gmsw&i may be
relevant to the discussion here as
it could suggest the kind of target features which
might
attract the
attention
of our experimental
percipients
in
free-response GESP
tasks.
Berlyne
(1970)
noted
the
difficulty
of even
defining
what
is meant
by
the word
"attention".
In
his series
of experiments (described
in
Berlyne, 1960) on
curiosity,
conflict and arousal he seems to use an operational
definition.
These experiments
typically presented the subject simultaneously with several
stimuli and observed the
percipient’s eye fixation movements
- the inference being that attention was given to
the
stimulus
which
attracted
most
eye
fixation
(e.g.
Berlyne,
1958).
Other
experiments
used
a
different
measure
of
attention,
allowing
subjects
to
expose
themselves to very
brief sights of stimulus
pictures as many times as .they
liked
-
presumably attention was attracted by the stimuli which were chosen to be seen most
often by subjects.
The characteristics of stimuli which seemed to influence direction
of attention included:
intensity; brightness; contrast; colour;
novelty; complexity; and
incongruity.
Intensity.
Berlyne (1960) states that the intensity of stimulation is seen in "the
frequency of nerve impulses and the number of fibers activated" (p.170)
in the
reticular arousal system.
Generally, large stimuli are more intense than small
stimuli; "warm" colours
(e.g.
red)
are more intense ana arousing than
"cold"
colours
(e.g.
blue);
high-frequency
sounds
are
more
intense
than
low
frequency sounds; and
(in cats and monkeys) painful stimuli are most intense,
followed by proprioceptive,
auditory, and visual
stimuli
respectively.
Berlyne
found that attention was attracted by relatively intense stimuli
- for example, to
larger
than
to
smaller
circles;
to
brighter
than
to
dimmer
visual
stimuli.
Intensity is related to brightness, which also appears to attract attention.
Colour.
Infants
preferred
looking
at
colour
to
looking
at
black and
white
stimuli.
Adults’ attention was attracted more to a coloured stimulus than to a
white one (Berlyne, 1960).
Contrast.
It was found that attention was attracted
to a
lighter stimulus on
black and medium grey backgrounds, and
to a darker
stimulus on a white
background.
So, contrast with the background attracted attention.
Above we
saw
that
brightness
also
attracts
attention.
When
presenting
subjects
with
stimuli which
differed from
their background
to equal extents but
in
different
directions,
It was found that subjects were more
likely to respond to the lighter
stimulus
- that
is,
in the absence
of a contrast difference, brightness was a
secondary determinant of attention (McDonnell, 1968).
Novelty.
This can be defined as an unusual combination of parts of various
objects,
or a change from
the
kind
of
stimulus
to which
the organism has
recently been exposed
(Stotland & Canon,
1972).
It has
repeatedly been
found that novel stimuli attract more attention than familiar stimuli (e.g. Langer,
Fiske, Taylor & Chanowitz, 1976;
Berlyne, 1958), though the effect of novelty
declines over time
(perhaps as
the
subject
habituates
to
the
stimulus and
ApprovedWffl&te'ise 2000/08/08
: CBSfcDP96-00789Rp03100120001-4
CPYRGH Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4 arousal drops). Berlyne (1960) considers attention to be most effectively attracted by a stimulus whose novelty is often renewed. Novelty is related to change or surprisingness of a stimulus (Stotland & Canon, 1972). On surprise, Berlyne says "In experiments on learning, orienting behaviour (a set of psychological and physiological responses through which the organism "sits up and takes notice" when an aspect of its environment changes) is often found to be strengthened by an unheralded change in experimental conditions” (p. 98, Berlyne, 1960, {my italics]. This observation strongly resembles one made from a parapsychological experiment by Roll & Harary (1972), that "some of the more interesting results came when unannounced changes in the experiment were made spontaneously", and similar results occurred "when there was a last-minute change in the target materials” (p.4). Complexity. This can be defined as the number of distinguishable parts which a stimulus possesses, the degree of difference among these parts, and the difficulty of integrating the parts involved (Stotland & Canon, 1972). Incongruity, evidently related to both complexity and novelty, was found by Berlyne (1958) to attract attention. Under examination, the distinction between complexity and novelty grows blurred, and, as Stotland & Canon point out, both involve stimulus change. Humans seem compelled to attend to stimulus change - a response which might be expected to be evolutionarily adaptive. Infants are attracted to relatively complex visual patterns and the attention of adults is also determined partly by stimulus complexity (Berlyne, 1960; Jeffrey, 1968). . This research on the determinants of selective attention also states that, consistent with the discussion earlier of approach-avoidance behaviour, people seek an optimum level of arousal: either too much or too little arousal is unpleasant for individuals, and factors such as stimulus novelty, complexity, intensity and incongruity are seen as contributing to an organism's arousal. The research outlined above tended to use fairly sterile tachistoscopic stimulus presentation, however more recent studies of human causal judgement in social situations have shown that these early findings can generalise to much more realistic and complex situations. Shelley Taylor and Susan Fiske (1978), reviewing the literature on the influence of salient stimuli on people's causal judgements, found that bright, contrasting, moving and novel stimuli all attract attention in social situations (e.g. Langer et. al, 1976; McArthur & Post, 1977). Movement can be regarded as simply another aspect of stimulus complexity/novelty, and we have already seen that stimulus change (a feature of movement) compels attention. As it is not yet clear whether the process of psi perception is similar to perception with our known senses it may be argued that the above findings from psychology on attention-grabbing stimulus characteristics may not generalise to the "psi stimulus”. However, it would seem to be evolutionarily adaptive for any organism to attend to bright, contrasting, moving and novel stimuli as such features may indicate either food or threat to the organism. Insofar as psi perception may be an evolved attribute or
CPYRGHT
abilityPM30Y&d R»qp&slei*sfe 2dmo®mrfflte§&^yO(miMM3 W)(Mi»WMfil-^lated
stimulus features such as those outlined above.
For parapsychologists, these
findings suggest that:
1.
stimuli which are
likely
to
attract
the
attention
of
our
experimental
participants
and
consequently
make
successful GESP targets may possess the following character sties
In some (as yet
unspecified) degree
or form: movement,
complexity,
novelty,
incongruity,
contrast,
colour,
brightness
and
intensity;
and,
2.
these
attention-determining
target
characteristics must be present at moderate levels
- too mucti and our subjects will
be overwhelmed, too
little and they will be bored.
