Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200640001-7 (5 9¢2 a Fle Sari Jo 2b Fm 0e2 / Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200640001-7
. Enhancing Human Performance pared for the Army Research Institute by John Palmer and from a review of the same studies that it commis- sioned Alcock to make. The committee also reviewed the other main body of experimental research, namely, on Ganzfeld experiments, in which a homogeneous visual field is used to alter states of mind in the interest of receiving psi signals. A paper on intuitive judgment and the evaluation of evidence was prepared for the commit- tee by Griffin (see footnote 2). With particular attention to the three sets of experi- mental studies, but including its other reviews and expe- riences, the committee found no scientific warrant for the existence of parapsychological phenomena. (‘‘No scien- tific justification’? was the phrase agreed on with NRC editors for the committee’s report, but ‘‘warrant’’ cap- tures better the intended sense.) Though the committee therefore saw no reason for direct army involvement, it felt that monitoring by the army of the main, current, experimental work would be prudent and suitable. If that monitoring led to the proposal of specific studies, the recommendations were that army and outside scientists arrive at an agreed-upon research protocol, that the re- search be conducted by proponents and skeptics, and that attention be given to the manipulability and practical application of any effects found to exist. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The committee observed a pervasive army tendency to accept and implement enhancement techniques on the basis of personal or clinical experience and marketplace popularity instead of on the basis of research evidence that could establish the existence and usefulness of an enhancement effect. In expressing its concern about this practice, the committee issued a list of questions about presumed enhancement techniques that had been pre- pared by scientists at the Walter Reed Army Institute for Research: What changes will the technique produce? What evidence supports the claims for the technique? What theories stand behind it? Who will be able to use it? What are its implications for army operations? How does it fit with army philosophy? What are the cost-benefit factors? (Hegge, Tyner, & Genser, 1983). Because strong claims of support from basic research have been made for some of the techniques the commit- tee examined, the committee reviewed in its report what it takes to justify a scientific claim. Specifically, it high- lighted the need to conduct basic research so that infer- ences could be drawn in accordance with scientific stan- dards—inferences about novel concepts, causation, alternative explanations of causal relations, and the gen- eralizability of causal relations. Standards for evaluating field tests of enhancement programs were also reviewed, including such factors as immediate effects, side effects, 92 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE assigning merit and meeting needs, likelihood of tansy and contrast with alternatives. The committee acknowledged the differences bety, rational decision making in science and in practica] ¢ ‘, texts, for example, differences in the benefits of COTE, decisions and the costs of incorrect decisions and in w is viewed as a timely decision. It recommended tha th army acknowledge such differences explicitly in Conn, tion with decisions about particular techniques, It forth an analysis of the unreliability of testimonies. evidence for enhancement effects. And it stipulated Wh it thought would be useful mechanisms for advice to dit ferent parts of the army as well as bidding Procedures, felt would facilitate informed choices of programs ang, vendors. The committee recommended that the army CONtin to examine vigorously enhancement techniques that pear promising. It added the advice that the examinatig, should be systematic and should include technique drawn from mainstream research as well as packages Pro. moted by vendors. A main concern of the committee Wag to link more closely the army’s great interest in enhang, ing human performance and its substantial resources fy conducting tests to evaluate techniques. The COMMitter remarked on the potential for transfer to the civilian sg, tor. ) COMMITTEE PUBLICATIONS The committee's final report was published as a boo, by the National Academy Press in early 1988, Entitled, Enhancing human_performance: Issues, | theories, ang ries, and techniques, edited by Druckman and Swets. (A sec second printing w: was made a year later.) With preliminary copies available, a briefing was given army officials and a preg; conference was held in December 1987, with Swets, Bjork, Hyman, Singer, and Druckman representing the’ committee. The press conference was attended by som fifty reporters who heard a 15-minute prepared statement and then raised questions for an hour or so. Primary a. ticles appeared in the New York Times (Leary, 1987, Washington Post (Squires, 1987a, 1987b), Washington Times (Price, 1987), and Los Angeles Times (Gillette. 1987), and articles based on them appeared in many other’ Yocal and regional newspapers. Other news articles wert } published in Science (Holden, 1987), Science New. (Greenberg, 1988), Science and Government Report (Greenberg, 1987), APA Monitor (Hostetler, 1988), Psy! chology Today (Roberts, 1988), The Chronicle of Highe Education (Wheeler, 1987), Beijing’s Science and Teck nology Daily for June 29, 1988, and the NRC’s News? Report (Jarmal, 1988). Swets and Druckman co-authore,, an op-ed article that was printed in 25 daily newspapers. ; The press conference was videotaped by NBC, CNN, , and the United States Information Agency. CNN I - CIA-RDP96-00789R002200640004 YA RCH IM, Jette! form: the I expr techr Web niqui look. TI nent: addr: sear Sche bias¢ expe ators follo conc pact Four of p: minc to s enhze Gore weei tee’s ried resp VOL