Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP9«&G6R£$G310001-4
Final Report
April 1982
AUDIOLINGUISTIC CORRELATIONS WITH THE QUALITY
OF REMOTE VIEWING SESSIONS
(U)
By:
EDWIN
C. MAY
MICHAEL H.
L. HECKER
SGI J
Prepared for:
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
D.C.
20301
Attention: HBHHHHH
DT-1A
CONTRACT M DA903-8 1 -C-0292
SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM FOR GRILL FLAME.
RESTRICT DISSEMINATION TO ONLY INDIVIDUALS WITH VERIFIED ACCESS.
NOT RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo
Park,
California
94025
U.S.A.
(415) 326-6200
Cable:
SRI INTL MPK
TWX:
910-373-2046
iInternational
1 -^ipboved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0'
8R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
iii
LIST OF TABLES
iii
I
OBJECTIVE
II
INTRODUCTION
A.
Statement of Problem
B.
Possible Solution
C.
Historical Perspective of Audio Analysis
Techniques
•
•
III
METHOD OF APPROACH
A.
Selection of Data Base
B.
Audiolinguistic Protocol
C.
Scoring the Utterances.
.
1.
Preprocessing the Utterances
2.
Target-Independent Analysis
.
Target-Dependent Analysis
IV
RESULTS.
V
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR COORDINATE D-3
(DOLL)
B
SCORE SHEETS FOR THE "DOLL" TRIAL IN THE "COORDINATE
BOX EXPERIMENT"
ii
occncT
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
-SECRET
ILLUSTRATIONS
4x4 Array of Objects used in Box Coordinate Experiment
.
.
TABLES
Quality Rating for a Concept
that
has been Identified
at the Site
Visual Functional Centrality Rating Scale
for Target
Sub-Element
Audiolinguistic Analysis Results
.
B-l
Audiolinguistic Category:
Present Time
(PT)
B-2
Audiolinguistic Category:
Debriefing
(DB)
B-3
Audiolinguistic Category:
Analysis
(AN)
iii
GECKO*
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/0^EjflfiiPWMaBR001 30031 0001 -4
I
OBJECTIVE
The objective
of this program was
to determine the feasibility of
developing audio analysis techniques that
can, under operational
conditions,
separate correct from incorrect statements recorded during remote viewing
(RV)
experiments.
OCCRCf
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/0^pj(5®|mfl788R001 30031 0001 -4
II
INTRODUCTION
A.
Statement
of Problem
During a typical RV session,
the subject produces
a wealth of spoken
material,
but only some
of
this material relates
to the chosen target.
Unfortunately it
is
difficult
to identify the target-related material
without
a priori knowledge of which times
the subject was engaged in
accurate
RV.
The question posed in this study was whether
it
is possible
to use audio analysis techniques
to determine when a subject
is accurately
describing the intended target.
B.
Possible Solution
Careful
listening to tapes
of sessions with a single subject suggests
that
some target-related material was uttered in a different tone of voice
than other material
(e.g.,
conversation with the monitor).
For this subject
accurate remote viewing appears associated with certain changes
in speech
behavior,
including speaking more softly,
more slowly,
longer pauses, and
with a dream-like quality.
In general,
if
a subject were to exhibit
a particular
set
of speech
changes whenever target-related material was being produced,
the analyst
could use these speech changes
to separate the related from the unrelated
material without knowledge of the
target.
We explored the relationship
between changes
in speech behavior and the accuracy of target descriptions
in this
study.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07^MOJ9MB788R001 30031 0001 -4
C.
Historical Perspective of Audio Analysis
Techniques
Earlier research has
shown that
changes
in speech behavior can reflect
subtle physiological changes such as
those resulting from stress
or disease.
Two studies representing
this research will
be described to provide a
context for the present study of speech
changes observed during RV sessions.
These studies
illustrate different approaches
to speech analysis.
The first study was designed to examine how speech behavior may be
influenced by task-induced stress
. 1
An arithmetic task requiring
a verbal
response was repeatedly administered to each of ten male subjects.
The
difficulty of the
task was varied from trial to trial:
on some occasions
the subject was obviously stressed, and on other occasions
he was relatively
relaxed.
Contrasting responses
containing
the same test phrase were
com-
pared by means
of
critical listening and instrumental analysis.
Listeners were able to discriminate between the responses representing
the stress and control conditions for many subjects.
Level measurements
showed that three subjects
spoke more softly and one subject
spoke more
loudly under stress.
Measurements
of
fundamental frequency provided
similar results:
some subjects
raised their vocal pitch,
others
lowered
their vocal pitch,
and still others exhibited unique pitch contours when
the task became stressful.