SOME LIMITATIONS OF THIS PAPER
Although this paper may seem to have rambled over a wide range of subjects,
it has
mainly been
restricted to a consideration
of targets’ physical
features, and has not
examined in any depth the idea that "the target" is in part define d by the experimental
participant’s own personal reactions to and interactions with
it.
Taylor & Fiske (1978)
considered some ways
in which the
salience
of a stimulus may be
influenced by
factors independent of the actual physical stimulus characteristics, and the following
table summarizes their findings.
Table 2 (after Taylor & Fiske, 1978)
Determinants of Selective Attention
Properties of Stimuli
Brightness
Contrast
Movement
Novelty
Properties of Situation
Environmental Cues
Instructional Set
Properties of Perceiver
Temporary Need States
Enduring Individual Differences in Traits, Reinforcement Schedules, Schemas
As Table 2 suggests,
properties of a situation and properties
of the perceiver may
influence what aspects
of an
individual’s
environment,
or a free-response
target,
appear as salient to any individual.
For instance,
if a person
is hungry then food will
become especially salient to that
individual.
An
Individual’s cognitive schemata
will
play some part in determining the direction of his or her attention (Stotland & Canon,
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA2J8DP96-00789RQ03100120001-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
Science Applications International Corporation
An Employee-Owned Company
September 16, 1993
Defense Intelligence Agency
Bolling AFB, DT-5
Washington, D.C. 20340-6150
Attention:
SGI J
Reference:
MDA908-93-C-0004
Data Item No. A001
Project Periodic Status Report
Dear^^^H
SGI J
As you know, we are required by the official contract to deliver formal reports.
So, here is our Periodic
Status Report deliverable dated 10 September 1993. We are required by contract to distribute the deliver-
ables according to the Contract Data Requirements List. Although it specifies the reports should be mailed
to RSQ-4, 1 am sending them to you for the final distribution:
Requiring Office
Final Report Copies
DIA/DT-5A
RSQ-4
Also, please contact whomever it is that tracks these deliverables to let them know you have received both
the draft and the final reports.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 325-8292.
Sincerely,
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
Edwin C. May, Ph.D.
(J
Director, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory
cc Tbm Albert/w/enclosure
Joe Angelo/w/enclosure
Betty Muzio/w/o/enclosure
file
1010 El Camino Real, Suite 330, P.O. Box 1412, Menlo Park, CA 94025
AI(lQtfia&3> AJbiM1ut*que^P<#k>CL CoLoiatig SprifiQPi
Las^gaz L
(415)325-8292
,
BpIaAUo* Seattle
-4
Ot
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
Science Applications International Corporation
An Employee-Owned Company
April 23, 1993
Defense Intelligence Agency
Bolling AFB, DT-5
Washington, D.C. 20340-6150
SGI
Reference:
MDA908- 93 -C-0004
01-0187-03-3880-XXX
SGI J
Status and Management Report
Dear^^J
As you know, we are required by the official contract to deliver formal reports. So, here is our Status and
Management Report deliverable dated
. We are required by contract to distribute the deliverables accord-
ing to the Contract Data Requirements List. Although it specifies the reports should be mailed to RSQ-4,
I am sending them to you for the final distribution:
HHMHMBM
'
Requiring Office
Final Report Copies
ODT-S
DPP-4
Also, please contact whomever it is that tracks these deliverables to let them know you have received both
the draft and the final reports.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 325-8292.
Sincerely,
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
Edwin C. May, Ph.D.
Director, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory
cc Tbm Albert/w/enclosure
Joe Angelo/w/enclosure
Betty Muzio/w/o/enclosure
file
1010 El Camino Real, Suite 330, P.O. Box 1412, Menlo Park, CA 94025
• (415) 325-8292
i Las Vegas, LosAngeles, McLean , Oak RidaCjOrlandq, Palo Alto, Seattle, Tucson
: CTA-RDP96-00789R0031 001 20001 -4
CPYRGHfPProved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
1972).
If a person has a phobia of spiders, then a picture of a spider will be very
salient to that person, while
it may have no Impact on another person who has a
phobia about water.
If we as researchers instruct our expenmerrtal
participants
o
attend to one aspect of their environment, then that feature
will become salient to
them.
So,
we
see
that
there
are
many
influences
on
what
makes
«ge
characteristics grab attention, and
it is unwise to restnct our view to PhVs
'f
characteristics alone.
Nevertheless, these conclusions about the salience of physical
target characteristics remain valid so long as
it
is appreciated that they do no
g
the whole picture.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The present paper considered theoretical ideas of what might be expected to make a
successful free-response GESP target.
Popular
literature
on
the
training
of
psychic
powers
suggested
that
emotional impact and human interest content made good targets. A survey ot
patterns seen
in spontaneous cases seemed
to support these observations:
the bulk
of the
information transmitted concerned negative events related to
humans, though
reporting
bias accounted
for some
of
this
pattern
White
parapsychologists could
not physically harm their subjects,
it was sugg
that the emotional Impact seen
in spontaneous cases could be incoiporatea
into
target
material
for
experimental
research,
as
observations
from
spontaneous cases suggested that such targets might be expected
to have
more success in an experimental setting than trivial or Impersonal targets.
2.
Varied theoretical suggestions by parapsychologists on what might make a
good target suggested that meaningful, emotional and potent targets could be
expected to blsuccessful
in GESP
research.
Studies of charactsnstics
of
good
taraets
in
conventional
psychophysiology
suggested
tha
targets
in
parapsychology
should
stand
out
from
their
background.
This
might
be
achieved by having the target event occur suddenly, be discrete in time and be
"important" to the percipient.
Several
parallels were noted between
subliminal and
psi
perception.
From
perceptual defence and vigilance
effects seen
in sub imina
perception
it was
suggested that, paradoxically, white some parapsychological sub|ects m^ht be
expected to psi-miss with negative emotional targets, others might psi-hrtwith
such
targets.
It was
suggested
that
the
Repress.on-Sensi iza ion S^
diagnostic
of an
individual's tendency
to be defensive
or
vigilant,
might De
useful to parapsychologists wishing to pursue these ideas.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R0031001 20001-4
259
ApracovprtcFQr<£§l^^y8K$flgW!&S fdib%»6}Pii^6^Ta8RD§3taJ§^C0|O©t^n were
described.
Firstly,
from
environmental
psychology
it was
suggested
that
greater attention should be given
to the
subject’s emotional response to the
target
stimuli,
and
that,
from
the
connection
between
arousal
and
approach-avoidance, the use of negative emotive stimuli could on the whole be
more
likely to arouse our experimental
participants and
attract their attention
than
neutral
or bland
stimuli.
