- ji i ee a rae 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 | ILLUSTRATIONS (U) Stanford Art Museum Target (a), and Response (b), by Vi ewer 372 (U) ry e e ° . ° . . o « e e . e e . e e ° e . o . Beacon Tower in Vicinity of Control Tower Target at Palo Alto Airport (a), and Response by Viewer No. 292 (b) (U).. Windmill Target and Responses by Viewers S5 (a) and No. 468 (b) (U) e oe e a e a « * os e e e e . . ° ci e cd ° @ oe e Redwood City Cross Target, and Responses of Viewers 372 (a) and 155 (b) (UU). 2. we ee we te ee ee te ee ts Pedestrian Overpass Target, and Responses of S4 (a) and No, L5p (b) (U) e ° e e e e ° e e e e . . ° e e ° e e ° . eo cy Distribution of 36 Target/Transcript Correspondences for Local Target Sites (6 subjects, 6 transcripts each), Showing More than 50% First-Place Matches (U). ..... +6 « © «© #© « Comparison Between Blind-Judge Rankings and Accuracy Assessments (U). . 2. 6 +s © © ee ew ee ew we ee we ws Ultra Modern Dome House--Target, and Viewer 372 Drawing (U). 2. 6 6 6 © © © © ee eo 8 ew te et ee wl Mount Alverno Conference Center, and Viewer 372 Drawing (U). . 2. 6 «© © © «© © © «© oe oe 6 6 8 oe 8 ew ee Stanford Shopping Center--Target, and Viewer 372 Drawing (U). . 2. 26 6 6 © © 6 «© © ew ee eee ee ee we Varsity Theatre Arcade--Target, and Viewer 518 Drawing (U). . 1. 6 6 6 6 © © ee oe oe He wo et ee ew we Victorian House--Target, and Viewer 518 Drawing (U). .... Glass Slipper Motel--Target, and Viewer 518 Drawing (U). 2. Stanford Shopping Center--Target, and Response of Viewer No, 468 (U) . 2. 2. 6 © © © © et © # eo oe et ew Target Slide, and Viewer 292 Response Fifteen Minutes Before Random Selection of Target (U) . 2. 6. 1. 6 1 © © © © © se ew we Target Slide, and Viewer 272 Response Fifteen Minutes Before Random Selection of Target (U) . 2. 2. 2 5 «© «© «© © © © @ wae Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIASRDP96-00788R001300170002-9 33 45 46 48 49 51 61 62 ‘63 64 65 66 72 76 77
eee Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R0013001700 17 Copper Pitcher and Viewer No. 518 ERV Response (U) ... » 18 Food Mill Target and Viewer No, 518 ERV Response (U) « « + + 19 Straw Hat Target and Viewer No. 518 ERV Response qu)... 7 20 Tripod Target and Viewer No. 518 ERV Response (U). . o © 2 21 Antenna and Viewer No. 518 ERV Response (U). + + «+ » 22 Globe Target and Viewer No. 518 ERV Response (U).. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CiA-RDPS6-007 6s oad bogs :
1 Results of Transcript Concept 2 0-7 Point Accuracy Rating 3 Total Scores for Each 0 4 Distribution of CRV 5 Program Summary (U). » +2 2°? A . pproved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002 ! -9 TABLES (U) Analysis of a Remote Viewing eo 8 oe # e 8 e « e e . e . Experiment (vu) eee * 8 . Scale for Target /Transcript Correspondence (U) see ee ee? £ the Six Viewers in Phase-One Orientation Program 61) Target /Response Matchings (U). +++: ° vil Approved For Releas . R001300170002-9 22 27 52 98 100
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9: a | I OBJECTIVE (U) } | The objectives of this program are the optimization of remote viewing (RV) protocols, the orientation of selected individuals to reach enhanced levels of ability, and the establishment of screening procedures to enlarge the population from which individuals are selected. a hf t + eee Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 / eee , Siniplenceerupompmennedenenemeee ne ee
\-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 — | Approved For Release 2000/08/07 ,; II INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY (U) A. Basic Program Structure (vy) | In this report we present results and assessments of a one-year program for the optimization of remote viewing a. Ee. The objective of this program was to familiarize these individuals with the SRI remote viewing protocols, to produce enhanced levels of ability, and to establish screening tests and procedures for enlarging the population from which such individuals are selected. . o (U) For the past seven years SRI International has been investigating a human perceptual/processing ability called remote viewing (RV). This , is the subject matter of the current study, and it pertains to the acquisition and description, by mental means, of information blocked from ordinary perception by distance or shielding and generally considered to be secure from such access. 