An extensive comparison of spectrograms
demonstrated many other stress-related changes
in the speech signal.
Temporal and spectral irregularities were observed in the acoustic pulses
that
are generated in the
larynx during speech production.
Stress also
affected the precision with which particular speech sounds were articulated.
The second study was
concerned with speech changes
that
are related
to cerebrovascular disorders
. 2
? 3
The purpose of
the study was
to develop
a subjective method of
speech analysis that
could be used to identify
persons who have suffered
a minor stroke.
Because stroke affects
speech
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 :^^^||^1^88R001 30031 0001 -4
III
METHOD OF APPROACH
A
.
Selection of Data Base
To determine
a useful set
of audiolinguistic
(A/L)
criteria,
it was
important
in this
pilot investigation to work with
a RV data base that
met two conditions:
(1)
The data base had been independently analyzed
by "blind"
judging procedures.
(2)
The RV targets had to be well-defined.
The first requirement defined the minimum assessment
standard;
namely,
any A/L technique had to perform at
least
as well
as
blind judging procedui
The second requirement allowed for an unambiguous element-by-element
comparison between target information and RV-generated data.
To meet
these requirements
,
an existing data base from earlier SRI experiments
was used.
In an early attempt
to assess
the nature
of
’'abstract*'
targeting,
Subject 504 was
the only participant in the "Coordinate Box Experiment."
The target material was
a collection of
16 small dissimilar objects,
placed one each in
a
x
4 matrix array.
Each cell
of
this
matrix was
a
cube measuring approximately one
foot on
a side.
Subject
504 was targeted
with only
a row and column address and asked to describe the object
at
that
location.
The experiment
consisted of
six trials.
A complete
description of
this experiment can be found elsewhere.
The overall result
derived from blind
judging analysis was
significant
Two important
features
of this experiment were
(1)
the targets were
well defined
(Figure
1) and
(2)
the target-transcript
correspondences
SECRET
STD a
T£ir
tblh.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release ONC TASSIFIED OO” 6 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300310001-4 4 x 4 ARRAY OF OBJECTS USED IN BOX COORDINATE EXPERIMENT UNCLASSIFIED 4 x 4 ARRAY OF OBJECTS USED IN BOX COORDINATE EXPERIMENT (U) FIGURE 1
Approved For Release 2000/08/07^g£££fe788R001 30031 0001 -4
ranged from excellent
to rather poor.
These two features allowed for a
sensitive test
of the A/L procedure described below.
B.
Audiolinguistic Protocol
Three out of
the six trials
from the Coordinate Box Experiment were
chosen for study.
They represented the best
correspondence
(doll target),
an intermediate
level of
correspondence
(book target),
and
a poor corre-
spondence
(plant
target).
A verbatim transcript was produced from each
trial
(a sample transcript,
the one for the best-correspondence
case,
is
shown in Appendix A).
First,
the utterances were sequentially numbered
for ease
of reference.
Then,
on
a blind basis,
each utterance was
labeled as belonging to one of
four categories,
defined on the basis
of A/L characteristics
as
listed below.
The first
category,
Present Time
(PT)
,
is defined as that characterized
by a slow,
dream-like utterance that
is usually preceded by a pause.
Sentences tend to be
in the present tense,
and are typified by
"I feel
"I see...," or "There
is
...."
The second category,
debriefing
(DB)
is
defined to be that charac-
terized by initial excitement and a higher vocal effort.
There
is
frequently an announcement of debriefing such as,
"I
just got
a flash
.
.
. ."
Debriefing may be characterized by present
or past tense statements,
like
"I feel
...,"
"I saw
...,"
or "There
is
(was)
. ...”
Although this
is
similar to PT,
the voice quality is considerably different.
The third category, analysis
(AN).,
is defined to be characterized by
statements
that
contai n analogies and associations with respect to an
object,
e.g.,
"It
looks
like
...,"
or "it reminds
me of
...”
Utterances
that
contain generalizations with respect to an object
(e.g.,
"It must
be
some kind of
a
...")
are also considered to be analysis.
OCCRCj-
CF\r&50R'
IES
*
(PtzeFWS)
I
oebP-iEP-
l.WG
e*are
utcmer
\jocm_
NJftLOCiV
f\ssocift.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: Afiffi||ffiab38R001 30031 0001 -4
Finally,
the fourth category,
conversation
(CO),
consists
of
questions asked of the experimenter,
answers
in response to non-task
related questions
by the experimenter, and general statements directed
to the experimenter.
