Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
At this time, the hardware and communications protocols have been debugged but no
experimental trials have been conducted.
This delay was caused by unforeseen difficulties at
both Syracuse and SRI.
Work
is currently underway to remedy this situation and we expect
results in all areas during FY 1987. We suggest a detailed reading of the Syracuse report (see
Appendix) for a more complete understanding of the procedural complexity of the
experiment.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
Appendix
INVESTIGATION OF PSYCHOENERGETIC DISTANCE EFFECTS
OBTAINED FROM NOISE SOURCES
WITH DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS
Edward F. Storm, Principal Investigator
Communication Studies Laboratory
School of Computer and Information Science
Syracuse University
Syracuse, New York
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
I INTRODUCTION
This document constitutes the final report for services performed in connection with a
services contract between SRI International and Syracuse University (Services Contract
Number 011489).
This work has been performed within the Communication Studies
Laboratory in the School of Computer and Information Science. Syracuse University. We
refer to this Laboratory as “CSL."*
I
«t»ff of CSL is committed to supply any additional information bearing on the execution of this con
*at Sfmiy »
^Sutton, CSL wffl submit a supplement to this document reporting on the
experimental results obtained when the experiment itself has been completed.
J
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
II EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND DESIGN GOALS*
There were four primary goals set for the design of the SRI-Syracuse Remote Action
Project.
First,
it was desired that we develop a protocol that would allow comparison of
remote action (RA)
effectiveness for RNGs having different physical characteristics and
located at varying distances from the designated RA agents.
Second, the protocol, although
rigorous, should allow RA agents considerable
flexibility, and should be oriented, in general,
toward producing strong positive RA effects.
Third, the protocol should allow for on-line
multiple laboratory research, such that each laboratory could have confidence in the validity
of the obtained results.
Fourth, the protocol should be such as to eliminate reasonable
counterhypotheses. We will now consider how these goals are implemented by the design
developed.
GOAL
I:
Comparison Of RNGs Of Differing Characteristics
The present study employs a within-subject two-factor design.
Each subject completes
at least one session composed of eight runs.
Each run
is composed of 1,536 trials, where one
trial equals a single binary digit generated by one of six possible sources of randomness
(RNG). RNG distance from RA agent
is one factor, in that three RNGs are at CSL in
Syracuse and three at SRI in California.
At each
site, one RNG
is pseudorandom, one relies
on a source of electronic noise, and one uses beta-decay as noise source.
Thus,
characteristic of RNG noise
is the second factor in a 2 x 3 two-factor design.
Within each
run,
all six RNGs contribute 256 consecutive trials, making up 6 x 256 or
1, 536
trials.
These trials are fed back to the RA agent through a circle of lights display
(to be described
below) in such a way that the display behaves the same and looks the same for each of the
six RNGs, including any time delays made necessary by hardware or software considerations.
Thus, the RA agent
is operating an equal amount of the time on all sue, yet has no ordinary
knowledge of which
is driving the display at any given time and,
if desired, need not be
informed that more than one kind of RNG
is involved.
Although
all six RNGs are involved in
each run, a run lasts
little more than a minute therefore, there should be minimal noise from
any short or long-term environmental or psychological changes.
Additionally, to eliminate
* This chapter prepared by Dr. Robert L. Morris.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8
order effects within the run and within the session, the order of the six RNGs
is tightly
counterbalanced within runs, within sessions, and between sessions.
Half of the tune the three
RNGs from CSL are run
first within the run and half of the time they are not.
Likewise, half
of the time the RNGs from a given location are run in the order:
noise, pseudorandom,
decay; and half of the time in the reverse order.
These four possibilities are counterbalanced
within each session, in one of two fixed symmetrical orders.
The two orders (designated
Order 0 and Order
1) are counterbalanced between sessions for the 32 sessions. A
pseudorandom computer algorithm decides which one of the two counterbalancing orders will
be used
first, so that the experimenter and subject are blind to the sequence in a given
session.
The computer software in either location has been set up to recognize and
implement each order when told which order
is in use.
Thus, any differences in RNG
performance cannot be ascribed to any kind of order effect such as decline effects, terminal
salience, and so on, of the sort occasionally observed in parapsychological data.
GOAL II:
Allow RA Agents Adequate Procedural Flexibility and Simplicity Such as to
Optimize the Likelihood of Positive Results
No more than ten RA agents are to be selected to complete a total of 32 sessions.
Although each agent will thus average just over three sessions each, strong performers may be
invited back for more than three, while weak performers may be invited for fewer,
at the
discretion of the experimenter.
Thus, each person will have more than one opportunity to do
well, thereby reducing the pressure often experienced by agents in single session designs.
Although such a procedure potential diminishes the generalizability of the final result
(a deficit
to be remedied in any event only by follow-up research), such that whatever results are
obtained are more likely to represent findings about real RA.
Additionally, introductory
sessions (not to count in the formal series of 32)
will be conducted for each potential agent,
to expose them to the testing environment and personnel and options
(see below).
They can
thus familiarize themselves with the environment, decide whether they want to participate,
think about the conditions under which they would like to be run, complete
(or at least be
familiar with) the necessary questionnaire and consent form, and so on.
Those who show
evidence of strong negative scoring during the introductory session may, at the discretion of
the experimenter, be encouraged to do a second introductory session, or at least some
additional practice runs before beginning the formal experiment.
At the introductory session, potential agents will be shown or told several things.
They
wUl receive an introductory talk about the lab and its work, with emphasis on
its past success
in producing results in RA studies, plus the success of similar studies in other labs throughout
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200090001-8