Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
IV CONCLUSIONS
Several important factors must be noted when assessing the overall efficacy of the
PAS
in this study.
It
is important to observe,
for example, that the novice RV training results
are preliminary;
final training results are not officially scheduled for delivery until the end of
the
first quarter of FY
1987.
Although continuation of training with the original nine
participants at this juncture would destroy the double-blind aspect of the PAS study,
a
workable solution to this problem has been identified—namely,
to continue training with a
new group comprised of the most promising few candidates out of the original group of nine,
augmented with new candidates to whom the monitors and evaluators are blind with respect to
PAS pattern.
The explanation for the observed lack of significance
in
the
preliminary novice RV training results
is presently unknown.
One
hypothesis would suggest
that
the training procedures are
simply not
proving effective.
This appears unlikely,
however,
given
that
significance
was achieved with novice
trainees using the
same procedures
in FY 1984.
A
second possibility
is
that
training needs
to be of
a
longer duration.*
This hypothesis
can be tested by observing whether
significance
is achieved
with
the selected viewers
from this study who continue
training.
The PAS
results for this study are encouraging and provide
a conceptual replication
of the earlier FY 1984 PAS work.
In the earlier study, the PAS was used successfully to
predict the top performer out of each of three different training groups.
In FY 1986, the
PAS has been used effectively to predict two out of the top three performers in a single
training group.
As an empirically driven system, the PAS Reference Groups experience
continual refinement as the PAS data base increases.
It
is anticipated, therefore, that the
predictive power of the PAS
will increase accordingly.
with somcthin^°efse
'^e^th
appar6nt indication that aspects of the training results are correlated
- 22 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
Appendix
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATOR (MBTI)
- 23 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) provides personality type categorizations
according to the manner in which an individual answers a series of test questions.
Questions
are designed to
elicit preferences and are typically of the form:
“Are you inclined to (A) value sentiment more than logic, or (B) value logic more
than sentiment?”
The following
is an excerpt from the book,
Gifts Differing , 6 * which provides a very
skeletal overview of the four preference scales that are combined to form 16 distinct
personality types:
...personality
is structured by four preferences concerning the use of perception
and judgement:
Preference for
i
i
Affects a person’s choice
El
Extraversion or
Introversion
To focus the dominant (favor-
ite) process on the outer
world or on the world of ideas
SN
Sensing or
Intuition
To use one kind of percep-
tion instead of the other
when either could be used
TF
Thinking or
Feeling
To use one kind of judg-
ment instead of the other
when either could be used
JP
Judgement or
Perception
To use the judging or the
perceptive attitude for deal-
ing with the outer world
Under this theory, people create their “type” through exercise of their individual
preferences regarding perception and judgement.
The interests,
values, needs, and
habits of mind that naturally result from any set of preferences tend to produce
a
recognizable set of traits and potentialities...
Individuals can, therefore, be described in part by stating their four preferences,
such as ENTP.
Such a person can be expected to be different from others in ways
characteristic of his or her type...”
An even more thorough discourse on the MBTI can be found in:
Myers,
I.
B., and McCauIley, M. H.,
Manual, A Guide to
the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,
Consulting Psychologists
Press,
Inc., Palo Alto,
California (1985).
- 24 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6
REFERENCES
1.
Saunders, D, and May,
E. C., “Personnel Identification and Selection,
” Final Re-
port, SRI Project 6600, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (December 1984)
Winne,
J.
F. and Gittinger,
J. W., “An Introduction to the Personality Assessment
System,” Journal of Clinical Psychology, Monograph Supplement 38
(1973)
3.
Rosenthal,
R., Meta-analytic Procedures for Social Research, Sage Publications, Beverly
Hills,
California
(1984)
4.
Humphrey,
B., May, E.
C., Trask, V. V„ and Thomson, M.
J., “Remote Viewing
Evaluation Techniques, (U)”
Final Report, SRI Project 1291, SRI International, Menlo
Park, California (October 1986)
5.
Schmeidler, G.
R., “A Possible Commonality Among Gifted Psychics,” Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research,
Vol.
76, No.
1, pp. 53-59
(1982)
6.
Myers,
I.
B., with Myers,
P.
B.,
Gifts Differing, Consulting Psychologists Press,
Inc.,
Palo Alto, California (1983)
- 25 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200010001-6