b
>
I
I
I
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: ClIs
RDP96-00789R00
30^200290001-6
chance expectation-the expected direction
if the hypothesis
is true),
it forms the basis
for a
strong hypothesis for formal testing.
The directional effect sizes are statistically equivalent to a fiducial condition
value
of 0.26.
Thus, V002
did not
exhibit a
decline
effect,
but there was no indication of
improvement either.
If a direction is specified in advance of an experiment,
it is appropriate to
use one-tailed tests.
From this perspective, the hitting rate was 61%, p ^ 1.37 X
10'3
, and the
effect
size was 0.21-results that are
statistically equivalent to the
fiducial
data, but with the
added feature of possible directional control.
'
The conc|itions for the second half of FY 1987 were defined at the session
level.
V002 defined three types of sessions - positive days, negative days, and unknown days -
that had to be specified in advance of any trials during a session, reilecting the overall subjective
state of being of V002.
If these a priori statements correlated with performance, they could be
used as a filter to reject part of the data.
Table 2 shows the results for 1341 trials collected under
this protocol.
Table 2
(U) PRELIMINARY RESULTS FOR SECOND HALF OF FY 1987
Session
Condition
Trials
Hits
p-value
Effect
Size
Fractional
Hit Rate
Positive
311
174
1.82 x
10- 2
0.12
0.56
Negative
484
243
4.63 x
_]
-0.04
0.50
Uncertain
546
322
1.37 x
10- J
0.18
0.59
~l The Pos * t *ve-day
and
negative-day
data
did
not
exceed mean
chance
expectation.
The uncertain case scored similar to the fiducial data.
Yet, the effect size changes
are small and not
statistically meaningful.
To be consistent with the calculations
for the data
collected in the
first half of FY 1987, the one-tailed combination of the data yields a fractional
h*t rate of 52% - P^
' 00 x
10'‘> and ^e effect size
is 0.045.
Thus,
it appears that V002’s
perception of good and bad days may interfere with good functioning
(earlier performance was
replicated only during V002’s uncertain days).
Since there was no evidence for a decline effect
for 546 trials during the uncertain days,
it
is unlikely that the decline effect
is responsible for the
reduced scoring for the other data.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08^CIA-RDP96-00789^[002200290001-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
CIA-RDP96-00789RO|02200290001-6
2.
(U) Formal Test
(The experiment coordinator decided to cancel the formal test at the year’s
end for two reasons:
(1)
One main objective of the year-end formal test was to protect against
possible cuing. The hit rate for the year was 55%, p < 2.97 x
10' 5 and
the
effect
size was
0.10.
Thus,
if inadvertent
cuing was present,
it
resulted in a decrease in effect size—an unlikely circumstance.
This
is
consistent with one of the main conclusions drawn from the results of
the FY 1986
test.
(2)
V002 requested that we postpone formal tests until FY
1988, because
V002
felt
he/she
was
concentrating
and
beginning
to
understand
something
about
his/her
internal
processes.
According
to V002,
a
formal test at this time would seriously interrupt the discovery activity at
a
critical juncture.
In the experiment coordinator’s opinion, canceling the formal year-end test did not detract from
the FY 1987 results, since they were marginal to begin with and,
it was
felt that
if insights were
being gained, they could be tested during FY 1988.
As shown below, this decision was justified.
D.
(U) FY 1988 Experiments
1.
(U)
Theoretical Constructs
(U) Viewer 002 has been working
for over 20 years
in attempting to understand
his/her own
internal,
subjective
awareness.
What
follows
is
a summary
of V002’s
current
understanding with
regard
to
the
specific
task
of determining the source
of mental
noise
in
forced-choice experiments.
(U) The fundamental idea
is quite straightforward.
Forced-choice remote viewing
perception*
is
susceptible
to
massive
overlay
by memory
(e.g.,
from
earlier
trials)
and/or
expectations
(e.g., the target was number one ten times in a row,
this time
it must be number
two).
To
understand
the
source
of
these
difficulties
requires
the
understanding
of
the
development of thought
itself.
