o OBJNCTIVE A SSESSUENT OF SRI VISIT Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : GlA+RDP96:-00787RQ00700090008-0 ~ INTRODUCTION The trip to SRI was in support of CB's contract on enhancement of human perception. The purpose was to take an independent look at the SRI protocols, subjects, results and their analysis. In particular, | was to witness further demonstrations on the existence of an éxtra sensory infor- mation channel, to criticize the experimental protocols and analysis pro- cedures, and to evaluate potential operational utility of the phenomena. My applicable history includes a ten-year mild interest in paranormal phenomena, peaking slightly at times of various personal experiences. My education includes a Ph.D. in electrical engineering, with research in appli- cations of computer science to bioengineering and experimental psychology. Before this trip, | had read the SRI progress reports and had briefly met with Hal Puthoff. Although the existence of telepathic communication seemed possible to me, the possibility of remote viewing (RV) of a location without a human "sender" seemed absurd, and foreign to my concept of human information processing. Based on reading the earlier results with Price and Swann, | became willing to admit the possibility that some people might have such talents, and sol participated as a control on the Atlas experiment - with no particular success. Later, in reviewing the results of an SRI subject (Hella Hammid) performing RV on a piece of scientific apparatus, | attempted to identify the apparatus from her descriptions, which had been judged marginally useful. My attempt was successful, and raised the question of how best to assess information content in RV experiments. An attempt was to be made to repeat this procedure, and to become more familiar with Hammid's vocabulary and manners of speech as well as with her general ability to observe and describe events. ‘ This report is in three parts; Assessment of experimental results using the subject Hella Hammid, Criticism of experimental protocols and analysis procedures, Recommendations for future efforts. ” Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 ~”
‘Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 Trip Report - SRI 6-8 November 1974 tren Attached are two reports concerning my visit to SRI in conjunction with the current CB contract on perceptual augmentation. The separate reports represent an Objective Assessment and a Subjective Critique of the SRI protocols and results, and reflect my dual role as observer and participant. They were written for different audiences, and so overlap in part. SG1l ~ Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 1, Experiments With Hella Hammid aoe ee ee mena remmid My assessment of Hella, based on my reading of her earlier results and an observation of those described here, is summarized by the following points: Hella is very alert and outgoing; although not insightful. An See She is very concerned with her performance, although she Be does not argue with the analysis of it. Her aim seems to be pleasing the experimenters rather than proving anything to herself. Although the quality of her results varies greatly, she has had some outstanding successes, including one which | witnessed, Certain features of all her results may be generalized: She does very badly on absolute size estimates. She does very well on indicating lighting conditions, including the presence of steady or pulsing lights. She does not often describe colors, but is very accurate when she does. She apparently cannot.assess her own performance, although she is more pessimistic when she knows the target is technical. She is very willing to try new experiments or to follow new suggestions, including working along with someone else, In fact, there are indications that she gets at least a psychological boost from such interaction. There can be no question that Hella can repeatably, although not reliably, produce information not available through normal means. As yet she has not shown an ability to assess or increase that reliability. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
“¢ Approved For Release 2000/08/0 0 74 CGIAR /96- 90787RO00700090008- -0 Scientific Apparatus Experiment i was to witness Hella's attempts to perform a remote viewing experiment on some piece of technical equipment. The stanclard procedures were followed except that | selected the target, which was not drawn from the safe but selected arbitrarily by me at the last possible moment before she was to begin. Hal Puthoff accompanied me, and Russell Targ remained with Hella as inquisitor. The target selected was an electric typewriter. | sat at it for 10 minutes typing the words "Hella", "Mustang", "Francine"; after which Hal sat and typed "typing". We then returned and listened to Hella's tape and saw her drawing. , The results were disappointing. Although elements of the drawing and certain of her verbal descriptions were excellent, an overall analysis must rate her results as a miss. Critique Hella is not confident of her ability to perform on the apparatus tests; and that attitude may be detrimental to her performance. My presence may have had some effect on her. Also, the use of two experimenters at the sending end had not previously been tried with her. The most significant results of the experiment were the fact that Russell gave a nearly perfect account of the target when I asked, although he had been engaged in actively questioning Hella duri ing the entire experiment. This result brings into question the whole process of interrogation, with its potential for leading the subject. In addition, the fact that Russell perceived only Hal and not me doing the typing indicates the existence of a strong preferential bond between Puthoff and Targ which must not be allowed to influence any further results. Later experiments, described elsewhere, eliminated the use of the inquisitor, and sent both Puthoff and Targ to the site. Results were quite good, and indicated that the established link between those two is not responsible for the phenomena involved in such experiments, although it may alter the specific results. Hella's performance at the church is another justification for that conclusion, Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