The voice quality in this category is matter-of-
fact and colloquial.
HON)
C.
Scoring the Utterances
The utterances were scored in two separate ways:
(1)
by a target-
dependent scoring procedure and
(2)
by a target-independent method.
Both
techniques
share a common preprocessing, which
is described below.
.
Preprocessing the Utterances
The conversation category was
first eliminated for all the
analysis
done
in this
study.
For each of the three remaining A/L categories,
PT,
DB, and AN,
each utterance was reduced to one or more concepts.
A
concept
is technically defined as
a short
phrase that best represents
the
idea incorporated in the utterance.
The
concepts are then edited to remove
any redundance with the category.
A zero in the duplication column in
Appendix B indicates
that
a particular concept was ignored because
it was
redundant.
The resulting
lists
of
concepts were then analyzed by a target-
dependent procedure and by
a target-independent method.
The following
analyses were conducted for each of the three responses
chosen for this
study.
FOR*
2 .
Target -Independent Analysis
In the target-independent analysis,
a simple
count of
the
number of
nonredundant
concepts
in each category is
computed.
It was
hypothesized that
the percent
of PT statements would correlate with the
blind judging results and thus
could serve
as
a predictor of RV quality.
TN P£
MOftLNSlS
uo/
HYPOTHE-
SIS
0CCRCT
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For^Ksase 2000/08/07 :^^jgj^Q^788R001 30031 Q.
\
-r-Vv
#
<#
^
From these summations,
the percent
PT is
calculated from
%PT = No
. (PT)
/
[No. (PT)
+ No.(DB)]
U
( 1 )
where No,(PT)
and No
# (DB)
are the number of
PT and DB concepts,
respectively.
It must be noted the %PT can be
calculated without any knowledge of the
target
,
UOVW
derwed
NSWMsr
.
Target-Dependent Analysis
Following an idea first proposed by Targ et
al
,
,
a detailed
target-dependent analysis was devised.
With
a response conceptualized in
rspe
accordance with the above guidelines,
the target-dependent analysis
proceeds in three steps:
(1)
Binary determination—Each concept
is assigned a one
if
some element
in the target appears
to correspond to the
concept
in question.
The
concept
is assigned
a zero
otherwise.
There
is
no implied evaluation at
this point,
but
if there
is
a correspondence,
the identified element
must be explicitly noted.
(2)
Quality evaluation—A quality evaluation is
made for
each concept
that has
been assigned
a one from Step
(1)
above.
The evaluation is made on a one-to-f ive-point
scale shown in Table
1.
FOiL
QLV-
pEe&ervr
(3)
Centrality evaluation—Each concept that
has been assigned
a one from Step
(1)
above
is also evaluated with respect to
the centrality of the corresponding target element*
Centrality
is expressed as
a number between one and five
(Table 2).
This numeric assignment
is made according
to the element's
importance
to the target as
a whole
and
is
based on target information only.
*
foe.
pFesenr
The scores
from these three
steps
are then multiplied together
to
form a
composite score
(maximum of 25)
for each concept
in each response.
Appendix
B is
a complete example of this procedure
for one of the three
responses,
i.e.,
for which the target was
a small
rag doll
(Figure
1).
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 :^iA-£QPagaQ0788R001 30031 0001 -4
Table
QUALITY RATING FOR A CONCEPT
THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THE SITE
(Specific Target Sub-element)
Table
VISUAL FUNCTIONAL CENTRALITY RATING SCALE
FOR TARGET SUB-ELEMENT
(1)
Present,
but
a trivial or hardly noticeable feature
(2)
Minor feature,
could be overlooked,
not
central
(3)
Prominant,
but
not central
(4)
Strong,
central, visual feature,
can not be missed
(5)
Immediately strikes the
eye as
central.
Only one
element gets
this rating.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07^J^RDMtMJ^8R001 30031 0001 -4
'V
HOU-3
cAft
Be. 0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
SECI1ET
V
CONCLUSIONS
This
pilot investigation was
conducted on the basis
of
a detailed
analysis
of
three trials from a single subject.
Therefore,
it
is premature
to conclude with certainty to what degree
the particular A/L analysis
technique used with this
subject
can be generalized.
It
is possible,
however,
to conclude that
the A/L technique
is basically productive
in
its approach.
In particular the observed correlation of
the target-
independent analysis with previous blind
judging results
is highly
encouraging
.
As
the A/L analysis technique evolves
further,
a single
set
of A/L
criteria
is
not expected to
be applicable across
subjects;
rather,
for
the operational setting,
in all
likelihood
a subject-specific set
of
criteria must be developed.