6 .. the start of this program, six individuals were a a. « participate in an RV technology transfer. With the exception of one of the six who had participated in an ESP study several years earlier, these participants when selected were inexperienced with regard to paranormal perception in general, and RV in particular. A variety of different training protocols were examined with the goal of helping the participants familiarize themselves with the SRI RV techniques, Formal assessment and transfer series were carried out with each of the six participants, in which they were asked to use mental imagery processes to describe distant geographic locations (bridges, roads, buildings, etc.), hidden 35-mm slides of similar sites, and objects placed in a controlled- access location. Several other information series were carried out. These are all described in later sections of this report. 3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 -ialailaiepiy 8571001300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 :CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 ~ (U) Four of the six participants each produced results that de- parted significantly from chance expectation in assessment series that were formally judged by very strict criteria. The other two produced results in the assessment series that were also suggestive of paranormal perception. Overall, this result constitutes highly significant per- -5 formance (p = 4 *% 10 , or odds of one in 25,000 of such a result occurring by chance). | XE are including in this introduction one illustrative example of an RV trial for a real-time San Francisco Bay Area outdoor target. The viewer, No. 372, who contributed this data, produced a mixture of responses, some excellent and some noncorresponding , in his two series at SRI. Several of his descriptions were among the best obtained in the program, and his overall consistency in performance resulted in both of his individual series reaching statistical significance. (U) Current and proposed programs are directed at training partici- Le OR BE Beare wate PR pants to bring their RV ability under more conscious control, and to learn to recognize and overcome the factors that limit RV reliability. These limiting factors center around the genera on of erroneous data by the viewer from his memory and imagination. An example of the successful resolution of such noise is the following. (U) The viewer was closeted with an interviewer in the laboratory at SRI to await the target team's arrival at their destination. The target was the Stanford Art Museum on the Stanford campus. The viewer made several tentative outline sketches of different shapes that he said were “associated with the face of a building." Finally, he made a careful perspective drawing of the building he was visualizing. A photograph of the target is shown in Figure l(a), and the viewer's drawing is shown for comparison in Figure 1(b). The viewer's narrative descrifed the face of the building as follows: “There is a white and black pattern, a white Fl Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP$6-00788R001300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 Two judges evaluated this viewer's responses: one judged it significant (p = 0.05), and one just missed significance, ¢ (U) Alphabet Targets. A viewer successful in both Bay Area remote viewing and slide trials also participated in a series in which he attempted to describe alphabet letters in a distant location. This was not a formal series, since the protocol, which was exploratory in nature, was changed several times during the series, However, the percentage hits result indicates that the viewer was in contact with the target letters at a rate higher than would be expected by chance. These data, taken in conjunction with data generated on another program, show promise that this ability can be developed. * (U) Correlated Responses. In the course of the year's work, ‘targets were repeated from time. to time as a result of random selection from a target pool of sixty. In some cases we obtained strikingly similar responses (even when incorrect) from the different viewers who countered these repeated targets. These responses also corWlated well with responses obtained from other viewers over past years of research. The observation of such a result indicates the possibility that given target stimuli trigger charac-~ teristic responses, which could be tabulated in a "dictionary" of site attributes, ° ; og Coordinate Remote Viewing (CRV). Three of the viewers ‘took part in CRV exercises in which they were asked to describe distant locations anywhere on the globe, given only the geographical coordinates of latitude and longitude. This is an ability that has been well demonstrated by some of our experienced participants, and similar encouraging results were obtained in these trials One exercise which was sufficiently lengthy to justify analysis was found to be statistically significant at C Pp = 0.0083 (odds of one in 120). | ea these studies we find evidence that the SRI RV technology is transferable; one of the ‘viewers turned in clearly superior performances, and three others produced successful (statistically Signifi- cant) remote viewing at a level to indicate useful information transfer. 0788R001300170002-9 - Approved For Release 2000/ 7: =
