Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
II INTRODUCTION (U)
A.
(U)
General
(U)
As part of an overall training R&D Task, SRI International has investigated a
number of potential training procedures.
One of these, which
is the focus of this particular
study, involves multistage, coordinate remote viewing.
In this procedure,* coordinates
(latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes, and seconds) are utilized as the targeting
method, which
is structured to proceed through a series of well-defined stages in a particular
order—hypothesized to correspond to stages of increased contact with the target
site.
(S/NF)
In this study, the basic hypotheses of the procedure were investigated under
strict double-blind testing conditions in order to document whether, and to what degree, the
hypothesized training approach provided a viable vehicle for RV technology transfer.
The
DIA COTR in residence selected three individuals from the staff of the SRI Radio Physics
Laboratory.
He tested them for baseline RV performance levels over an initial series of five
sessions each, and then turned them over to the SRI Psychoenergetics Program staff to be
exposed to the theory and application of the procedure in question.
B.
(U)
Description of Procedure
(U) We begin with the basic premise of the training procedure under study: the major
problem with naive attempts to remote view
is that the attempt to visualize a remote
site
tends to stimulate memory and imagination—usually in visual-image forms.
As the RVer
becomes aware of the
first few data bits, there appears to be a largely spontaneous and
undisciplined rational effort to extrapolate and
“fill in the blanks.”
This
is presumably
driven by a need to resolve the ambiguity associated with the fragmentary nature of the
* (U) Modeled after a procedure developed in an earlier program in conjunction with SRI
Consultant Ingo Swann.
- 2 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Releasgj^^^
800240001-7
(u)
emerging perception.
The result
is a premature internal analysis and interpretation on the
part of the RVer,
e.g., an impression of an island
is immediately interpreted as Hawaii.
This
we
call analytical overlay (AOL).
(U)
Our investigation of these overlay patterns suggests a model of RV functioning,
which we have shown schematically in Figure
1.
With the application of a “stimulus”
(e.g.,
the reading of a coordinate), there appears to be a momentary burst of “signal”
that enters
into awareness
(for a few seconds
at most), and then fades away.
The overlays appear to be
triggered
at this point to
fill in the void.
Success in handling this complex process requires
that the RVer learn to “grab” incoming data bits while simultaneously attempting to identify
the overlays as such.
UNCLASSIFIED
FIGURE
(U)
SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF REMOTE VIEWER RESPONSE TO
RV SITUATION
(U)
Observation of this process in the earlier development work suggests that the above
behavior can be learned.
Specifically,
it appears that a RVer being trained in accordance
with procedures developed in that program can be expected to exhibit a performance curve of
the type shown in Figure
2.
In brief,
after being exposed to the basic concepts of the
training procedure, the RVer typically exhibits a short period of spontaneous “first-time”
effect of very-high-quality response
(usually three or four sessions).
This response cannot,
however, be maintained;
it
is followed by a decline to a low level of performance—at which
- 3 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Relea
6-00788R001 800240001 -7
(u)
point substantive learning can begin.
If learning is to take place,
it will go forward from that
point until saturation at some
skill plateau
is reached.
FIGURE
(U)
IDEALIZED PERFORMANCE-OVER-TIME CURVE
(U)
The RV training
is structured to proceed through a series of stages that are
hypothesized to correspond to stages of increased contact with the target
site.
These stages
(described in more detail below) are tutored in a set order.
Presentation of theory
is
followed by a series of practice sessions, taking a few weeks per stage; thus, the RVer moves
up through the stages, concentrating on the elements to be mastered in each stage before
proceeding to the next.
In the early development work,
it was also noted that an
experienced remote viewer applying the techniques that are learned in this procedure tends to
recapitulate the stages in this set order.
The contents of the early stages
(as evolved in the
development work) are as shown in Table
1, and the techniques employed in the stages are
described in the following paragraphs.
- 4 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Relea^j j^Q/^^^^-j^)^6-00788R001 800240001 -7
Table
(U)
STAGES
IN REMOTE VIEWING
Stage
Example
I
Major gestalt
Land surrounded by water,
an island
II
Sensory contact
Cold sensation,
wind-swept
feeling
III
Dimension,
motion,
mobility
Rising up,
panoramic view,
island outline
IV
General qualitative analytical
aspects
Scientific research,
live
organisms
UNCLASSIFIED
I*
(U)
Stage
I (Major Gestalt)
(U)
In Stage
I, the RVer
is trained to provide a quick-reaction response to the
reading of
site coordinates by a monitor.