Secondly,
research bn
attention
found
that
attention
was
attracted
by
stimuli
which
were
reatively
intense,
bright,
contrasting,
colourful,
novel,
complex
and
incongruous
-
though
only
at
moderate
levels.
Similarly,
social
psychology,
using
more
complex
and
realistic settings than attention research, found that bright, moving, contrasting
and novel stimuli attracted attention.
4. Some of the limitations of this paper were noted: there was a narrow focus
on
physical
target
characteristics without considering
inevitable
influences
of
properties of the perceiver and the environment on what aspects of the target
stimuli
would
appear
salient
to
any
individual.
Nevertheless,
the
findings
presented here were
valid
in
their relevance
to considerations
of the
target
question
given
that
this
paper
does
not
present
a
comprehensive
and
exhaustive overview of the subject of targets in parapsychological research.
We have seen that there
is some consistency
in the suggestions of popular "psychic
training"
literature, spontaneous cases, and
parapsychologists’
theoretical ideas on
the
likely
characteristics
of
successful GESP
targets.
These
findings
appear
to
suggest that our targets should be psychologically salient and physically salient:
1.
targets
In
parapsychological
research
should
be
meaningful,
have
emotional
impact and human
interest
-
this may make
them
salient
in
the
minds
of
our
experimental
participants;
2.
targets should also be physically
salient by standing
out
from
their backgrounds
-
properties
such
as
movement,
novelty,
complexity,
incongruity, brightness and contrast tend to make stimuli physically salient.
CPYRGHT
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-g6P>96-00789R003100120001-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4 CPYRGHT Berlyne, D.E. (1958) The influence of complexity and novelty in visual figures on orienting responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 289-296. Berlyne, D.E. (1960) Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. McGraw-Hill, New York. Berlyne, D.E. (1970) Attention as a problem in behaviour theory. In D.I. Mostofsky (Ed.) Attention: Contemporary Theory and Analysis. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. Boswell, H.A. (1969) Master Guide to Psychism. Lancer, New York. Braud, W.G. (1975) Psi-conducive states. Journal of Communication, 25, 142-152. Braud, W.G. (1982) Nonevident psi. Parapsychology Review, 13, 16-18. Brown, W.P. (1961) Conceptions of perceptual defence. British Journal of Psychology Monograph, supplement no. 35. Burns, J. (1981) Your innate Psychic Powers. Sphere, London. Byrne, D. (1961) The repression-sensitization scale: rationale, reliability, and validity. Journal of Personality, 29, 335-349. Bryne, D. (1963) Relation of the revised Repression-Sensitization Scale to measures of self-description. Psychological Reports, 13, 323-334. Byrne, D. (1964) Repression-Sensitization as a dimension of personality. In B.A. Maher (Ed) Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Volume 1, Academic Press, New York. Corcoran, D.W.J. (1965) Personality and the inverted-U relation. British Journal of Psychology, 56, 267-274. Crandall, J. Conversation held in Psychology Department, University of Edinburgh, spring 1988. Delanoy, D. Conversation held in Psychology Department, University of Edinburgh, spring 1988. Delanoy, D. (1988) Characteristics of successful free-response targets: experimental findings and observations. Paper submitted for presentation at the 1988 Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association
CPYRGHT perkARR WES Phill St. Paul, Minnesota. Dixon, N. (1981) Preconscious Processing. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Edwards, H. (no date) A Guide for the Development of Mediumship. Spiritualist Association of Great Britain, London. Jeffrey, W.E. (1968) The orienting reflex and attention in |cognitive development. Psychological Review, 75, 323-334. Langer, E.J., Fiske, S., Taylor, S.E. & Chanowitz, B. (1976) Stigma, staring, and discomfort: a novel-stimulus hypothesis. Joumal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 451-463. Le Shan, L. (1977) The purpose of psi. Joumal of the Society for Psychical Research, 49, 637-643. McArthur, L.Z. & Post, D.L. (1977) Figural emphasis and person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 520-535. McBain, W.N., Fox, W., Kimura, S., Nakanishi, M., and Tirado, J. (1970) Quasi-sensory communication: An investigation using semantic matching and accentuated affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 281-291. McDonnell, P. (1968) Effects of intensity, contrast and novelty, on selective attention and free-choice reaction time. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Toronto. Cited in Berlyne, D.E. (1970) Attention as a problem In behavior theory. In D.I. Mostofsky (Ed.) Attention: Contemporary Theory and Analysis. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. Mehrabian, A. & Russell, J.A. (1974) An Approach to Environmental Psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Morris, R.L. (1977) The Airport Project: A survey of the techniques for psychic development advocated by popular books. In J.D. Morris, W.G. Roll & R.L. Morris (Eds) Research in Parapsychology 1976, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, N.J. Nash, C.B. (1980) Characteristics of psi communication. Parapsychology Review, 11, 17-22. Powell, |. (1979) How to be More Psychic. Sphere, London. Roll, W.G. & Harary, K. (1976) Target responses during out-of-body experiences. In report by G. Solfvin of 1976 SERPA Conference, Parapsychology Review, 7, 1-7. Roney-Dougal, S.M. (1981) The interface between psi and subliminal perception. Parapsychology Review, 12, 12-18. Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4 262
CPYRGttUnvBrt For Release 2000/08/08
: C1A-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
Romey-Dougal, S.M. (1986)
Subliminal and psi perception:
a review of the literature.
Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 53, 405-434.
Schmeidler, G. (1972)
Respice, Adspice, Prospice.
In W.G.
Roll, R.L. Morris & J.D.
Morris
(Eds)
Proceedings
of
the
Parapsychological
Association
(1971),
8,
Parapsychological Association, Durham, North Carolina.
Schouten,
S.A.
(1979a)
Analysis
of
spontaneous
cases.
Research
Letter,
9,
Parapsychology Laboratory, University of Utrecht, 55-62.
Schouten, S.A. (1979b)
Analysis of spontaneous cases as reported in ’Phantasms of
the Living’.
European Journal of Parapsychology, 2,408-455.
Schouten, S.A.
(1982)
Analysing spontaneous cases:
a
replication based on the
Rhine collection.
European Journal of Parapsychology, 4, 113-158.
Schouten, S.A. (1986) A different approach for studying psi.
In B. Shapin & L Coly
(Eds) Current Trends in Psi Research (1984), Parapsychology Foundation, New York.
Sherman, H. (1960) Know Your Own Mind.
Anthony, New York.
Sondow, N., Braud, L. & Barker, P. (1981)
Target qualities and affect measures In an
exploratory
psi
ganzfeld.