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96 001300170002-9. Cc. Report Organization (U) (U) In Section III we describe the SRI RV protocols, including results from the past, and our expectations for the present program. also discuss the screening procedures used to select viewers and the judging procedures used to evaluate the results of the investigations carried out in the current program. (U) In Section IV we describe the first phase of the study, in which we systematically carried out RV trials with the participants to obtain baseline data from each under similar experimental conditions. | In Section V we present the exploratory work carried out in Phase Two in an effort to extend the repertoire of RV tools available - =! personnel. (U) Our conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section 8 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : Cia-ROPS6- aiioaaaaaaaal7°
: CIA-RDP9 00788R001300170002-9 Approved For Release 2000/08 III BACKGROUND (U) (U) With the overall objective of improving the reliability of psychoenergetic functioning, we have in the past investigated several different screening procedures, familiarization/training protocols, and judging techniques, both with the goal of developing procedures useful in identifying gifted remote viewers, and of providing the most optimal strategies to permit individuals to exploit the RV phenomenon to useful ends, In this section we provide background data on each of these areas, . e A. Screening (U) e::. of the goals of the program was to mo question of the establishment of screening procedures to enlarge t population from which individuals are selected for RV work. (U) In the psychoenergetics field in general, two approaches to screening have been pursued; screening by profile, and screening by performance, Both have been examined to a limited degree in this program, (U) In screening by profile, ‘one attempts to establish physiological and/or psychological parameters which differentiate high-performance from low-performance individuals * In an early program SRI carried out an extensive profiling program on gifted individuals and controls, The tests included a comprehensive medical evaluation, including X-ray scans ki the brain, and comprehensive psychological and neuropsychological profiling. The following list of tests administered gives an idea as to the thorough- hess of the evaluations: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), Bender Gestalt Visual Motor Test, Benton Visual Memory Test, Wechsler Memory Scale, Luscher Color Test, Strong Vocational Interest Blank, Minnesota 9 Approved For Release *"ieemammeaeaas®)°0782°001 2001700029
ic a Approved For-Release'2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 (U) Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Edwards Personality Preference Schedule (EPPS), Rorschach Inkblot, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), Halstead Category Test, Tactual Performance Test, Speech Perception Test, Seashore Rhythm Test, Finger Tapping Test, Trail Making Test, Knox Cube Test, Raven Progressive Matrices, Verbal Concept Attainment Test, Buschke Memory Test, Grooved Pegboard Tests, Gottschaldt Hidden~Figures Test, and the spatial relations subtest of the SRA Primary Mental Abilities Test. The overall result of this testing was that no clear profile parameters * emerged on which an a priori screening procedure could be based, eee In contrast to formal testing, however, several years observati of remote viewers by SRI researchers has led to an informal guide based o subjective evaluation of the personality traits of successful viewers, This rule~of-thumb guide is based on the observation that successful remo viewers tend to be confident, outgoing, adventurous, broadly successful individuals with some artistic bent. With this as a guide, the sponsor considered a population of 250 potential candidates for the RV program. Of these, 117 were interviewed, resulting in a pool of 30-35 individuals for potential active use in the program. With regard to the SRI orienta- tion program, ten of these were selected for interview by the SRI team, of which six were chosen for active participation in the SRI program. This constitutes the level of screening by profile. (U) In screening by performance, a number of unselected or pre- selected individuals are given a psychoenergetics task to perform. Those performing successfully are then said to be screened by the task, and are then graduated to further tasking. * tt (U) H, Puthoff and R. Targ, "Perceptual Augmentation Techniques (UV), Final Report, SRI Project 3183, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA (December 1, 1975), Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96- mnmee') ; aha ; .
