI. hy Honarton and colleagues is widely recognized as onc of the soundest methodologies in parapsychology, However, it has not heen without its criticisms. Naturally, any teplication atizinpt of complex smidies, such as those carricd out at the PRL laboratories, must take into account the advantages and disadvantages encountered in those studics, and while capitalizing on the former, must altewpl to eliminate or minimize the tater. We have attempted to evaluate these criticisms 1n our own work at the Koesuer Chair, and will address thosc issucs herc, The main criticisms of the earlier automated ganzfeld work (¢.g., Morris, et al, 1993) have heen: (a) Possible subliminal sound Icakape to the receiver, (b) Repeated playing of the targct tape during sending might alter it physically such as to provide a subtle cne, (¢) Sounds trom the VCR might provide cues Lo the experimenter about which clip was heing played as target. (c) Sonne leakage from the target coom to experimenter might provide cues, if senders are noisy, (¢) There could be a complex electrunic signalling system herween sender and Teceiver, and, (f) Deliberate experimenter fraud. In the case of criticism (a), possible subliminal sound leakage to the reeciver, the audio sysicms, as well as the video systems. are elecuunically isulaied from each other. The onty direct connection between S's and R's audio or video systems is the output of the audio mixer into the output of the § audio mixcr. See Figure 2. The technicians from the Electonics/Audiv-Visual department at Tiniversity of Edinburgh have electronically checked all such connections, following recommended procedurcs (all sound Jevels at upper limit), and have verifted that no such leakage caisis in our facility. These checks were cnnducted prior lo the beginning of the present ganzteld study uriderway, and again at approximately the midway point. In response to (b), that repeated playing of the target ape during sending might alter it pliysically such as ta provide a subule cuc, our system ulilizes two separate tapes for sending and judging, which are housed in two scparatc NEC TC/VCR's, and totally under computcr-control. Two scparate VCR's are used, and sensorially isulated in a separaie mom away trom E, in response ta a theoretical sensory cue (c), that sounds trom the VCR might provide cues to the experimenter about which clip was bcing played as target, allowing E w yuuss S's target clip. The theoretical cue may work as follows: it is possible, although unlikely, that by E hearing S's VCR Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
eee ad Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT rewinding ur fast-forwarding the video tape before it begins to play, that E can get a hint about which target pool, and possibly which spocific targcl clip, thc YCR is playing. Such a cue would obviously bias E towards curtain targets ar a particular tarper. F might then inadvertently transfer this bias to X during the judging process, and this is clearly unacceptahle. Notes this sensury cue tx onfy possible if : E ig Lamiliar with the locations of the target pools on the vidco tape, E knows the order of the clips witiu cach puul, _F pays attention to how long the VCR rewinds or fast-lorwards, or perhaps notices the video tape counter, and, the videu tape always begins fram the. same Incarion (é.g., it always rewinds to the beginning of the tape at tho beginning of each session). To climinatc these potential cues in our facility, we have taken hie following steps in our procedure. The VCR's have been placed in a separale non-adjoming, sound attenuated room in the experimental suite, behind two doors. It has becn verified by rescarch personnel that auy videu tape movement sounds cannot he heard in the experimental suite or in E's room. ‘Lhe digital tape counters have been completely blocked from view from inside the housing of the VCR. which also effectively removes any possibility of accessing control of the VCR through the remote control. ‘Ihe tront contro! panels are inaccessible, being enclosed by the metal housing unit for the VCR's. The video clips themselves arc all exactly one minute long, eliminating any cueing from the Jength of time the clip is played, even uf they could be heard. The order of the clips within each target pool is fixed by the recorded order on the video tape, but the order in which they are played during the judging prncess is always freshly randomized for each session. ‘Thus, K's that are not familiar with the order on the video tape will never know the actual target sequence within each pool, The seuder video Lape is never rewound tn the heginning of the tape. but starts Up where the tape stopped at the end of the last session. It has been verified by roscarch personncl that no sound can be beard from the video room, aud dhe computer program is wriuen to ensure that no timing cues (c.g. tape rewind times, etc.) are available to the experimenter, thus, E cannot receive any information rcgarding tape movement. The R and § video tapes are locked inty the two VCR's via the specially designed meral honsing unit, with a brittle plastic security tab, cluminating the possibility that E may surreptitiously retrieve one or both of the tapes and view all of the targets to Jearn theit posiliuu on the wpe. This also prevents orher Torms of potential fraud, such as substituting S’s actual video with a specially prepared sham tape with only onc target repeatcdly recorded throughout the tapc. By doing this. E could pruduce fraudulent hits if (a) F. knows how to read digital addresses on the real § video tape, (b) has access