Proceedings,
24th
Annual
Convention
of
the
Parapsychological Association.
Stotland, E. & Canon, L.K. (1972)
Social Psychology: A Cognitive Approach.
W.B.
Saunders, Philadelphia.
Targ, R. (1987)
1986 Esalen Conference.
Parapsychology Review, 18, 6-8.
Tart,
C.T.
(1982)
Physiological
correlates
of
psi
reception:
some
methodological
considerations.
In
Proceedings,
PA
& SPR Combined
Jubilee
and
Centenary
Conference.
Tart,
C.T.
(1987)
cited
in
Targ,
R.
1986
Esalen
Conference.
Parapsychology
Review, 18, 6-8.
Taylor, S.E. & Fiske, S.T. (1978)
Salience, attention, and attribution:
top of the head
phenomena. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 249-288.
Ullman, M. & Krippner, S. (1973) Dream Telepathy.
Penguin, Baltimore.
Williams,
L.B. &
Duke,
M.
(1979)
Qualities
of
free-response
targets and
their
relationship
to
psi
performance.
Proceedings,
22nd Annual
Convention
of
the
Parapsychological Association
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
263
J
l, !«*#«.* I
VJ
*
"h.'*
»
„!
-
'
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
r>o r
roi pm^A/TTMTPATrnM
TXT
HTl-JT? rLANDZE'^l n
V.J V_7 1V1 1V1 LJ I N 1L_j.TY i ivn in
l 111. UAilZji
i^i^r
EXRERIM ENTS WI TH AN AUTOMATKl) TESTING SYSTEM
AND A COMPARISON WI TH A MKTA-AN AI.YS1S
OF KARLIKR STUDIES
By Charles Honorton, Rick E. Berger, Mario P. Varvoglis,
Mari a Quant, Patricia Derr, Ephraim
I. Scheciiter, and
Diane C. Ferrari
ABSTRACT: A computet -cuniiolktl testing system was used
in
II
expoiiineuis oil
ganzfeld psi communication. The automated ganzfeld system controls target selection
and
present at ion,
subjects’
blind-judging, and
data
recording and
storage. Video-
taped
targets included
video segments (dynamic
targets)
as
well
as
single images
(static
targets). Two hundred and
forty-one volunteer
subjects completed 355
psi
ganzfeld
sessions. The
subjects, on
a
blind
basis, correctly
identified randomly
se-
lected and remotely viewed targets to a statistically significant degree, z =
3.89, p =
.00005. Stud)' outcomes were homogeneous across the
series and eight different
experimenters. Performance on dynamic targets was highly
significant,
z =
4.62, p
=
.0000019,
as was the difference between dynamic and
static
targets, p =
.002.
Suggestively stronger performance occurred
with
friends than
with
unacquainted
sender/receiver pairs, p =
.0635. The automated ganzfeld study outcomes are com-
pared with a meta-analysis of 28 earlier ganzfeld studies. The two data sets are con-
sistent on four dimensions: overall success rate, impact of dynamic and static targets,
effect of sender/receiver acquaintance, and prior ganzfeld experience. The combined
z for
all 39 studies
is 7.53, p = 9 x
l \
Research on psi communication in the ganzfeld developed as the
result
of
earlier
research
suggesting
that
psi
functioning
is
fre-
quently associated with
internal audition states brought about
This work was supported by the James
S. McDonnell Foundation of St.
Louis,
Missouri, and by the John E. Feizcr Foundation of Kalamazoo, Michigan.
We wish
to thank Marilyn J.
Schlitz, Peter Rojcewicz, and Rosemarie Pilkington
for
their
help
in
recruiting
participants;
Daryl
J.
Bern of Cornell
University and
Donald McCarthy of St. Johns University for helpful comments on an earlier draft
of this paper; Edwin C. May of SRI International for performing the audio spectrum
analysis; and
Robert
Rosenthal of Harvard
University
for suggestions concerning
data analysis. We also wish to thank several PRL colleagues who contributed in var-
ious ways to the work reported here: Nancy Sondow lor assistance in the preparation
relaxation
exercise
and
instruction
tape
that
was
used
throughout,
and George
Hansen and Linda Moore who served frequently as lab senders. Hansen also pro-
vided technical assistance and conducted a data audit resulting
in the correction of
several minor errors that appeared in a version ol
this report presented at the 32iul
Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association.
Finally, we thank the 241
volunteer participants for providing us with such interesting data.
CPYRGHT
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
CPYRGHT
i
O
gf» 2L
£ 2
x
c
a
o
-
GS>.
O
„ U
'
,a
ffj
bio >
O
c
u ^
rt
4J w
w
oo
—I ^
«
u
o
a -S a
y
S
u
*
c
«
t
X
“ £r
OJ -
/
£
G
C
*+2 JS
u
’«o^i
C
.23
rt
OJ
C/5
rs ^
qj
ZG
*-»
_
(J
U
I ’ll-
co
r*
g
;
'w
CL C
^ <
i
•S « «
,S
U
O
32 ^
rin
*-*
« -Q
Q-;
r-
E
S
C
—
i
COH
|
«-S
•
co
U
4J
3 ^
•c.o
w
M-«
CT3
..
I
E0
1O
3 H0
tc
r—
XIG
c^J
20w
<j
E
U
< -a
XIV T!V
aj
t N
u-
Li_
i
a
w>
I
T3 .5
L'> ^
.
o IS
.
!
I—*
—>
1 a—
,s a w
*3
X
<u
cr u 35
.
,
<u
W
-a
oj
T3
-3
-5
' G
<->
o .s
CL)
c ^
,
*>
g *n
< 2
g
. £ S*
V
««
C/5
D W
sfi-6
q fl2
i-2
*
•s n-a
«
jj
bo
<-j
u
u
e
jj
CT3
boT3
—
L-.
<2 2 jj
C
C -5
v
^
1/5
-
,
o
a
§
s
a S
C
hr c
.b
-5
w
w
U ^
E «2 3
2 7, -
•
w
CL)
o>
£
fc
£?
S
g 3
: »-i
1 § i.
3S
o3
b
|
o-«§
«
™a£f’
a
& 2
’
?
“
c
S
<v
u
o l2
w
u
o
X
<u
O-
c —
bo 3
« «
CL^
-5
”
c«
I
^ i| *>J
b
rt 3
C
E
u ^ ‘H <J
U (T
,
y
« 33
L
Li
^ .SR’S
c ^
• « «5
2 y
g
ijj
^
.S3
^
fi ’3
(jj
>n
rt
c
d 3
^ 8
S
bo bo
*J
b
C3
a;
O
G
c
.S3
b£) CU >n C
^
3.^5
;
c ^ a .a.S
w
u
*S3 ^3
rt
8 .3
3 1 1
u
<C
a 1 1 .§ a
<n
o:
C3
QJ
°*
“>
c
S?