' local San Francisco Bay Area locations as target sites. Four of the six Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 — = In this study, the six individuals pre-screened by interview were then screened by performance on a six-trial RV series involving participants produced results that individually were statistically sig- nificant. Since this overall result is itself statistically significant we take as evidence that the interview selection (screening) procedure based on the SRI-supplied informal guidelines was successful, keeping in mind that the sample is too small to make an absolutely definitive statement. EZ Furthermore, taking the initial six-trial series as a performance- screening instrument, we found that the four high-performance individuals in this series cqntinued to perform with good success in additional tasks, while the two lower-performance individuals were also less successful in later tasks. We consider this to be an important finding. (U) From these overall results we conclude that pre-screening on the basis of interview, following the informal SRI guideline criteria, and screening by performance, using the SRI Standard RV Protocols, both constitute basic screening tools that in this program provided reliable indicators of success in psychoenergetic performance. B. Remote Viewing Protocols for the Description of Local (San Francisco Bay Area) Target Sites (U) {U) As a result of efforts over the years to develop an optimum psychoenergetic task appropriate for screening and training, we have settled on a standard remote-viewing (RV) procedure which is a refined * Gersion of that described in our Proc, IEEE paper. The elements of the * (U) H. E. Puthoff and R. Targ, “A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research,’ Proc, IEEE, Vol. 64, pp. 329-354 (March 1976). Approved For Release 7 iia oF-00788R001300170002-9
Approved For Release — _——— (U) in our view such (novel) environmental factors would divert some of the subject's much-needed attention. * 6. Interviewer Behavior (Ww) (U) The interviewer arranges ahead of time to have pen and paper available for drawing, and a tape recorder. The room lighting is somewhat subdued to prevent after-image highlights, shadows on eyelids, etc. (U) When the agreed-upon RV trial time arrives, the interviewer simply asks the remote viewer to "describe the impressions that come to mind with regard to where the target person is." The interviewer does not pressure the remote viewer to verbalize continuously; if he were to, the remote viewer might tend to embroider descriptions to please the interviewer, a well-known syndrome in behavioral studies of this type. If the remote viewer tends toward being analytical ("I see Macy's") the interviewer . gently leads him into description, not analysis. ("You don't have to tell me where it is, just describe what you sag#") This is the most important and difficult task of the interviewer, but is apparently necessary for good results, especially with inexperienced remote viewers. (U) It is also useful for the interviewer to "surprise" the remote viewer with new viewpoints. ("Go above the scene and look down-- what do you see? If you look to the left, what do you see?") The remote viewer's viewpoint appears to shift rapidly with a question like this, and the data come through before the viewer's defenses activate to block it out. nD The interviewer role described here, applicable to the familj tion/screening task at hand, is appropriately modified for an experienced remote viewer. In the SRI ically more "muzzled" in general, although, key points procedure’ the interviewer is typ if not blind to the target, supplying positive feedback at certain for correct target-related responses. 17 Approved For Release 2000/08/ 8%8R001300170002-9
*pprowes For Release 2000/08/07 UNCTASST PRES: (U) The shifting of viewpoint also obviates the problem of the remote viewer spending the entire session time giving meticulous detail on a relatively trivial item, such as a flower, which, even if correct, generally will be of little use in assessing the session, (Once a remote viewer feels he sees something, he tends to hang on to this perception rather than commit himself to a new viewpoint.) It is important to recognize again that with the division of labor between remote viewer and interviewer it is the interviewer's (not the remote viewer's) responsibility to see that the necessary information to permit discrimination among the range of target possibilities is generated, the remote viewer's responsibility being con- fined to exercise of the RV faculty. (U) The remote viewer is encouraged to sketch what he sees, even over his objections that he is not an artist, can't sketch, etc. He may do so throughout, or wait until the end of the session if inter- mittent drawing would distract his concentration, Since drawings tend to be more accurate than verbalizations, this is an extremely important factor for good results. 7. Target Person ("Beacon") Behavior (U) (U) After obtaining a target card in the manner described earlier, the target person proceeds to the target site indicated. (U) He is asked to come upon the target location at the starting time so that his view of it is fresh at the beginning of the remote viewing period, He is to then simply pay attention to the environment as dictated by instructions on the target card, At the end of the agreed-upon target viewing time of 15 minutes the target person returns to the lab. 18 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 —$—$_$_$$—