Ap roved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 | Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
SG1l ‘Approved For Release 2000/08/02 t: GLAFRDR9620074877R000700090008-0 Background Due to the sensitive nature of my attendance at this event, it is necessary to justify that attendance and to assure anyone concerned that such attendance was not officially documented nor was | specifically identified to the participants. A major goal of my trip was the witnessing of Hella Hammid's performance, and an assessment of that performance. Another goal was duplication of my analysis efforts with her past remote viewings of technical targets. It was important for me to establish a rapport with her, and | began that when she arrived for the day at SRI. ! had been introduced to her merely as an interested party who happened to be at SRI and wanted to meet her. We discussed the fact that I had listened to her tape of the drill press, and from those results we (meaning Hal, Russ, and 1) were interested in whether or not such combined effort could work in general. She enjoys the experiments and enjoyed talking with me about them. She is particularly impressed that they are not tiring to her, but quite the opposite. | was attempting to establish a rapport with her, since she had done badly when observed by Ss previous days. She was disappointed in that performance, and talked (without provocation) about the "two men from DOD" who had made her "tense", During the middle of those discussions, | accompanied Puthoff, Targ, Hammid, and Police lieutenant Walt Konar to Stanford chapel because it would have appeared unusual for me to have left the group at this point, and because it presented a unique opportunity to observe Hella in a totally unfamiliar task and setting. Experiment Lt. Korrar was in charge of investigating the murder of a young girl in the Stanford chapel some weeks before. When he had exhausted all available leads, he contacted SRI and asked for Puthoff and Targ's assistance, having read the recent publicity associated with their work. They had called Hella, who indicated she was willing to give it a try, although she was skeptical of her ability to help. I was introduced by name (not spelled out) to the lieutenant as an interested observer, and was invited along. Tape recordings were made of the entire activity, including during the car rides and during later discussion. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 Hella performed extremely well, giving much information that was later corroborated, as well as specific information beyond that known to the police. She had never tried such a task before. Apparently the presence of the policeman and myself, as non-hostile witnesses, was not noticeably dis- tracting to her. In particular, she gave details of the crime location, described the victim and her assailent, indicated the exact location of the fatal wound, alluded to the ritualistic tone of the crime, and traced the victim's movements before the crime as well as the relocation of the body afterwards. Of the wealth of detail given, the only information known to be incorrect was Hella's state- ment that the victim was wearing earrings. The overall excellence of Hella's performance has been attested to by a letter sent from Lt. Konar to SRI, and by the fact that they are following up leads she provided. Critique This is Hella's only performance to date in which neither Puthoff nor Targ were actively involved. For this reason alone, it is important to note the excellence of her results as occurring independent of any SRI involvement. The results show the durability of the phenomena involved. No special environment or preconditioning was used. There were many people (tourists) jee" around, and every word Hella said was recorded. ( - Lp uw This was definitely Hella's best performance of those | am acquainted with. ope { __ She was very earnest in her desire to help, and she stated that her impressions a et isthe G were stronger than when she is playing games with experiments. a > jun - The conditions of this experiment were much closer to operational utility (Ie a than those of the routine experiments. As such, the results are more pertinent. eke _ The independent assessment by Lt. Konar should therefore be considered in Su any assessment of operational feasibility for such activities. . None of the data that Hella generated, that has been verified, was unknown to Lt. Konar-at the time of this experiment. Therefore, it is possible that Hella received all of her information from the Lt., by some unknown means. Only when the additional facts have been verified,can the conclusion be reached that some technique akin to remote viewing was involved. oe Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
SG1I Before my trip to SRI, | had been reviewing Hella's parfermance on remote viewing of technical eauioment. After hearing her clescription and seeing her drawings from the experiment with a CRT graphics terminal as target, | mentioned that I could possibly have guessed the actual equipment from her cescriptions. Fs suggasted I try to clo that with another tape she had made, which was thought to be less geod than the CRT results. After two runs through the tape, my guess of a vertical boreing machine was clase to the actual target of a drill press, That result was considered significant, since it indicated that more information might be present in the data than had been supposed. Two factors seemed important to me: One, | was very familiar with both CRT's and vertical milling machines, and was currently working with bath. Two, | had been briefed on Hella's background and personality. In particular, | knew that she was basically untechnically oriented, that she was capable of detailed description of anything she had seen, that she was not prone to fabricate details, and that she was employed in photography. After having spent several hours with her at SRI, | expected that my familiarity with her RV performances had very much increased. My attempt to process another of her tapes, however, was nota success. In this case, the target was the ESP teaching machine, with which she was quite familiar. | had spent my first hour on it just before | left with her tape for the evening. My guess of a view graph projector was based on arbitrary selections from seemingly ambiguous and contradictory sets of statements. For instance, | was not certain if light were shining into or out of the box. Some of her terminology, such as "burning in" had specific meaning for me based on my background. I had to decide, in thase cases, whether another meaning fit her background, or whether she had picked up the terminolegy along with the target. Although it is probably helpful to have a calibration on the original subject {such as realizing that Hella's sizes are generally overestimated, and her drawings are often better than her descriptions), it does seam that familiarity of the interpreter with the possible target set is the crucial aspect of such an interpretation attempt. This may be considered analogous to giving raw intelligence cata to an analyst who is well grounded in the pertinent fieids, Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
5 ‘Approv d For Release 2000/08/07. :, CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 . Both from the stancpornt of rellapifity assessment and information production, the analyst must know his field es well as lis source, | Unfortunately, there was no chance to work along with Hella as she performed a technical RV experiment, due to time constriants. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 |
Tl CLASRDP96-00787R000700090008-0 Necessary experimental constraints depend to a great extent on what is being constrained from occurring. If the wish is to prevent manufacture of apparently paranormal results through covert use of normal techniques, then the experimental constraints must be sufficiently tight that any such attempt will be detected. Under those conditions, the following are valid criticisms: Documentation of the outbound experimenter's movements, destination, and perceptions should be generated, by tape recording and photographs, during the experiment. ‘This avoids the possibility of manufacturing a site to suit the subject's description, or of describing movements and perceptions to match the subject's descriptions, after his data has been heard. To avoid collusion between experimenters, no interrogator should be used, and no one should be present with the subject. To avoid use of subliminal cueing to the subject, he should be free to roam during the experiment, and should be encouraged to randomly select his own locations. To avoid any use of suggestion, the subject should not first appear at SRI; but should go directly to his experiment location, and begin the experiment at a time selected well in advance and sent to him in writing or via a third party. Having concluded that the phenomena do exist, which | believe has been é justifiably concluded, the constraints should now be shifted so as to-enhance vs the reliability of the data and make more meaningful its analysis. Under ’ those conditions, the following criticisms are presented: a There exists an unconscious preferential link between Puthoff and Targ which must be eliminated from any experiments. There are two reasons why existence of this link should not be considered grounds for dismissing further work with these two. First, there are indications that any pair of people involved in such experiments establish an increasingly strong link of this type, so the problem will reoccur. Secondly, Puthoff and Targ fe probably represent the strongest link of this sort we have yet found; so that, in some sense, they may be of unique value in evaluating the individual-dependent aspects of the phenomena. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
A DP96-00787R000700090008-0 Approved For Release 2000/0 07,  GIARDF shown to be useful in some cases. Analysis of the debricfing.data would be much simpler if the debriefer were not witting as to the target. There is no strong evidence that an interrogator is needed. Again, the analysis could be much simpler if no one is leading the subject in either.correct or incorrect directions. By moving an unwitting interrogator to the debriefing process, any additional information can be eaked out, without confusing the primary analysis. "Symbolism" is an incorrect word to use in analyzing the data; since it connotes repressions or associations involving the ~ subject's psychological make-up; or the subject's unconscious desire to sublimate impressions. None of the experiments | have studied here involved either the need to probe the subject's psyche, or the need to translate from one level of abstration to a lower level. Rather, the processes that occur are simple extrapolations and analogies. The need is for an understanding of the subject's vocabulary background and speech patterns, rather than an assessment of his values and attitudes. Obviously, for a more emotional set of targets, the psychological assessment may be necessary. Analysis of the drawings should be done both alone and in conjunction with the verbal report. Any inconsistencies should be noted, and followed up during debriefing. The subject's satisfaction with both his drawing and his description should be recorded before and after he receives feedback. This would be needed to compute trends in the subject's-performance, as well as leading to calibration of future results. A simple analysis scheme would involve having the subject select a site or object from a set of 10 or 50 to match his impressions; after he has been debriefed. Most real-life uses for these phenomena would probably involve such limited possibilities. The effects of the size of the set would also be of interest. The targets chosen are of such a complexity that analysis is difficult. The possible range for ambiguous results is very large. Use of simpler targets for assessing a subject's capa- bilities, or calibrating his performance would provide far more consistent assessments. + ‘. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090008-0 x Repetition of targets should be used for assessment of the subject's learning, as well as for an indication of the role that familiarity plays in performance. More real-world problems should be attempted, both to provide independent assessments and to introduce the emotional involvement which seems to enhance performance.