S1E8 2
6>.y
* to
* rP
T3
bJO.
3-g
^•3
Xi
35 g
.
G ‘2
Si .2
a
> 2
I
" <2
os
a
'*. ^
a
"
S
«
G
J3 w
a
oj
>
u
u
«u
•
•u
a;
o,
^ J
r/s
xj
e
«
Cl h ^
2 ^
g
tcS
-
4>
D
3|
b
t3
g 2
C j.2
^
Sf
u
y
.
^5
O
u
.
' O 42 -2
1 7
t- .2 o
is 03 s
1/1
eo"
J
OO
«
<T5
Q-i
ZL
<«
^
a
CO
^23li=ij§S
'S
§ “ iH - 3 -a ~ "5 X
-8.3.biS.Saag2
C
rv
cj
—
<u
bj
>
r
r- —
*-•
'-'CO
-s
re S3
G j
<*.
«
,
a C -,
os
uO^O.-^2
03U
o X
S — “
-c x ci£
3 u .= 7 £ ._ •-
«
SVr2^-S^3reCO.
^ ^
?
-J
e
«
3 r
r<
S-.g^SgEf-js
‘3 J® "O
X
c
ic
S -
v 7 .9- 5 .a S; =
"
-j"
be g h .a - —
2 £
=
S- 3
re
T3
-O
S
C
OJ
g
:
^ a-o-
r
c
o ^ .3
-
o
y
c •-
: s| ,^*=
• —
V
3^0
w
>
LS3
o
C
T3
U
O
5J
—|
u
£ C S E
|
-r=|
°-.s
£PS-S s
g-5 ^ 1 2
>
'z
v
s^
w
2 ^c
C
rs
>
« ^
-
>s 6
O
V
0>CJC-!:-rU
u
Ui-TC^ScEi-CC
s US >,2 58^2»
P-3 JjsB.2
-3
a- 8 .la
rjT -3 c^^.s
S
H —
W
to
^
*
rs
,
Q
, q
O
c
-) xs
"z:
,
-C ccsx
to
S
=
X 3 o .y x s .y
c 0. 1:
OL C
rrt
’ 32
!“*
—•
<U
>rt
— ^
« ’£ — -b
—
y
M
>«.=
~
>.
.''J ^c.= a.Og^o.>
t£= g
- E - G
C —
y
3 aj7
^.2 .2 V
CL be § — — -a
£ 8 -=
?.^-3E.=
'^cgj
«
J «
c .= a 5 =
. - E - 3 c -= «
.5
'G *s •—
o
c
E *—
^
oaTC^-.s:
c
^
C.TZn^C-tjDCL^-
x
r* ^3 w
>
u
ri
,
"X
<u
ps
^ W
c
r _
s-
u
"O
u
T
"C
U
1>
^
u
-X _g
oc^
2 «^rt-c
hr
U *5
._"
>
-
o w CL g
:
c
(U
..
03 J3 ^ ^
.
a w
c
o T3
{J
c
.:
^
C
CJ
•
; *33
2-22
o -GW
(JJ
1=1
Cj
to
r,
<L> -o
a
«
X
D
-
S ”2
'—
c
o
D
»— 1<
•2 "S w
C
CO
‘
1) x
p
a
c
cw
-
^
-a e? •s .y
' XX*
w
,
b ^
c
! j? y
.2
jo
V-
«3J -Q
j 2!
Q- 3
!
O- ^
c 2
« X5
•
c
.- « a
S.J &-
g-^
.bp
eo *C
x .y w
•
T3
* 2.C
3 °0
_
2 o)
g
td
- E
.—1
co
y
,1)
u
u
t-*-«
<u
bz
N
Lai
r!
§ < Q
be
>s G cc
u .c cc
C w
<71
>
z,
<U
U
S
DO
C^T C
, x 2
o
^
|22 J J5
I -g
a- y
is
||
| s ^
: S sgf|
• 57.S2,
:
u <0
.
-
c;
-o -
: •£ — O
I ! 3 § ^
I — s
uj
-
.. x
e
• t -2 «o 2
<
J
'J OO
L
,
>
GT)
O
.
-•
«a ^
c
<
t>e id ^ c
> T3
-2
y
t3 ’G CO
o
X .y -2 js cai
b
Q- Z
<3J
<-h
T! « u
C
ifl w
y
y
u
o 8
-
S' u O -3
CL C
Q. « 2
Q..H"-o 2
M J
^
C
r
L
h
u w
u
b
c
S
HH
U
«
*3
O
S.-S « d "5
w
C
J c -
l
«
O
o .5
o
c 7?
<*- w
S
re
-
o .u
1X1
<U ^ o
y.
* -
,ti
oj X
s u bo
cr xc w
ra
,oj 00
- jo 5
c
St: 01
E
H 13
-7
« —
e ,y
“
«
>—
£oxa^
OS
S ^
be ^
_r
X LT ~
• « 00
b
j-
.
' 3 m
§ «
-
F—
C
g
S
O
^ X
C<b
Oh
=« 22 =a
,.
^
r- cb
,
!
1J
5 00
-
w
CT
w
, QJ 00
.52 =
pjo f
a fa a>
J=
§
S L5
?
u —
,
oj
^
^
<*
£ .2 a-U
<u g 73
w
-
l
g
c xi
be C
u
u
c
«
c *2
^
- u
c
'! E-5 « C ! §
3.a 8 I
§ -3
• "132
CO _
cjj
£
°
OJ
s.