Approved For RAJ NOoLAS SGERED-00788R001 300170002-9 8. Post-Experiment Feedback (U) (U) When the target person returns, and after all the raw data has been filed, the interviewer, remote viewer, and target person proceed directly to the target site for feedback. This helps to develop the remote viewer's sense of which aspects of his mental imaging process are correct, which are incorrect, This appears to bring the RV trial to closure for the remote viewer, so that when he has a following session, his mind is no longer involved with wondering how he did on the previous one. Only a very experienced subject can function well time after time without feedback, so this is done for each trial to optimize the potential for success. 9. Evaluation Procedure (U) (U) Ina sense, the most critical part of the standard remote- viewing procedure is the evaluation procedure. Any single experiment in remote viewing, even if perfect, could in principle be dismissed as possibly a coincidence. Further, any result less than perfect might be called into question as a generalized "grass is.green, sky is blue" transcript that fits every target. Strictly speaking, only blind differ- ential discrimination of transcripts across a series of targets can provide a basis to discriminate between these dismissals and the RV interpretation, although, as we shall see later, certain post hoc transcript-by-transcript evaluation procedures are found to correlate well with blind differential matching procedures. (U) To obtain a numerical evaluation of the accuracy of a standard six-trial remote viewing. series with a given remote viewer, the results are subjected to judging ona blind basis by an SRI research ‘ analyst not otherwise associated with the series he is to judge. To be specific, two project personnel acted as interviewers (R. T. and H. P.), UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : IEE ASS PEE DP (U) and two others (E. M. and B. H.) interch When acting as a judge for a given anged roles on alternate series as target. person and blind judge. series, that individual was isolated from the viewer and others involved in the series so as to prevent contamination. (U) In preparation for judging, the remote viewer's tapes are transcribed. The resulting transcripts are then edited only to the extent of deleting information which might act as artifactual cues to a judge, such as references to other targets, or phrases which might indicate the temporal order of the transcripts. (U) The transcripts (including associated drawings) and target cards, each arranged in their own random order different from the order of target usage, are then turned over to the judge. The judge is instructed to visit the target locations on the basis of the target card instructions, j and to blind rank order, on 4 scale of 1-6 (best to worst match), each of the six transcripts against each of the six target sites, generating a 6% 6 matrix. (U) In order to carry out this task, the judge must assess quantitatively the degree of correspondence between a given transcript and target. We have recently developed a concept analysis procedure that provides for just such detailed comparisons. In this new procedure, we begin by analyzing each transcript for its specific content. To accomplish] this, the transcript is divided into a list of specific concepts, where a concept may consist of a single word or phrase from the transcript (e.g., "red"), or a single word or phrase that summarizes a lengthy idea (e.g-,; "shady"). <A list of concepts is made for each transcript in a series to who is blind to be judged. The analysis proceeds by having the judge , which transcripts actually match which targets, stand at the first target J location on his target list, and for each transcript make an assessment, 20 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Releas : | base 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 ¢ CIA- TED -00788R001300170002-9 SIFI (U) concept by concept, on a rating scale of 0 to 10. A rating of zero implies no correspondence whatever between that particular concept and. the target site in question, and a 10 implies complete correspondence. Intermediate scores are given in .propartion to the extent of the corres- pondence.. Having done this for each of the concepts, one by one, in the first transcript, the judge repeats the assessment as independently as possible for all the concepts in all of the remaining transcripts. He then proceeds to the next target site on the list and repeats the concept assessment for all of the transcripts as applied to that site. Having finished all the travel sites in this manner, the judge computes the average rating score for all concepts in each transcript matched against each target. When there are six