(U) As
a
starting point, V002
followed the ideas of Dr. N. Dixon,
a well-known
investigator of subliminal perception.
Figure
1 summarizes Dixon’s concepts of the processing of
preconscious information. t
It
is beyond the scope of this report to describe
all the processes
*
(U) These problems
arise
in
traditional
remote
viewing;
however,
they
are
particularly
troublesome
in the forced-choice arena.
t
(U) Dixon, N. E., Preconscious Processing, John Wiley, Chichester and New York, p. 25,
(1981) UNCLASSIFIED.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08/: CIA-RDP96-00789IR002200290001-6
r
Approved For Release 2000/08/0|f^CIA-RDP96-00789
3789^002200290001-6
t
final level of the hierarchy
is to perceive the meaning of different conditions of similar objects.
For example, the difference between a piece^ blank paper with UNCLASSIFIED printed top
and bottom and one with
//top and bottom lies only in the meaning of the words.
If this
last stage could be realized,
it would have obvious*
^significance.
Psychoenergetic
Input
UNCLASSIFIED
FIGURE 2
(U) SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF ANALYTICAL OVERLAY
Approved For Release 2000/08/0^
: CIA-RDP96-00789fJ002200290001-6
If
It
r
r
r
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
i CIA-RDP96-00789Rjp02200290001-6
degrees of freedom.
Clearly, this
is different from the expected value of zero, and thus on the
average, there was not a constant hit rate.
FIGURE 3
(U) EXCESS HITTING DURING EXPLORATORY TRJALS-1988
Shown also in Figure 3
is the “instantaneous” hit rate, R, calculated over 10
trial segments (open circles).
The
first point,
at 10
trials, represents the average
hit rate from
trial 5 to trial 15; the second point at 20 trials represents the average hit rate from trial 15 to trial
25 and so on. The line labeled MCE (mean chance expectation) corresponds to a 50% hit rate.
The unlabeled
line
(/? = 0.529 + .003 n)
is the regression
line for the instantaneous
hit rate.
While
the
curve
demonstrates
a
clear
trend
toward
performance
enhancement,
the
linear
correlation coefficient
is not significantly
(r = 0.203, p < 0.09) greater than chance
(r = 0.0).
/
Figure
3 shows
periods
of
significant
growth
followed
by
periods
of
consolidation.
Major strategy 535
fits this model, but major strategy 536 does not.
Yet, major
strategy 537 produced another period of growth.
Strategy 537B
is also labeled because
it was the
Approved For Release 2000/08/0/
R002200290001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: Cj
DP96-007:
02200290001-6
I
one that was used in the formal test (see Section 3 below), and V002 claimed that
it represented
a transition from three-dimensional to two-dimensional targets.
In V002's theoretical construct,
this also represents a change from perceiving object conditions to perceiving object meaning.
I
| As can been seen from both the hit rate and accumulated excess hits, there
was one period (approximately 14.3% of the total number of trials—trials 254 through 321) that
corresponds to a decline in performance.
This period
is the only time during the exploratory
sessions in which a large number of trials (68) were attempted during a single session (average hit
rate of 40%). The second longest continuous segment was from trial 335 to 358 (24 trials for an
average hit rate of 54%).
In answer to questions about what was occurring with each of these strategy
shifts,
all V002 could say
is that they represent new psychoenergetic contact with some of the
noise sources shown in Figure 2
.
It is frustrating from SRI’s perspective as well as from that of
V002 that these strategies remain so subjective.
|
In addition to the 477 binary trials,
18 were collected, but not included in
the record.
For these
trials,
the
target was whether or not a second person was
in the SRI
analyst's office.
The hit rate for these 18 trials was 78%, p <. 1.69 X
10‘2
, and the effect size
was 0.50.
These data are not to be considered part of the experimental record, however, since
it
became apparent that the background noise level was obviously different when a second person
was in the office.
Thus,
it is assumed that the strong scoring could easily be attributed to cuing.
(U)
During FY 1988, two smaller series of forced-choice experiments (n = 3 and n =
6) were conducted.