The response takes the form of an immediate,
primitive “squiggle” on the paper
(called an ideogram), which captures an overall
motion/feeling of the gestalt of the
site
(e.g., wavy /fluid for water).
Note that this response
is essentially kinesthetic, rather than visual.
2.
(U)
Stage II (Sensory Contact)
(U)
In Stage
II, the RVers are trained to become sensitive to physical sensations
associated with the
site,
i.e., sensations they might experience
if they were physically there
(heat,
cold, wind, sounds,
smells,
tactile sensations, and the like).
Again,
this response
is
essentially nonvisual in nature
(although color sensations may arise as a legitimate Stage
II
response).
Of course,
in both Stage
I and Stage
II,
visual images may emerge spontaneously.
In that case they are not suppressed, but simply noted and labeled as AOLs.
- 5 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Release ommU^Sit^0^6 -0078^00 ^ 800240001 -7
3.
(U)
Stage III (Dimension, Motion, and Mobility)
(U)
Whereas in Stage
I and Stage
II viewing, data appear to emerge
(typically)
as
fragmented data bits,
in Stage
III, we observe the emergence of a broader concept of the
site.
With Stage
I and
II data forming a foundation, contact with the
site appears sufficiently
strengthened that the viewer begins to have an overall appreciation of the
site as a whole
(which we label “aesthetic impact”)-
Dimensional aspects such as
size,
distance, and motion
begin to come into play, and emphasis
is placed on generating configurational outlines and
sketches
(e.g., the outline of an island).
4.
(U)
Stage IV (General Qualitative Analytical Aspects)
(U)
Stages
I through
III are directed toward recognition of the overall gestalt and
physical configuration of a target
site; Stage IV
is designed to provide information as to
function,
i.e., the purpose of the
activities being carried out
at the
site.
(S/NF)
Because of the apparent increased contact with the
site that occurs in Stage
III
(a “widening of the aperture,”
as
it were), data of an analytical nature begin to emerge.
As observed in the earlier development work, contained in Stage IV data are elements that
go beyond the
strictly observational, such as ambience
(military,
religious, technical);
cultural
factors
(nationality); and function or purpose
(agriculture, research, weapons development).
Thus, Stage IV viewing transcends simple physical description of what
is visible to the eye,
to
take into account human intention.
Because, from an operational point of view,
it
is the
latter that
is typically a matter of intelligence concern,
Stage IV
is considered to be the
threshold for crossover into operational
utility.
(U)
In Stages
I through
III, information
is collected in the form of ideograms,
their motion and feeling
(S-I), sensations
at the
site
(S-II), and sketches that result from
expanded contact with the
site
(S-III).
These various “carrier”
signals are individual in
nature, and special techniques have been developed to handle each in turn—more or
less in
serial fashion.
In Stage IV
(as designed in the earlier development work), the RVer
is
trained to accumulate data bits in no
less than eight separate categories,
in parallel,
in
addition to processing additional ideograms and sketches.
These range from broad categories
of sensations and dimensional references, through specific qualities
(physical/technological
detail,
cultural ambience, and functional significance), and includes tracking of the analytical
- 6 -
—occncT
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Releasgj^^(j8^:^|^g|J6-00788R001 800240001 -7
(u)
overlay line.
To keep these separate signal lines on track requires exceptional control of
session structure—an ability acquired in the lengthy S-I through S—III training period.
With
these elements under control, the Stage IV data-bit-acquisition procedures can then be used
to build up an interpretation as to the
site’s activities and functions.
- 7 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Release
6-00788R001 800240001 -7
III
METHOD OF APPROACH (U)
A.
(U)
General Design
(U)
The purpose of this study was to collect data on the RV procedure described in
the previous section,
in order to determine
its viability as a training methodology.
In the
overall design of the study, emphasis
is placed on adherence to
strict double-blind protocols
in the collection of the data, and on the use of objective analytical techniques in the
evaluation of the data, so that documentation and authentication are as objective as possible.
B.
(U)
Target Site Preparation
(U)
Because the RV training procedure involves targeting on
sites around the world
(given only the geographical coordinates of those sites), an important preparation step
is the
generation of target materials.
An SRI analyst charged with this responsibility prepares the
target materials, which consist of an index card with
site coordinates
(latitude and longitude
in degrees, minutes, and seconds), and a folder with site information.
(The latter provides
feedback at session end;
for the purpose of training and evaluation,
sites are chosen for
which feedback information in some form
is available.)
Site/feedback materials consist of
more than 5000 map sites (U.S.G.S.
Series E maps,
G.N.I.S.; Army Map Agency maps;
World Aeronautical Charts; atlases), and over 1500 National Geographic Magazine
sites.