trials in the series, there are 36 such averages. (U) In a second step of the judging procedure, the judge displays his results in a matrix with targets displayed as rows and transcripts displayed as columns. An example from an actual experiment (Viewer 690) is shown in Table 1. At this point in the analysis, the judge submits his results. (U) -A precise measure of the statistical significance of the matrix of target/transcript relations is given by a direct-count-of- permutations method of great generality. It is an exact calculation method requiring no approximations such as normality assumptions. Furthermore, the judging process that went into generating the matrix is not required to be independent transcript-to-transcript nor target-to- target. Finally, the statistical evaluation procedure is general enough that, in addition to being applicable to the blind rank order procedure TD, * : (WU) C. Scott, "On the Evaluation of Verbal Material in Parapsychology: A Discussion of Dr. Pratt's monograph,” Jour. Soc. Psych, Res., Vol, 46, No, 752, pp. 79-90 (June 1972). 21 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000 NICEASSIFIES 300170002-9 (U) The significance level for the experiment is then determi ned by counting the number of possible matrices that would yield a result (diagonal sum) equal to or better (i.e., lower sum of ranks in the rank- order case, higher sum of scores in the corres pondence-rating case, etc,) than. that obtained for the matrix corresponding to the key, and dividing by ni This ratio gives the probability of obtaining by chance a result equal to or better than that obtained in the actual judging process, For the results shown in Table 1 we find, by direct computer count of the 6! matrices obtained by interchanging columns, that the probability of obtaining equal or better matching by chance is Pp = 1/6! = 0.0013. (U) This statistical procedure, in use for more than two decades by many researchers, was Specifically designed to handle narrative material of the remote viewing type, and it cannot be stressed enough that it is constructed sufficiently conservatively so as to apply even in the limiting case in which the target pool is completely known a priori to all involved, thus handling any possible contamination due to remote viewer guessing or interviewer cueing in protocols of the type used in the SRI RV procedure, (U) As an overall calibration of the remote viewing process, against which specific examples can be gauged, we can take as a background data base the lengthy collection of 51 remote viewing trials collected Over a several-year period with nine viewers, and published in Reference 1, In these trials, viewers were targeted on local targets (bridges, swimming pools, theaters, airports, computers, machine shops, etc.) within a 20-km range of SRI. The quality of the results was such that the judges, who had to determine in a blind fashion which viewer-generated data packages (tape transcripts and drawings) were associated with which target sites, were able to blind match transcripts to targets in first place in roughly half the cases, an exceptionally significant result. As will be shown later, similar results (in fact, somewhat better) were obtained in this program, 24 UNCLASSIFIED P — For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9
ticipants. These s Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9 IV ORIENTATION PROGRAM--PHASE ONE (U) wa In this section we describe the six remote viewing series carried out with each of no volunteers. All series have been assessed as to the amount of remote viewing exhibited in each. Four of these series were found, by blind judging, to depart significantly from chance expectation. Finding four such significant series, in a group of six, is sufficient to make the group as a whole statistically signifi- cant (p = 4 x,107>). A description of each trial in each of the series will be presented below. A. Remote Viewing of Local Target Sites (U) : During the months of May, June, and July, six one-week remote viewing series were conducted, one week with each of the six | | par- eries were carried out at the rate of two series per month. The purpose of these initial training activities was to obtain baseline data on each of the participants taking part ina uniform series of trials, and to provide a basis for later evaluation and comparison of their performance in more diverse tasks. (U) The six remote viewing sessions for each participant were con- ducted at a rate of one per day, except for Thursdays, when there were two sessions. The project directors divided the interviewing tasks, with RT remaining with the viewer for the first four trials, and HP acting as interviewer for the last two, in every case. 25 Approved For Release 2000/03/;igaggggagmmmapeR00" 300170002-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : -RDP96- )0788R001300170002-9 ¢ B. Summary of the Six Series (U) ee xe series ww The following summarizes our impressions of the thirty-six remote viewing trials carried out in our laboratory, May through July 1979, * by the six WM att cipants. (U) In order to present a coherent assessment of the