The protocol for these was the same as for the binary case except that the
target pool was appropriately larger.
V002 contributed 135 trinary
(i.e., one-in-three)
trials.
The
hit rate was
48% (expected hitting rate
is 33%), p < 1.83 x 10~\ and the effect size was 0.31.
This effect
size
is slightly larger than the fiducial binary case and represents an increase from 0.25
for the
first half of the data to 0.34 for the second half.
With so few trials,
it is difficult to interpret this
increase.
These trials were primarily used to form a fiducial point for later trinary experiments.
JV002 contributed 49
trials
in
a one-in-six experiment. The
hit
rate was
18%,
p < 4.49 X
10_1
, and the effect size was 0.018.
These trials were exploratory for V002,
to determine subjectively
if some of the binary routines were applicable to a larger pool of target
choices.
This small effect size and hit rate (expected hit rate is 17%) indicate that more work
is
needed to understand the forced-choice remote viewing of one-in-six target possibilities.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200290001-6
u
M
ILJ
N
*
i
p
p
p
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: <^IA
IA-RDP96-00789RJ02200290001 -6
3.
(U) Formal Test
<
As
in earlier years, there
is no indication (except where noted)
that these
results can be accounted for entirely on the basis on inadvertent cuing.
However, SRI conducted
a formal test of 50 trials as a concluding effort for FY 1988. V002 used strategy 537B throughout
the formal series.
(U) The protocol for the formal experiment was designed to eliminate the possibility
of any inadvertent cuing.
In general,
it was similar to the binary procedures that had been in use
since the beginning of the binary search program in FY 1986 as described above.
a.
(U) Number of Trials
(U) The
total number of
trials
for the
formal experiment was
specified
in
advance as 50.
b.
(U) Target Material
(U)
For each
trial, pairs of targets were selected from the material shown in
Table
3.
Some of the time V002 suggested a pair, but most of the time the choice was up to the
experiment coordinator.
These pairs were not chosen randomly.
Rather they were chosen in
accordance with a subjective opinion as to the difference between the pair.
Occasionally, V002
would request a different pair before the
trial was initiated.
c.
(U) Computer Link
(U) To ensure
that
there
was no
inadvertent
cuing,
a computer
link was
established between the experiment coordinator (EC) and the research assistant (RA).
After a
target had been generated
(see below) the only communication allowed over the computer link
from the EC was the single word ‘Ready.” To further protect
against inadvertent cuing, the word
“Ready” was typed automatically by a special program rather than manually.
d.
(U) Sequence of Events for a Single Trial
(1)
Viewer 002 selected a pair of possible targets from the
list shown above,
and informed the RA.
(2)
The RA informed the EC by computer link of the choices.
(3)
The EC used established computerized random procedures to select one
of the pair as the actual target and placed
it in a predetermined place.
The other target of the selected pair was placed in a desk drawer.
One
Approved For Release 2000/08/08/: CIA-RDP96^0078|1r002200290001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: plA-RDP96-00789R00J00290001 -6
(U)
minute after Step 2, the EC informed the RA that a target was ready by
typing the single word “Ready."
(4)
The RA informed the viewer that a target was ready by striking a bell.
(5)
The viewer responded, and the RA informed the EC of the choice by
the computer link.
(6)
The EC recorded the data and informed the RA of the target.
(7)
The RA provided feedback to the viewer.
(8)
Before a new trial could begin, the EC had to replace the targets in the
target pack and signal the RA by typing “Next.”
Table 3
(U)
TARGET LIST FOR THE FORMAL EXPERIMENT
Number
Description
Graph paper:
red,
circular.
Contour map: black,
ovals.
Contour map: black, concentric circles.
Graph paper: black, rectangular.
Circular graph paper: Black, concentric circles.
Reactance frequency graph paper: orange, rectangular/triangular.
Reactance frequency graph paper: green, rectangular/triangular.
Circular percentage graph paper: green,
3 circles.
Geomagnetic meridian plot paper: black,
3 half circles.
Perspective graph paper: blue, rectangular, diagonal lines.
Triangular coordinate paper: orange,
triangles.