-0
S3 .c
° "O ^ w
2 3
>
«
co
hi
c .C
U
c
**• ^
<u b
>
2* u
g
bo 3
jj
Li
,.,
V) .C
h
w
w b
.
p.y
.52
!>
CO
*H
cn 'Z
b
—, b
^
3t
^
to
-X
te zR be
'-WC^CnjiU
be c
£
«
«
a. 2
—
<—
l/l
Q
^
-
w
^ S ^
* —
c '? .a
5 w
- g -5
£-
g « — E
"
sSJXTJSuasjSu
2 2 ^
—
qj
- —
O « T3
Z
N
C. U
u
c
• ^
u
bo^c
<u
*Jo 22
G
OS
o
be —
c
^
s *p -*
5r
u
<U
O
o
cr- X
u
' — '=
<u
-eo
E
4Mi y y»s~eis>iciiiiii:MMii^#iQi#ii|#l-
tb
vj
.52
bi
c
to
G G
C>
eo
>.
o
—j
u
r; o w
““2«oS£
S' -5 a
S. 2
« -
s-gbo .«
g
ss a h x ° >
c
u
Jc W
_
y
x ly
eo
oj 2
jc
cr "b c
m
«/»
r.li
«
T3
- > X
g
• s § §
« s
2 - ea
h
^ c
• t2
s
to
co
E
D X
C j
13 w
r T3 G
M
JG
G
u
be
G
QJ
OJ
U
(o
co LC
<U
u
^
do
««
lJJ
C
N
cn
o
c
« XJ
Sd
to k.!
g
CO
CT>
feb CL
^
fS
qj
b
Si 3
g
oj
.5^5 £.
C
rz
c
QJ
U-
V
.*
qj
Q-S^
«
>
>
d
-
<u
n
,
x:
c
b -
21 jh
CPYRGHT
w*wi • T • T • r i •
i • V
c
^ s
—
C
-
JJ
re „
E
bo e
o
_j .2
u g 8
O f
W
3j
E-*
<o
— w
r
qj
u
been
•
u
c
O 2 §
u ”
cr
c
_
u
v 2
«
V
u
<D
S3 .2 J*
Q.
re
S
»
M»
C «
.9* o
<o
£ '3
SJ
IS 3 §t
>
S
« c
*s
^
y
!
bC
TO
.s g c
fc
-
O
-o«
a £
§ =
s
i « %
s 3.2
“* a «
J
£
re
a
«
.h s 2
ea
c
t~
Sv2 Ji
jj.SE
-Up
.
4J 5
e
JJ
Q.S
B
E-2 J
c
5 u*
U
t)
u
5/3
O
S
Sj o
CO -S
C
U
Ji
a.
re .s
g
w =
s
£
« 3 •=
2 .2
c
£ 3-g
4J 2 ^
tc.S
c
o
be
*G
u
. EH
CL ^
u
C" J3
w O
>>
u •» s
«
5 -
-U
(A U*
^
4>
%*
E -S
§
is
-2 I
.£p
55 "2 i§
j •§
o
aJ
«
c
a-
o
to
u _
^
o 2
1/5
C
s
o
S
o
-TO
*“*-> TO
re
JJ
o ^ 5
c &8
^ w J
aj
u
c/5
g
O
o
O u
c
-C
c
u V
V
C >-
1*3
U o ^
g "2
a
b
C
TO
S
4> -C
CL
CO
to
C
TO
jj-
v —
JJ
*? 2 "5
£ 'G
o
u s-o
S 1 "
«
§
w
s tS j;
w
C X)
to
j*
to S3
*t2
"
c
c S
i
to
*
CL >*
4j
U =3
j=
*3 C
rt
*=
u
«
g -r
CL<i;
fl
aJ * ig
“So
w
C
"»
£ u -o
o c
. 2
ft
s -
.
~ are'
s s a
e § v
. g «4J
G
jj
c "2
o
s
§ g a
bo £
C
S
a;
<u
•
a ^ .£
s
w
H _c
a >
U
•*?
X
U
TO
« £
u
c rs
'
«- *“ .5
*
5/5 ^3
3fe.s‘
o-r"
w
_
S U w
'
S
“>‘15
^
b
°
u 3
„
2 «"S
^ -
a
D
*-•
-
8 ^ «
«
a -
«
<*;
t
TiS
©
re 2 J
j= ^ a-
hi s
«
TO _Q
U
*
8 « a-
K .«
u
2^o
bo u
d
c
o
n .S 3
C
C —
,
-
rt
u “
•
to v
v
w u
u
a
o
j: os-
^
U
TO
/.
.
^
o
P .2
a 3 -2 -3
8 8 §
Is
bOdE a
reG w
C
to w
CJ
4J
* 0
'TO
O
w
TO-
^ £
TO
u
TO S3 w
4> S3
CL G
G
>
4) S3
TO
4)
S35 .2
co
co
4JC
4J
bO
E
4)
TO
u
TO
,
y d
V
# J3
><
CL u
‘co
4J
| s-g
s.2 s
§ G
p
re S
«
* V
~
S3
*"O .2
•r^aiar^iriiiiMhiikMiiiiikirii
« -2 2
o
^
- y
i
*
*-<
i>
-<o
,9* 2 3 S
E
o
cr u
,P
in -- o
G 3
CL, S3 d S
C/)
C
U -
W
« a E
^ 13 2 -
8 3 <2
bo
s g-a j
s J
S;
S)
oj
-*5
CL
4; *5
bp c £ S'
,S «<-S.
3 -C
o
--I
&* S
3* 8 1 .3
^|s
c
«J -2 £
G
w w w
ft « C
rt
v
Q* S
b
co
» w
n
s
w
-a
c
u t: "5 2
re .2
U o
E
| s | 2r--o :
c
<L»
d
JZ
CO
d,
co
U ^
<U 12
TO
>.
jj a Jp
p
„
n -5
«J
8 “ .2
S
K- w
l> co
u
.ST
bO
ctj
u
" 3
c
5 J3
o
* -o jr
2 w
O
fl T3
aj Ti
u
TO
4JU
C
.2
C
4J
<0 be
i
duct
S3
0c 2
>s a
rt
Ul
CO
TO
4J
c0
E .2
•:
g c .2 I
rr =
'|.2 o Sp -
K C^I
C/5
£2 w w .3
E
§
» uu ^
=3 "C
w
,2
W >
u
>
U
O
CL
.
LC
CO
JJ
CO
4>
O
TO
2 —
3 2
CO
O
1)
TO
^
.2 jo
u
4J
re
’
JS
4J -O
. w a
t*
5 K _ cl
l>
bo
<j
•
C
l>
i
050
*
co
C £ W
° 5 3
S.-S
^
1:5
;
u *5
U
TO
S
O
CL -5
J
1>
4)
; - -
! a “ |
!•§•§"
:
TO
fe
T5
^
,
TO ^
^
; -
co
ex
: —
v
cl
: H 5 «
>
SP 8
©
r y
8 "f
! 3 a
4j
1 c
re
O
>
« 3 -c
* « g -
N G
C £
J
TO
c [w
J
u
^
[h - 8
(•wore
*
U
JC
u
Q.
I-P
«
e
a-5 -
O
^co
bp
OJ 2
.s
w
.