sessions in this summary, we rate each session individually by a measure we call Accuracy Rating. This is our evaluation as to the correspondences between viewer-generated transcripts and the intended target site. This assess- ment is carried out ona post hoc basis with knowledge of the target site, and so is not intended to be the equivalent of "blind judging." Its utility is, that it provides a relative measure from our standpoint as to the success of the various participants, We rate each transcript ona 0 to 7 scale, with a 0 for no correspondence, and a 7 for a transcript that shows excellent correspondence with essentially no incorrect infor- mation, and including good analytical detail (for example, naming the target by name). The scale is shown in Table 2, Again, the 0 to 7 rating is not a blind measure of the level of RV functioning, but rather a procedure for comparing the relative performance of the participants. As i we see later, however, the correlation or agreement between our Accuracy Rating system and the results of formal blind judging is high. l. Viewer No, 155 (U) ee (U) Target 1: White Plaza at Stanford University. This trial was the first in the overall group of thirty-six, and also was in our opinion (and that of the blind judge) one of the very best in the series of six with this remote viewer. The viewer correctly identified the main feature of the site as being a plaza with a fountain. He also had a tall column dominating the scene, which could be a match to Hoover Tower, a looming structure nearby. Additionally described were a series of arches, 26. Approved For-Release 2000/08 ae 758R00" 300170002-9
Approved For WINCLASS | PRE B)96-00788R001300170002-9 Table 2 (U) 0=7 POINT ACCURACY RATING SCALE FOR TARGET/TRANSCRIPT CORRESPONDENCE (U) Excellent correspondence, including good analytical detail (e.g., naming the site by name), and with essentially no incorrect information. Good correspondence with good analytical information (e.g., naming the function), and relatively little incorrect information. Good correspondence with unambiguous unique matchable elements, but some incorrect information, Good correspondence with several matchable elements intermixed with incorrect information, Mixture of correct and incorrect elements, but enough of the former to indicate viewer has made. contact with the site. Some correct elements, but not sufficient to suggest results beyond chance expectation. Little correspondence. No correspondence, (U) whigh are a recurring feature in the buildings surrounding the courtyard. Accuracy Rating = 5. (U) Target 2: Stanford Art Museum, The viewer did not describe this large Greek-columned building at all. He did, however, mention nearby features, such as arches and red-tiled roofs, and indicated that he felt that it was again a "Stanford type” of target. Accuracy Rating = 3. | (U) Target 3: Fire Circle. Among other things, the viewer correctly described a circular depressed area, with descending steps, a squared-off far end, and something in the center. These features are: UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300170002-9
q i Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CAERFRPOD ASS PPI PRe-2 (U) descriptive of the target. However, the viewer also described and drew two other fairly coherent scenes that did not pertain to the target. Consequently the judge who eventually evaluated this series in the blind, ranked this transcript in fifth place, out of six, because of its corre- spondences to other targets. The viewer also accurately perceived the beacon's activities at the target by stating that, ",.. he was involved in the movement somehow. He was on or thinking about something that moves ; goes around ina circle. It seems to be a circular thing. Because I was getting the feeling of vertigo .... The beacon stated in his notes regarding his activities at the target that he " .. ecirculate(d) the . a fountain ...". and "... did a sort of Indian whooping dance as I jumped ih around the thing .... Simply rating the transcript and drawings to the actual. target, our assessment was Accuracy Rating = 3. (U) Target 4: Logo. This target is a 6 ft X 12 ft orange metal sculpture on the grass lawn of a chemical company. It is symbolic chain molecule, consisting of four large diamond shapes connected together, The viewer did not describe anything that pertained to the target. His’ main features were of a gazebo structure. Accuracy Rating = 0. (U) Target 5: Valombrosa Conference Center, The main feature of his description was a fan shaped structure, somewhat matching the roof design of the principle element of the target. He pictured it as an “arched cave with bars," which led to the blind judge incorrectly matching 4 it to the pedestrian overpass. Accuracy Rating = 2. (U) Target 6: Pedestrian Overpass. The viewer's initial 1! description was of a "lacey arch," which is a very apt summary of this wire and pipe structure. He went on to describe his “confined feeling." His description then became that of a "narrow alley" and what sounded like ] a village scene with stucco buildings. His fourth drawing was a reasonable 28 UNCLASSIFIED