These materials are continually updated.
C.
(U)
Session Protocol
(U)
At the begining of the session, the monitor and RVer enter the RV session
chamber.
The monitor has in his possession targeting information (coordinates) written on
an index card, but
is kept blind to the target
site, thus eliminating the possibility of
cueing—overt or subliminal.
The experiment
is therefore of the double-blind type.
The
monitor’s role in the session
is limited to:
(1) seeing that the appropriate materials are
available (pen, paper, audio tapes
if the session
is to be taped, and so forth);
(2) reading the
- 8 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Release 2000i02/Qg_L QIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
(u)
coordinates as a prompter for the RVer; and
(3) making notes for later discussion.
Following the session, the monitor obtains the target folder and provides feedback to the
RVer, going over details of the session to provide further instruction
if needed.
D.
(U)
Baseline Data
(S/NF)
For the
first step of the study, the DIA COTR-in-residence selected three
individuals from the
staff of the SRI Radio Physics Laboratory and designated them as
trainees
for this
effort.
As described in the Introduction section, he then tested them for
baseline RV performance levels over a series of five sessions each.
They were then turned
over to the project
staff for training.
E.
(U)
Training
(U)
The training phase consists of a series of lectures by a training instructor/monitor,
interspersed with double-blind RV sessions.
In the lectures, the principles of a particular
stage under consideration are thoroughly discussed.
In addition,
a number of practical
exercises are carried out, such as
drills in sketching, exercises in listing possible sensations
one could experience
at a
site, and so forth.
F.
(U)
Data Collection
(U)
Based on previous experience in the development phase of this particular training
track,
it was decided that
it would be useful to collect
at least 30 sessions with each of the
trainees.
In the study, two of the viewers did contribute 30
trials (#309 and #694), while a
third (#558) contributed
43.
The trials were collected over a four-month period
at a rate
that never exceeded five per day per RVer, and typically no more than two per day per
RVer.
For
all RVers, the training level reached was the beginning to middle of Stage
III.
G.
(U)
Data Evaluation
(U) A key element in determining the efficacy of the training procedure under
investigation
lies in the evaluation protocols.
Given the nature of the RV product, which
consists of a narrative description plus drawings and sketches,
it has been necessary to
- 9 -
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Releas
[6-00788R001 800240001 -7
(u)
i/Q8
expend considerable effort over the
last decade
(in our laboratory and elsewhere) to develop
objective,
quantitative measures of RV performance.
(U)
In brief,
early evaluation procedures consisted of some form of subjective
(although blind)
analysis procedure in which,
for a given series of RV trials,
a judge was
asked to rank order the RV response packets against each of the
sites used in the series.
For example,
in a ten—trial series,
a judge would blind—rank—order
all ten transcripts as to
how they matched Target No.
1, then Target No.
2, and so forth.
In a good
series, the
transcript generated in response to a particular target would
fall near the top of the
rank-order
list for that target.
An exact
statistical calculation could then be made as to the
probability of obtaining the resulting distribution of rank orderings by chance.*
(U)
The next step in sophistication came with the development
(at SRI)
of concept
analysis,
in which specific concepts in each transcript were matched against specific attributes
of each target
site.
We could then determine not just generally whether RV functioning had
taken place and to what degree, but could evaluate on a concept—by—concept basis the degree
of match between transcripts and
sites.
t
(U)
The idea of concept analysis was taken to
its logical conclusion in the efforts of R.
Jahn,
et
al., Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory
at Princeton University.
A
generalized 30-element descriptor
list was developed in which,
for each target site and for
each transcript,
a particular element on the
list
(e.g.,
significant presence of water) could be
checked off as present or absent.
Thus, the output of any given transcript was a 30-bit
code, which could then be compared against 30—bit codes associated with various targets.
The result
is a complex, but meaningful,
analysis system where transcripts can be compared
against targets on a completely computer-automated basis—including direct matches
(transcripts against associated
sites) and cross matches
(for controls). Furthermore, given that
the abundance or rarity of a given element in a target pool
is known, the details of the
analysis system can take into account that the correct description of a rare element
is to be
*(U) See, for example, H. Puthoff, R. Targ, and E. May, “Experimental Psi Research:
Implications for Physics,” in “The Role of Conciousness in the Physical World,” ed. R. Jahn,
AAAS Selected Symposium 57, Westview Press,
Inc., Boulder, CO (1981).
t(U) E. May “A Remote Viewing Evaluation Protocol (U),” Final Report, SRI/GF-0247, SRI
International, Menlo Park, CA (December 1982; Revised July 1983), SECRET/NOFORN.