>
bJO
co
rT
,-o - .S
3 w
*—v O.
bo
v c <
fa 2
£P©3
*u
u
c
3 "o
TO
-O
u
bO
d
v
S3
u
C
CL
tX2
u -a
3 —
^ 2-0
4>
. 4J
c
Sn«
jc
5 —
-*
2L
to
C
Ec
= £.2
c
o
. 2 S3 -C
u s
u
TO w
a 2 S
5 .2
id
a
« — 2
b
s "
©>^2
' "J s 5 a—
^
•~_«^-re
c -5-s‘
J
«
^f^ov#IF6r«il^^(Mft«0i.fc(a4i[^9®0®f^l©ttei|?PS1 !j4
g &8
c5
,2 t>S
S;=s
-?=-=
= £-«•=
«
S§x,^u?o|5
^ -L
gpTS
S Q
•-
re iS
bp
co
co
C
* —
’So
.
S
C JC
>s
TO
7_2
u r cc
g ^
ifl
jj 00 ^
E d
to
o
^
G
_
II
.O
sf4
rs.
to
—1 H
W
co
S3
T3
5 w
w
TO
-3
of)
«
E
^
c
o
c
—1
<u
TO
fi B i
TO
u
Jw
to -C
G
S w
TO
CL
.§2
§
Ut
G*
TO 2
b°
V-o
<u 1m
<u
_2
'll "O .d tP
oj
•
gp
Si b o -5 u
« ,8
2 g
. 00 u. S
•S
«> - « a f
SJ
O
re
D
C p
9* £
g. 5
P
o
fiS '3
:h
H 3 gi^o
u
SI
« a
p
i
0 »«
o — - « ^
t*s ^
jL^Jioo
.
v
§ r*
p -s »
s
a "2
°_ o -£ c
s
-3
c
>—v
<U
to co
S3 -r
l.
a
o"^ ® -i
SI
i
C
=
c
fe g>2
.JJ -lot:
Q.-S
re
C^—
CL O
X
c u
.2 Jo
11 S
fr u
J3 .2
P
u
u h «
3^8 J hf
s
"*
bO s—" J3
ai
TO
TO
S
U —
?
O
-4
bO '—^ J3
4j
TO
E d
2^co2
£
' * S
.S3 -D
<-*
u -O 3
'o
*3
o 3
.5
—
TO
C
E
-k ^
OJ
.-*UmCL2r>t/i>
bO
G
S
.> C
TO
c
- ^2
C
G
+->
OJ -C
• —
C
G *G
co
>
C —
c^lJ ^‘o’o
•"
.
ajSrJbo^ w
tr
^ L G •«
bo
C
^
.JJ
s
- 13
3 "5 S'E
:n
-o
”
Si J-o,
J.
J
I
CO
»*•
I
L
iJ
>
V L
Q
K£
5*
J—
»—
U.
?
a TO .SF-p
a, £ Je -
U
p STa
. 7
•»
re
a^ "
fe g ^ § .S
g >0
fa.
>."=
h^
<
4J TI
Jr"
lO —•
'TO* •“
bO^Q
4)
O
^
*5 —
C
—
re ws...
re
-re m
3 —
p
m
2 h *E
i? "O
aC
Fwp^Jjy.fawS
"TO
c w
C
TO
to ^
iSsn^uilcU-
s^[£
c
”
re
'“
C
, i re o ,0
JJ
C —
=
1^ P 3
^
JJ
s i{.sSS«S B
'S
^ « R
C - S S. 2
c
.5 a C £
..2
cr c
c
3 c
I
. 2 C -a S..2
>*.h « 2
cos2SSs32 -
cP-"
, ^
,ocS
cr
C C ^ — «ySDc
re t
C -^cS^Ue
s-| 3 >iS6-8^ J
s
•** TO
P .=P C*
oj
4J
!2
b5s?l
fc
?tj a a s
?;
^
TO
V
L BJ3
4)
O
**
>
W
L-
OJ
,
4»
>
1— 3
>
V
<+*
b*’
•—
T>
-C
ire<
t>
G-*
*3
r
^3
-i
u
>
4;
>s O 3
to
TO
u.
^
TO ——•
-p* w
TO
TO W m ^
4)
4> 3
to
to
w
C
w
«
4i
j
.
C
re
II
'J G
^ O
§ *
*-5 «
3 -2 M -S
CL-
C
CL,^
. 2 ,®
P ^ P
B re
*J re8- W
^AA^KnA/iO A AO jlTO/vnO}jl
JH
u
|i?
s i ’5
C L
B - S
rs
J2
ra
C
= c
*— « u
ft U)U
s
o
*3 O u
>
_
ji c £
oii
TO? U= _
w
u
y
a bci
2 S3 9
d
4) CM
G S3
4J
u
CL C
O § -C
.‘u
u
O
c/5
O. TO^
to *3 LG
G
S3 S 2
c
= c
.3
O"
Oft
CPYRGHT
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003100120001-4
IIS*
ml
II
v a 2
c
>s,w
u
n '£
e
?
s
h
k &
s o £
. K
*5
°
CT3
w
u *2
-
1 §§
“geo
O
D N
*p
y
oj
OJ
^
CO
^ 3
V>
bc -2
£
.S
c -2
bp
.
T3
^ g
a;
.=U u
</>
S.2-S §t
U (V
>•
I
o
«
M
?
.S* O
^
C
w ^ C
W
«
V
u
-rj
E
u £
Ui 5
O .2 02
13 2
s =3 h
u -A
q
w
^ CC
£ :c
u
u
•
x
4J
u
cj
> j> p
<
^ oal
u
~ “2 TJ
u
v
c
w
m
js
«
a. >
“ — 2 ° 6
,E
5 ..to
.fa .2
is
u ^
<3
>
fl J2 <
g
* 3
c
bc^ £ 2
«
,
.5
oi 5
w "o
S
« « u
'
]jj g
c £
'
K g Si t'
1 S’" 0-2
mQ
r- TJ
g “-S 8 I-
o w 3 S
g
Cm
T5
w
E £ S
<J
S3
s
£• = %
S'
!3 a'= oi
"E-S-S-
/V
n O
P P
l>
. o
c
ra
w
0 TJ
S
fi ^ x T3
e S
c
f;.