Triangular coordinate paper: green, triangles.
Square graph paper: green,
10 x 10 to the inch.
Square graph paper: orange, 4 x 4 to the inch.
Square graph paper:
5 x 5 to the centimeter.
Circular, polar coordinate graph paper: orange,
10 parts to the inch.
Circular, polar coordinate graph paper: green,
10 pans to the inch.
Chan geomagnetic latitude paper: black, 11x18 inches.
flag/alen sheet with red-striped border.
document cover:; “*
r
SuKi document covgr: brown beige.
manila envelope.
.
mat paper.
mat paper.
mat paper.
NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT:
large sign.
PLANS:
large sicn. —
large sign.
CODE XLTZ:
large sign.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200290001-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
IA-RDP96-00789RQ02200290001 -6
e.
(U)
Record
(U) The date, target pair, intended target, and the response were tabulated for
later analysis
(see Table
4).
f.
(U)
Analysis
(U) A single p-value and effect size were calculated from the data shown in
Table
4.
g.
(U)
Results
,1
Table
4 shows
the
targets
that were used and
the
results
for the
50-trial formal series.
There were 38 hits, corresponding to a hit rate of 76% (p <1.53 x
10'4
)
and an effect size of 0.51.
The hit rate
is consistent with that observed using strategies 537 and
537B, and the effect size
is nearly double that obtained during the fiducial run at the end of FY
1986.
If
it
is assumed
that the
hit rate of 64%
is the
actual
hit
rate, then there has been a
significant increase
(p < 0.038) since FY
1986.
The one-sided confidence interval (95%)
is
66%, which
is greater than the
fiducial value of 64%.
I-
Ir
Ir
It
k
k
k
k
i
i
I
£
n
n
Approved For Release 2000/08/08/: CIA-RDP96 OiUSaLi002200290001-6
Trial
(U)
Table 4
RECORD SHEET FOR THE FORMAL EXPERIMENT
Date
9/20
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/21
9/21
9/22
9/26
9/27
9/28
9/29
9/29
9/29
9/30
10/3
10/3
10/3
10/3
10/3
10/4
10/4
10/4
10/4
10/4
10/5
Target Possibilities
Target Choice
Response
One
Two
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 :(ciA-RDP96-OO789^0O2l2OO29OOO1-6
Hit
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xxxx
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789Rg02200290001-6
IV CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (U)
/
^The
single most
interesting outcome
during the three-year experiment
is
that
there was a significant enhancement of hit rate in the formal series in FY 1988 over the results
from the formal series during FY 1986.
—
-
i
In examining the performance during the
exploratory phase
in FY
1988, we
observed strong enhancement (not significant) of hit rate (see Figure 3)
.
At this point, a number
of possible explanations could account for the improvement:
•
V002 has correctly identified his/her source of internal noise,
•
Although SRI believes
it unlikely, V002 may have learned to use weak sensorial cues
during the exploratory phase, or
•
Due
to
the
complexity
of the
protocol
during the
formal
series,
there
is
still an
unknown sensory leakage path.
While
it
is impossible to rule out unknown sensory leakage paths,
all of the known ones were
addressed in the formal protocol. We include this remote possibility for completeness.
Because
of the protocol complexity, the remote viewing processes are indeterminate at present, but the
end-point statistic
is valid.*
_
It
is important that
this study be continued
in order to
isolate which
of these
explanations
is more
able
to explain the
results, and
to
identify
a technique
to quantify the
internal experiences of V002, should that prove to be the proper explanation.
Should such a
technique be found, specific hypotheses could formulated and tested, and a training procedure
and applications could be developed based upon that knowledge.
*
(U)
During the Scientific Oversight Committee meeting of 4 November 1988, a number of
comments were made concerning the adequacy of the protocols with regard
to process.
However, there was general agreement about the endpoint statistic.
See “Enhanced Human
Performance
Investigations
(U),”
Final
Technical
Report,
SRI
Project
1291,
SRI
International, Menlo Park, CA (December 1988)^
_
f
Approved For Release 2000/08/08