- 10 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Releas<^j((j^/j^jglj^l^6-00788R001 800240001 -7
(u)
given more weight than that of a common element. * A descriptor-list net
is somewhat
coarse in
its ability to represent a target, and therefore constitutes a very conservative
measure of target content; the advantages of the attendant analysis techniques are
felt to
constitute a useful trade-off.
(U)
The procedure described in the above paragraph has now been modified and
extended by the SRI research team to provide not only measures of transcript/target
correlation, but also additional quantitative measures of overall performance, such as
accuracy,
reliability, and overall figure of merit. f
This modified procedure
is the one
employed in the evaluation of the results of the training programs under study, including the
Track
I effort that
is the focus of this particular study.
(U)
In our study,
a
list of 20 descriptors was developed to characterize both target
sites and transcripts.
As opposed to the
list developed by Jahn to represent local urban
target
sites,
this
list
is especially tailored to be descriptive of a wide variety of climes,
locales
and conditions,
as might be encountered in remote viewing of sites
all around the globe.
The descriptor
list check sheet
is given in Appendix A.
(U)
The
list of sites used as targets in the Track
I Training Task
is given in Appendix
B.
Included in the
list
is a folder I.D. number, the name of the
site,
its coordinates, and a
seven-digit octal number representing the information content of that
site.
To obtain the
latter, an SRI analyst filled out the descriptor
list check sheet, entering yes or no as to the
presence or absence of each of the 20 elements on the
list; the 20-bit binary number thus
generated was then converted into
its octal equivalent for ease of computer entry.
(U) R< Jahn, et al., “Analytical Judging Procedure for Remote Viewing Experiments,” Jour.
Parapsychology, Vol.
44, No.
e, pp. 207-231 (September 1980).
t(U) E. May, et al., “An Automated RV Evaluation Procedure (U),” Final Report (in press),
SRI International, Menlo Park, CA (December 1984), SECRET/NOFORN.
-
11 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Relea^|^^/^^jC^-j^^96-00788R001 800240001 -7
IV
RESULTS (U)
A.
(U)
RV Session Records
(U)
The chronological record of sessions for each of the RVers
is included as
Appendix C.
Each of the sessions, designated by a XOOO-series number (Column
1), has
associated with
it a code (Column 2), which
is the octal equivalent of the 20-bit binary
number that represents the RVer response
(transcript) content.
That number was generated
for each transcript as was done for the
sites, with the SRI analyst kept blind as to the
associated
site so as to maintain objectivity.
(U)
In Column
3 the folder I.D. number
(target
site number)
is
listed, followed in
Column 4 by the code
(octal number) representing the target-site content.
Columns
through 7 contain the results of primary interest:
accuracy,
reliability and figure of merit.
The “Accuracy” column gives the percentage of bits representing the target that the RVer
correctly identifies, and thus represents an assessment of the accuracy of the target
description.
The “Reliability” column addresses a
slightly different measure, the percentage
of response bits that are correct, which indicates how reliable the RVer's remarks are.
As to
the difference between accuracy and reliability, RVers might render encyclopedic descriptions
that cover
all possible cases,
in which case their accuracy would be high, but their reliability
low.
Conversely, they might say but one thing
(correctly), which would give
a high
reliability
factor for what was
said, but would not constitute a fully complete and accurate description
of the
site.
What
is desired,
of course,
is that both measures be high, and this
is what
is
tested for by the “Figure of Merit,”—the product of the accuracy and reliability measures.
A more detailed discussion of these issues can be found in the “RV Automated Evaluation
Procedure” report referenced earlier.
- 12 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001800240001-7
Approved For Releas^|)^(j8/^^j^||ig6-00788R001 800240001 -7
B.
(U)
RVer Performance
1.
(U)
Figure-of-Meril (FM) Plots
(U)
As a measure of RV training performance over time, the figures of merit (FM)
for each of the RVers are plotted, session by session,
in Figure
3.
The
first observation to
be noted
is that in each case, the empirical distribution of data points provides evidence in
support of the predicted performance curve of Figure
2; that
is,
it consists of an
initial short
region containing high-quality
first—time effect (FTE),” followed by a region of slowly—rising
growth in RVer performance as intermixed practice and instruction proceeds.
Specifically,
in
these data
sets, the FTE region
is characterized by an
initial region containing “outlier”
point (s)—points that
lie outside the main distribution—which include the highest-valued
point in the entire data
set, followed by a drop that
is the largest in the data
set.