S
y tS .S
,,
v
*0
boX* c ^ ^
V ^ o .5 JD .«
Y\
u "O
c
O
v
M Z i
-a S §
S-
«? •“ -C OS i g 8
u <2 J*
u
«
n „ ‘r s 2
w
5 ^
S
a ^
b w
5*0 bp 5
M —
1 u t ^
2 ^
c
o
o
«
2 ^
S
f2
° jz
>.
c- bo ^
® S * -It
*> -
Ctf
< I
« JS
™2 u
U * 3 g 1 & £
— .S t “» 2 S
w
3*«§.a
a a-g
t/5 <o
S
rr;
aj
qj
*2
os® 8 >-^£
o
o-E^ 2 hS
w
«
«> w
= j£ £
g i
8. § ^ 2 | s
S|Sfl.SI^«S 8
5 lag 3
§ i-o "
i2« —
., T3 S
“
C «
-33
!i
u C — le 3.2.W
«ogSS J
u E a u js
OS 'g 2
E s
!
§
“ri *§
o
s s
«
s-
! .*?“= a
Hr, U
«
‘ c
(i
,S
« u
i,s.i| S-.s-l
•—<
> w
C
trt ^
I
X
I
*
I
s §3
o - w 3 .2
U
a - b 3 -
«'i^3
w .2o*
y
-5
&o y
t “ - c
o
O
U -r
yo
V
U
bO-3
«
C
.
«
^ -C
(o ’E *U
Jj
CL >- ^
<u
bJO O *5
>s
<L>
o
u
O
w JZ W
C
u
L>
be
v> w
(rt Ji
-
£
C
•?: w T3 —
*r
O
V
%
C
S ^ 3
c
So s
2 a =
-2
W
,
w
w
|
o
«3
y
a
g
* *
C
Sc g
o a
=
> 2 1 S
o
c -p
v
v
§
t
iz a
a ja
cl § C
5 “ V 8
bo v
tUpi-SC-
«3 c
* o S o v
Cl «
S ^ V "
-JO
2 §13-3-51 =
&••§
u wo
i
s
2 2 .s
a. ? - u
E
c —
<l>
o
c
b
v j b
S
B 3
s •«
&• e
g a -S
§
=
i£-S.b^^l.s
"
v2
_c
O
^
^
« » y
A S t £
.fccaaC-aCma
1 1 1 1 §-| i ! 2
1 1 M&vvtt*
-Qr^^c^c
C
S
re .5
Q-<u
C T3 C
m
CL
T3 T3
X
y
c
c
2 .£
*
CL a
s-ss I
aj
C J3
W
"S
<u
-
§ g
. u
i
u
c
'53
*g
T
§ j:
§
S3 P “
cl
J- .E
.
p, 00
. o .5 "O
-
y
u
ij
c
3 £ •= “3
™
t/i
E
E .£
'
S
o
*
c g w E.
C J5
O
u
*"* y
vj
a;
•
x! c§ -§ w
:
u
.
^
«
4,
•
o
S as
o
O ^
CT u
Q-
-
s-s §-r
§ s
« U
°
x
« —»
«—<
Sw
v J3
jr —
:
C/5 «
c
-
g- o
TJ —T'
*
r- —
w
^
CTj Cm
r;
u
*T
TJ 13
C
SJ
Jr
si
.,0
' <3s
m c a
O
'
oo
• 2J15
u
u
g
5 cj
is
-
o <
u
u
t> —:
v
s
u
b: .E
r
<* L
a- u -C _
hn ° u
.E u -S^
-o’.E ^ TJ
tn
C ^
"P 3
rt
"O
O -
*=
c
u
,
-3 ^
cl
c
H
a .2 «
oj
-C
u _C
|C
^ w ’C
n3
o
«
*i
i«
X
m
tip ,y
qj
~~
• *“
.w
^-5 T
w TJ
t-p t ^
ni
dj
e
c- ^
C
e
T ^
C
C
y
as
C
a w
(«
c „
-C
m
C
C
c
y 'C
u -t
^
£ -a
y
c
^
E tj ^ |
^
u
§
E
-n
>o
u
1 .S I S
;
<U
CL
c/j
X
>
-o
u
e
o
OJ TJ
S
u
«
1/ -o
o
K
3 I
c
w
^
S:
<L>
«
o
•» J2
Ef VSX
O
x *5 -3
o g « js
«
o s
u-
,
bo-S
§,
o .§ I -g 73
tc *
g
c “3
c
. § .2 .a
S
«
s« .2
i
h
o
j: a
w
sL o
C X
<n
H
J-
^
cSc^%bo^
u S-i^i3
2^
‘^CMr3uSw w
E
O
S 3 .2 ^ -1
fctfeo^^igsATi
-s
> i
js
a-5 ^ g § «
s
Ji «
OJ
C
§^|gs|ao.g-.2
W 3
be ^
c
,
w
bd x
T.S-.^gbfeS.ES
-
g °-p — >
"53
o
g -O
E
*-*
c
CL r_,
U .2
_C h
L)
L
to
u —
,
,/’.3 ^C„uJi
U S-5
:i
U
>
—
O j- O «
S* S-E^^s.-En
= s||
#1
- S TjiiS“§
f-s 8 % % *
g a -8 b a
1 -
v
e ^ s
. a b g
»
w — jC
fo 2 ^
S a:
OjWhTSuawgKbo
•ca..yE“&
:i «=-t5-S
g>< I ? o - 1 B 1
-S 3
1sl|||l°|fs
O .2
C
C > g^.2
£
Q.-p
J=
l.
o
_
•- -a
v _
.
.h
i-
>
w
c £
cfl
> w •-
*** -a
«J
3 "S 00
c
Q
^
CTJ Cm
Releasel2000/i8?bi
o'
.12
^
V
rs '>
o
i* £
C ’S
x
y
c ^
su
w
c
1 a
«
S a£
bo
L4
*>
<j T
u
JO
Ou
«
<u
3 u
o
J
u ©
^
u
^
Q- Q. y
?a
c
c f O
u
| * “ i
^
u
c
V
Jc
rt ^^E.-
5/5
*T3 ’w
X
•SH cl
%
?>j « go
1 1
fe
-
^
J" *—
«
> *3
“O
jb a S
. •=
o-tj * «
03 ns-^u^C
u,
O
r\ U
.
m
V
2?
«*
3 o
U
u
9fep8l^(M§Qfl@
O
U so
CO JO
CO
-C
UD
V)
s < f*
O
uu MM
1)
.
U
Cl
c
OS
<u
VJ
to
CL w
s3?
to
3M
J2
ow
03u
.2
*-5
— ‘5
C
<v
\n
cs -oV
E w
•C ^ "SM
TJ
<A
3 w *G
c
C
co JC
<u
Dtfo
TJ
<U
.2
^
^ TJ
E
*U
t5 W>
J3
C
OS
CL