L/08
: ClA-ReJL
Approved For Release 2000/&8/08
: CIA-RaR96-00789R002200670001-4
(U)
(3)
Cost effectiveness,
i.e.,
individual subject session times should be
kept manageably
brief
to
facilitate
rapid
turnover;
this approach
would also tend to sustain the subject’s interest in the task, thereby
maximizing the potential
for success
in the screening process.
(U) A
preliminary
survey
of
the
extant
technology
for
attaining
these
objectives indicates
that the most
feasible option would include a video camera,
a video disk
recorder,
a video monitor, and
a Macintosh computer.
The video camera would be used
to
photograph
a
variety
of
target
materials
for
frame-by-frame
inclusion
on
the
video
disk.
Random
access
to
the
target photographs would
be
computer-controlled and
therefore
very
rapid-i.e., on the order of 0.5-second display time.
The disk, monitor, and computer would
comprise
the equipment
actually deployed
to
the screening
site.
Overall,
this equipment
is
relatively inexpensive, portable, and durable.
c.
(U)
Target Selection
\
A wide variety of
target materials
should
be
incorporated onto
the disk
to exercise
the
full potential
range
of
the
subject's abilities.
Candidate
target materials would
include photographs
drawn
from
the following categories:
(1)
natural scenes,
(2)
alphanumeric^,
(3)
technical
sites J
—
v
Zener cards,
and
(5)
the Maimonides
target
set.
A selection of dynamic
(i.e.,
moving video)
targets
has also been suggested.*
A small
subset
of
approximately
five
targets would be selected
from each category
for
inclusion on
the
disk:
this would
tend
to minimize
the potential
for
deviation
from prescribed screening procedures;
it would also enable
greater standardization
for RV performance across
the screened population.
d.
(U) Subject Populations
(U)
Judicious selection of candidate subject populations
is recommended over
the less-efficient and more labor-intensive “shotgun” approach.
One possible guideline, which
has been derived primarily from the observations of RV monitors,
is that a certain richness of the
subject’s vocabulary may be important for a comprehensive debrief of the RV signal.
This would
(U)
This
is not intended to be a comprehensive
list of target categories:
some rmv hp
and V
e
p
d
finpH°
th
Tn
S may beadded as
..the mass screening protocol
is developed, deployed
and refined.
The samecaveat applies to other research items mentioned
in this discussion
Approved For Release 2o£o8/08-rCIA-RDI 396-00789R002200670001-4
Approved For Release 2000/0J/08
: CIA-RBpJ6-00789R002200670001 -4
(U)
tend to imply that subjects should be sought out from groups that have members with superior
verbal
abilities.
(L)
Other candidate populations might include groups whose members exhibit
superior
skills
in drawing,
draftsmanship,
or other visual
abilities.
This approach
is suggested
because pictorial representation
is another rich modality
for debriefing the RV signal.
*
_
A third approach might center on drawing from
populations whose members excel
at pattern recognition or
in
the ability
to discern
a tenuous
signal
line
in
a noisy background.
_
Also subsumed under
this category are groups whose members
show
an aptitude
for
institutional decision-making— i.e.,
what might
be
referred
to
in
the vernacular
as
"playing hunches."
Such groups
might
include,
for example,
police detectives,
businessmen who make consistently
correct decisions
in risky or problematical
ventures,
or
individuals with
a special proclivity for locating oil.
(U) These are but a representative few of the kinds of populations that might
be targeted for screening initially.
It
is anticipated that other promising populations
will emerge
empirically as the screening system
is deployed on a
pilot basis.
e.
(U)
Methodology and Deployment
(U)
Research issues pertaining to screening methodology and deployment
fall
into two principal categories:
(1) manipulation of intra-session variables for arriving at the most
meaningful and efficient screening procedure, and (2) standardization of m/er-session guidelines
for deploying that procedure in a variety of settings.
The
first area focuses primarily on the most
profitable
use
of
the
hardware,
while
the
second
area
emphasizes
standardization
across
screening sessions.
(U)
Primary research
issues concerning the design
of the optimal screening
package include
(1) determination of feedback conditions
(e.g., whether there should be a “no
feedback”
target in each screening session),
(2)
identification of the optimal number of taruets
per session and their randomization
(e.g., whether targets should be presented on a gradient of
complexity, or whether they should be randomly selected), and
(3) determination of the analysis
techniques to be employed
(e.g., forced-choice guess by the subject versus detailed verbal and
Approved For Release 2000/D8/08
: CIA-R£EaA-00789R002200670Q01-4
L
-J
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200670001-4
(U)
visual assessment by an independent
analyst).
Recent developments
in the uses
of
fuzzy
set
theory and
cluster
analysis show promise
for affording "on-line"
analysis of RV on National
Geographic Magazine targets.
(U)
In the second major area of investigation, several preliminary guidelines
have emerged with respect to optimizing inter-session standardization.
First, screening settings
must be chosen
with the aim
of
mitigating a
subject’s performance
anxiety:
a one-on-one
private or semi-private session with a trained monitor
is indicated.
Second, a series of general
instructions must be devised that serve to inform the naive subject as to what the RV task entails.
These instructions must be specific enough to elicit RV performance without biasing the subject
towards any particular RV technology.
Third, monitors must be thoroughly conversant with
a
standard set of screening procedures, in order to minimize idiosyncratic variability in such areas
as feedback to the subject.
Monitors may be required,
for example,
to memorize scripts that
dictate the nature of subject/monitor interactions
for each target.
Scripts might also serve the
function of providing the framework for the systematic elicitation of RV data along a number of
predetermined dimensions—e.g., visual, conceptual, functional, depending on the nature of the
target material.
Fourth,
a standardized questionnaire must be devised to address psychological
parameters.
It would include a section for standard biographical data and a section for questions
drawn from the MBTI and the Psychophysical Research Laboratory’s PIF.
The purpose of the
form would
be
to
investigate,
across
a
large
population,
whether
psychological
self-report
correlates with RV
ability.
If such
correlations were obtained, then
the
questionnaire
might
profitably be used as an
initial pre-screening device.
(U)
All
of
the
research
issues
presented
in
this
discussion
will
be
most
profitably determined and
refined
from
actually
using
the
system.
If possible,
the optimal
approach would
entail
successive
pilot deployments
of
the
screening device
in
a
variety
of
settings.
20.
(U)
Objective
F, Task 8— Host Physiology Conference
V
"~jOn
July
1987,
SRI
International hosted
a*
*
physiology
-
conference
.
In attendance were
D.
Arthur,
Ph.D.
,
and
E.
Flynn
Ph.D from Los Alamos National Laboratory:
S.
Kornguth,
Ph.D.
from
the
Neurology Department
of
the University
of Wisconsin;
R.
Murray,
M.D.
,
Chairman,
the Department
of Medicine,
Michigan State University,
R.
Dickhaut,
Spectra Research
Institute;
M.
Hecker.
Ph.D.,
SRI
International
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP?6-00789R002200670001-4