This
is
then followed by a curve which, on the average, climbs steadily as the bulk of the training
proceeds.
(U)
As a
first step, we examine whether these observations meet the requirements
for statistical significance.
Given previous observations that the FTE region typically contains
fewer than five data points,
a significant
statistic
is generated even by the conservative
calculation as to the probability that,
in these three cases, the highest—valued point in each
data set should occur within,
say, the
first ten points
(p = 0.026).
Furthermore,
in
all three
cases, the separations of the points in the FTE regions from the least-squares-fit lines that
define the slow-growth curves, independently reach
statistical significance for six of the eight
points in question—a result which
is
itself statistically significant
(p = 4.0 exp
[-7]).
In
addition, examination of the distribution of the magnitudes of the differential drops over each
of the data
sets, shows that the magnitudes of the differential drops taken to separate the
FTE and slow-growth regions independently reach statistical significance in two of the three
cases
(just missing
it in the third—again being statistically significant
(p = 7.2 exp
[-3]).
Thus, the data (taken separately and together) provide support for the predicted performance
curve, and indicate that the separation of the data into the FTE and the slow-growth regions
is both justified and appropriate.
- 13 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
FIGURE
OF
MERIT
(FM)
FIGURE
OF
MERIT
(FM)
FIGURE
OF
MERIT
(FM|
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
UNCLASSIFIED
#,, FIRST-TIME'
r EFFECT
UNCLASSIFIED
FIGURE
(U)
RV TRAINING PERFORMANCE
- 14 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Releasj^j|^(g/^g^Fj|fjJ6-00788R001 800240001 -7
2.
(U)
Results
(U)
With regard to the slow-growth region, the slopes of
all three RVers are
positive,
in line with prediction; however, only one reaches
statistical significance
at the p =
0.05
level,
that of RVer #309.
As a second measure, the difference in the FM means of the
baseline- and training-data sets
(indicated by the shaded areas on the
left side of the plots
in Figure
3)
is in favor of the learning hypothesis for
all three RVers, but again reaches
statistical significance only in the case of RVer #309
(p =
1.3 exp
[-3]).
Thus, support
for the efficacy of the Track
I Training effort
lies primarily with RVer #309.
These results
are summarized in Table
2 below.
Table
(U)
TRAINING RESULTS
Slope
Training
(Baseline/Training)
Mean FM
#309
0.008
0.096/0,352
p - 0.05*
p
=
. 3
exp 10
[-3]
#558
0.003
0.372/0.378
p = 0.2 t
-i-
co
O
a
#694
0.004
0.252/0.372
p = 0
. 2 ^
p
= 0.15*
Statistically significant
^Nonsignificant
UNCLASSSIFIED
-
15 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
Approved For Release 200^^|^^DP96-00788R001 800240001 -7
V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A.
(U)
Summary of Purpose and Approach
(U)
The purpose of this SRI study was to investigate
a particular approach to RV
training, with special emphasis on evaluation and authentication under
strict double-blind
conditions.
The procedure involves targeting on the target
site using geographical
coordinates;
it
is structured to proceed through a number of well-defined stages that have
been hypothesized to correspond to stages of increased contact with the
site.
(S/NF)
As the
first step in the study, the DIA COTR-in-residence selected three
individuals from the
staff of the SRI Radio Physics Laboratory to act as trainees. A five-trial
RV series was carried out with each RVer (before training instruction)
to serve as a measure
of baseline performance, and psychological profile
tests were administered to provide data for
a separate selection/screening task.
(U)
At that point training instruction began, including RV practice sessions.
The
sessions were performed under
strict double-blind protocols, that
is, neither trainee nor
experimenter/monitor were knowledgeable
as to the identity of the target
site; feedback was
provided to the trainee only after the entire session was completed.
The training continued
over a four-month period, with interleaved instruction and practice, progressing up to the
beginning-to-mid Stage
III in the nomenclature of the procedure under study. A minimum
of thirty trials each was collected from each RVer.
(U)
For the purposes of data evaluation, an objective procedure involving
computer-automated target/transcript matching was developed.
The procedure,
a
modification of one developed
at Princeton University’s Engineering Anomalies Research
Laboratory,
is based on the reduction of site and transcript descriptions to a 20-bit code
each. A 20-question descriptor-list sheet was used to obtain the codes describing the
presence or absence of particular elements
(e.g., water).
The descriptor-list sheets are
filled
out in the blind
(without knowledge as to the corresponding site or transcript)
in order to
maintain objectivity.
Analysis then continues on the basis of computer tabulation of matches
- 16 -
QECRCT
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800240001 -7