Approved For Release 20pBHC/pH §'G {Fp EFG-00789R002200380001-6 SOC Reviewers’ Comments, Objective E, Task 3 (The Effects Of Hypnosis On Remote Viewing Quality) (verbatim transcription--not edited) NAME: Herb Ley Comments: 1. The study described in this task is straightforward, and the research design and statistical analyses are appropriate for the hypothesis. The sample size of two seems rather small, but is compensated for, I suspect, by the data available on these two persons from prior studies. No results were presented in the report, so I cannot comment on them or on conclusions. 2. I was impressed by the comments on page 2 under “Objective” that the monitor had observed the viewer to be in a more internally focused and relaxed state after hypnosis than during the control period. The same observation has been made by their practitioners for both meditation and prayer. However, “meditation” and “prayer” have different meanings to different people, and would be almost impossible to apply to a controlled scientific study. There is sufficient data on hypnosis to place it in a more objective category of variables for study. You did well to use a professional for induction of hypnosis. The point I object to in the report is the use of the word, “trance.” That word may be replaced by the phrase, “altered state of consciousness,” or ASC if you prefer, to minimize the undesirable connotations of the word, “trance.” Why don’t you discuss that with Ornstein? Recommendation: Yes November 1, 1988 NAME: Robert Morris Comments: 1. The research design could have used relaxation as a control condition rather than proofreading. Proofreading is a different category of experience altogether. The protocol and analysis seem fine. The conclusions offer interesting possibilities, but the concept of displacement has some difficulties. 2. Basically, you are using hypnosis to accomplish something, to be helpful in aiding some aspect of psi-mediated information processing. So why not see if there is any evidence that it has an effect upon information processing, and if greater effects are associated with stronger psi performance. If so, you have learned something and can then go on to tease out whether expectation (not ruled out in this study) or some aspect of hypnosis contributed to psi directly or some other process which in turn affected psi. Recommendation: Yes November 4, 1988 A-16 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200380001-6
Approved For Release 2D) NDE61E8A SS FFA EYR-00789R002200380001-6 NAME: James Press Comments: i. Page 2 - Why is the fact that “the subject was not blind to experimental condition” considered a design flaw? If the subject had no psychic ability, so what if he knew why he was being hypnotized? 2. Section F - There is no explanation for how a p-value was computed for each viewer of his 16 trials. I suspect independence is required, but the trials are not mutually independent. Recommendation: Yes November 1, 1988 NAME: Brian Skyrms Comments: 1. This was a more or less exploratory experiment with negative results. Further research along this lines should be given low priority. Recommendation: Yes November 4, 1988 NAME: Yervant Terzian Comments: 1. Page 2, paragraph 1 - Do we understand hypnosis? 2. Page 2, paragraph 2 - significant (?). 3, Page 3, paragraph 1, second sentence - Could also minimize! Since we do not understand the causes! 4, Page 4, 4th full paragraph - Question second sentence. 5. Page 5, first paragraph - Re. word communicate in line 6 - was this verbal? 6. Page 5, Figure 1 - Re. RV.15-30 minutes - per target? 7. Page 5, last paragraph, second sentence — better way? Results? Recommendation: Yes November 7, 1988 NAME: Mike Wartell Comments: 1. Design protocols for purpose of the experiment are satisfactory. Suggest discontinuing trance RV aspect and, if this approach is to be continued, emphasize post hypnotic suggestion approach. Recommendation: Yes November 3, 1988 A-17 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200380001-6
Approved For Release 20PNKC PR SHIFPEGH-00789R002200380001-6 NAME: Chris Zarafonetis Comments: 1. This report provides a very good review of prior literature concerning studies utilizing hypnosis in association with psychic tests. There were past reports which indicated a possible enhanced effect for RV under the hypnotic condition. Although the findings were not statistically significant, some flaws in the protocol were noted and further studies should not be ruled out. Recommendation: Yes November 4, 1988 NAME: Phil Zimbardo Comments: 1. Interesting attempt. 2. I would have preferred that we use only subjects who scored 12 - top of the line — to start with. Yes, I agree with your page 8 inference. 3. Page 8 - Yes, there should have been more hypnosis-RV training trials. 4, Page 3 — Spelling error. §. In general, the hypnosis training and its application were good and warranted, but better approach is suggested on page 9. Continue with pilot study procedure to use hypnosis for “clearing up the subject’s mental state,” so he/she can focus better on RV target. Recommendation: Yes November 4, 1988 A-18 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200380001-6