to another PC-VCR to dub the digital addresses to the sham tape and, (c) can retieve the sham tape aud substitute dhe rea) one at the end of each session. Another concern we have aftemptad to rectify is that of (d), that sound leakage from the wrect room to experimenter might provide curs, if senders are noisy. AS was duld above in the description of both the experimenter and sender's rooms, theso rooms are separated by some distance (approximatcly 25 meters), and a small {light of stairs. In addition, we have had our acilities acouslically evainated (sound alienuatinn herween S's room and the foyer of the experimental suite was above 55dB Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT fourm 1254 on np, and presumably higher for the experimental room itsell), and veritied that even without headphones on, our experimcaters could not hear shouts from the target room. In addition, there is wn electrical sensing system connected to the doar af §'s room that was designed to detect the opening of the door by activating a flashing red Hight in E's room. Consequently, if S Icft the room during the experiment. E would instauily be dleruwd. As an added prmcantion, the door into the experimental foyer is kept locked during sessions. In the present study currently underway only laboretory staff are used as senders. who all know to be quicl Tr the cane of (e), thar there could be a complex electronic stgnalling system between sender and receiver, we consulted with several security firms in our attempts to evaluate arid address this, They coufinmed that while we could conceivably do a great deal to prevent and detect known signalling systems, given the prasent state of technology it would be cxtremcly cxpensive to guard against all available types of signalling sysuios. Furthermore, the technology of such signalling systems is rapidly expanding and any detection systems would necassarily require continuos, and expensive, upgrading. Using only laboratory staff as scnders is one way of addressing this, ax is the electrical sensing system mentioned above Co detect any S leaving the sending room before the proper time. There remains the possibility of a fixed monitoring systcm in the seader's :00tu, ur monitoring of the sender's mam hy an accomplice outside of the room. Our present physical circumstances make this unlikely, as the room is periodically inspected and we monitor the environment during sessious fur strangers. The layout of the sender's raom ts designed to prevent any one standing or lying outside of the door to receive any visual or auditory information about the target clip. Additionally, such systems involve thie cue operation of the receiver. We currently use cach receiver for only one session, thus meaning that any deliberate fraud by receivers would involve several pcoplc. The last criticism to be addressed is dhat uf (0, delibera experimenter (rand. We advocate the use of multiple experimenters in any automated ganzfeld experiments. We are currently using three main experimenters, plus four senders. All of the experimenters participate as needed in the role as sender, plus one. other laboratory staff member. ‘Lhus, each session will have two members of the experimental tcam involved. The automated vanzfcld program records sessivu dala not only to the bard drive, hit. alsa to floppy disk. This floppy disk is stored in a secure location by one of the experimenters, and produced before cach trial. Immediately after each session. as soon as the cumpuler bas recorded the session as completed, muttiple copies of the session datafile are printed out. Each experimenter reccives one of these session records, and onc is included in the session file which, along with the audio taped subject mentation, is Placed in the unit's Security Cabinet. For more detail on the secunty precautions involved in acceasing the Parapsychology unit's Security Cabinct, please sec Delanoy, et al, ( 1993). The session records ou computer disk ae compared to printouts in the experimenters’ possession for discrepancies before any data are analyzed. A minimum of two experimenters arc required to sign off on the hand-written record of the pardvipauts Wirgcl Tespunses, wich iy then included in the subject fue with the computer print-out. in addition to the above security measures, we have also conducted periodic randomness checks on the program, using a chi squaie lest for numbers salactad uniformly at random. The interpretation of the RNG output by the program was checked by running a saties of mint-trials, using the program to generate requests for Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT largets and conditions, and verifying these as above. These checked were carricd out prior lo the current study and at intervals thronghont. These were conducted not only by the experimenters in the Parapsychology unit, but also by specialists in Artificial Tatelligence and Computer Engineering in the Psychology Depatuucul. Randomness checks and program interpretation were found to be within specificd parameters. Example of a Process-Oricntcd Autoganzfeld Study The system described above can easily he tailored tn prodnce a variery af erent experimental conditions, wo explore thosc that work best in gencral. or best for specific participant populations, Jt can also vary conditions in accordance with e design of process-oriented studies. Currently it is teing used in a study to evaluate the role of the sender. Although previous autoganzfeld research has always mployed senders (Honorton, et al, 1990), earlier ganzfeid studics have produced Sults both with and without seudeis (Hunurion, 19835). The present study employs three conditions, each with 32 participants pre pelected to match the characteristics of carlicr autoganzJeld successes as best we ould, ©.g. artistic ur musical went, positive auiride toward psi, and so on. In two onditions, participants arc introduced to a lab associate who is described as a helper ho may or may not be serving as a sender. The initial preparation of the receiver proceeds a8 usual. When the helper arrives at the target room, the computer system anduily selecus whether dic sender stays to send or is asked to leave, and displays is decision on the monitor screen, If asked lw icave, lhe sender goes clsewhere in he building. In this way receiver and experimenter remain blind as to the sender's resence until the end of the session. In the third condition, there is always a sender ind all parties Know this from the Start. In this way we hope to assess the ontribution of the physical presence of the sender as well as the psychological! effects bf knowing there is a sender. Only Jab personnel are used as senders. The study inishes in early June, and the basic results for each of the three conditions will be vailable tor presentation at. the convention. Discussion In our efforts to set up appropriate auluinated yanzfeld procedures from which 0 allempt roplication of Honorton’s successful scries of ganzfeld trials, we feel we ere moderately successful. In any study undertaken in the ganzfeld the psychological comfort and well being of the participant must be taken into account. i studies which du involve receivers bringing in their own sender, tor example, the emote location of the scnder's room, which is up a flight of siairs and down a dorridor, may impart 4 sense of isolation to the sender, and a sense of being ‘cut-off from that sender tor the receiver. We see no solution to this while still maintaining te integrity of the protocol. In addition, there is no direct, line-ol-sight connectian ith the scnder's room for the experimenter, making it difficult for the experimenter tp be sure that the sender does not some how de-activate the electronic signalling device on the dnor and leave the sending room, possibly in some attempt to douuuuricuie with the receiver. We have chosen not tn monitor the sender and cciver rooms via cameras as this can give participants the feeling that ‘big brother’ 1s fatching’ them, making them feel uncomfortable and self-conscious. Hunorton imself cautioned against the use of cameras inside the sendet/receiver rooms Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0
Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0 CPYRGHT (Honorton, 1992). Additional security measures are being developed which address the psychological comfort of the involved parties while cnsuring thal a high level a! experimental protocol is met. There are many factors that come into play within a laboratory experimental situation that are never covered in the protnenl designed to that describe that poceduic. For example, some participants may not complete ali of their forms before arrival for the session, and may thus be asked to complete Unc at the lab upyn atrival, immacdiately prior to the ganzfeld session itsclf. If, in fact, a study produces signiticant results, and such participants are among those scoring a large proportion of hits, does this.mean that it is heneficial lo have participants fill out farms in the laboratory because this in some way allow them Lo become ‘habituated’ wo their surrounding, and thus more comfortable with the cxporimental situation? Or is it more related to the personality type that puis off completing things, such as forms, until the last moment? If the reverse is true, and these particular participants score luwer dun would normally be expected, was it because being asked to fill out forms in tho laboratory sitting, possibility causing a sensc of ‘making everyous wail on them’, made them more self- conscious and thus less like to be open and receptive? (Wr, again, would this more likely be related to a personality correlate, such as mentioned above? What arc the ‘magic’ experimenter/subject interactions that arn most likely to help both extroverts and introverts to feel more comfortable in the laboratory setting? What types of ‘magic’ words could bc incorporated into pre- session chat that would facilitate the participants performance? Are the slight variations in presentation of the ganzfeld experience to receivers between experimenters cuuugh ly influence the participants reaction to that experience? Are there gender pairings within experimenter pairs that would prove wore conducive than others? Are men more comfortable with male experimenters, and women morc comfortahle with female experimenters? Or do both sexes find it easier to ‘open up’ w an experimenter of the opposite sex? It is our view that in the face of the variability of social and psychological factors that these questions involve, the physical environment of the participant should be held as constant and secure as possible to aid in our understanding of psi phenomena. We dv acknowledge that there is no such thing as a single absolutely fraud proof experiment and would not claim otherwise. However, it is vital that experimental protocol that provides a high measure of security be coupled with the type of warm, encouraging and frien dly environment that psi seems to demand, In this way all parlies concemed can proceed comfortably with the business of doing rcscarch and lcarning from cach scssion. Approved For Release 2002/05/17 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003200240001-0