In summary,
it
should be emphasized that,
(1)
at
a
minimum,
some
improvement
in the RV product
can be immediately realized by rejecting all
analytical
(AN)
statements;
(2)
beyond that,
a full audio-linguistic
(A/L)
analysis
of utterances appears
to further differentiate correct
from incorrect statements
generated in RV sessions.
\sr T\me
vottfvr
S CCI1ET
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
\
S8R001 30031 0001 -4
REFERENCES
1,
Hecker, M.H.L.
,
Stevens, K #
N.
,
von Bismarck,
G.
,
and Williams,
C.
E.,
"Manifestations
of Task-Induced Stress
in the Acoustic
Speech Signal/'
J, Acoust.
Soc. Amer
.
,
Vol.
44,
pp.
993-1001
(1968).
2,
Hecker,
and Kreul
,
E.
J.
,
"Research on Speech Changes
Related
to Disease," Final Report,
Projects
7742 and 8853,
Stanford Research
Institute,
Menlo Park,
CA
(April
1974).
3,
Bell,
D.
W,
and
Poza
,
F.,
"Discrimination between Stroke Patients
and Normal Speakers
on the Basis
of Speech Attributes Observed in
Spectrograms," Final Report,
Project
3954,
Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park,
CA
(February 1976).
4,
Targ
,
R,
,
Puthoff,
H,
E., Humphrey,
B.
S .
, and Tart,
C,
T.
,
"inves-
tigations
of Target Acquisition," Research in Parapsychology
,
pp.
122-124
(1979).
5,
Targ,
R.
,
May,
E.,
Puthoff, H
#
,
and Hecker,
M.
,
Interim Technical
Report
(Covering the period 20 July 1981 through
4 August
1981)
SRI
Project
3279,
SRI
International, Menlo Park,
CA
(August
1981),
SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 200(V(|BiQrir(l/^l»^(ni»l|M31300310001-4
Appendix A
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR COORDINATE D-3
(DOLL)
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000ONCLASSfflft?
1300310001-4
Appendix A
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR COORDINATE D-3
(DOLL)
Utterance
Number
M
k
M
«/3
M
JA
P-
M
4 +
M
f
M
'Q
M
M
^9
^
M
Ai
?
M
, Utterance
Well
,
I saw right away the butterfly again
Butterfly?
In one
of the experiments
I
drew what
I thought was
a bow-
tie
, what's what
is
looked
like;
butterfly
Uh-huh
It
feels
like material, velvety something;
it’s,
it’s
a
plushy feeling
of silk
Uh-huh
If
you ask
me,
it's
of an artificial flower™
Uh-huh
Dark
.
.
.
colored
Uh-huh
Dark brown or dark
[mole]
or
...
some dark color
O.K.
It
feels
like something layered
Layered?
Yea
Uh-huh
Regularly layered
[are
you]
sure that’s D-3?
D-3.
Right.
Coordinates
are D-3
Something with
a slightly cerrated edge
Uh-huh.
Are the cerrations associated with this,
er
,
velvety
.
.
. material?
Yea
.
.
.
yea
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4
UNCLASSIFIED
Utterance
Number
Utterance
M
A3
/l4
*
Al5
M
^ 16 ^
M
^ 17
M
x/18
^
M
^
V
M
$ 20
M
^2 $
>^3 ^
M
A
24 ^
M
Uh-huh
[The bat]
Bat,
butterfly,
artificial blossom
It's
a
[beast]
(laughter)
Ha
,
ha
,
ha
It’s almost
as
if
it’s
a dome-shaped
...
feeling,
it's
a
rounded
.
.
.
feeling
Uh-huh
Something that would fit into the palm of
my hand
Uh-huh
[Like]
a mushroom
If you
look right down on top of
it,
into the box, what
do
you see?
Yea,
that,
that's where
I
see this dome-shaped thing,
that
would be,
you know,
this-- (drawing)
like an open umbrella
from the top
Uh-huh
But
I feel material
sort
of strongly,
ah—velvety
...
[it's
a feely]
sort of soft
Maybe
not upholstered,
but spongy
...
texture,
soft
Uh-huh
Resilient
It’s
like,
like,
like
this
blossom,
or
a,
ah—this object
has
a,
you know,
like the stem of an umbrella or something
like that, and it’s
standing in
a
...
sort of
has
its
foot
or feet in a
...
in something
light—it’s
like having,
ah,
mid-calf booots
on,
the type
Uh-huh
Well,
like a,
like
a high cup they are standing in
Uh-huh
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 30031 0001 -4