Approved For Release 2000/08?
CIA-RDR96-00789R003200200001 -4
B
IV CONCLUSIONS
(U)
(U)
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.
J^^^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.
(U)
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.
(U)
This
is more consistent with the apparent indication that aspects of the training results arc correlated
with something else,
i.e., the PAS.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CI&-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
December 1988
Cweriag°he Period
1 October 1987 to 30 September 1988
THE EFFECTS OF HYPNOSIS ON REMOTE VIEWING
QUALITY (U)
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/0
-00789R003200200001 -4
ABSTRACT (U)
Two remote
viewers participated
in an experiment
to determine whether the
overall quality of remote viewing (RV) would be enhanced by a hypnotic trance.
Each viewer
participated
in
16 RV sessions while
in trance.
No
significant evidence of psychoenergetic
functioning was
obtained, and comparisons
with
previous work by
the same
viewers were
therefore rendered moot.
Implications of these results for further research are discussed.
ii
Approved For Release 20
96-00789R003200200001 -4
III RESULTS (U)
/
A.
(U)
Hypnotizability scales
(U) Our
experienced
viewer
(No.
372)
produced
a
score
of
on
the
12-point
hypnotizability
scales, a 92 centile equivalent. Though he was unable to inhibit hand movement
on suggestion, failed to respond to a hallucinated voice item, and experienced conflict during
value and meaning alterations, he produced a deep
state of relaxation, became absorbed
in
imagery processes, was able to regress, performed posthypnotic suggestions, and showed amnesia
and hypermnesia. trance logic, cognitive and role distortion.
Imaginal ability was highly rated
with the
ability to create, manipulate, and experience imagery in
all sensory
fields especially
when the image was positive and productive.
(U) The novice viewer (No.
137) scored a 7 on the hypnotizability scales, a 71
centile
equivalent.
She produced
a deep
state
of relaxation, showed
ability to
regress and
to be
absorbed in imagery, performed posthypnotic suggestions, and showed amnesia.
She showed
difficulty
altering sensory phenomena, did not demonstrate hypermnesia. trance
logic,
or the
ability for cognitive and role distortion.
Again, for this viewer imaginal ability was highly rated
with the ability to create, manipulate, and experience imagery in
all sensory
fields.
B.
(U) RV results
The
results of the independent judge’s rank order for each RV are shown
in
Table
1.
Table
(U) RANK BY SESSION NUMBER FOR 16 TRIALS
Session No.
3 0
6 B
ii
ll
Viewer 372
1 D
2 B
B
Viewer 137
2 flB
BB
Approved For Release 2000A
00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/0(8
-Q0789R003200200001 -4
sum of ranks for Viewer No. 372
is 50, with an associated p-value of 0.67.
For Viewer No. 137, the sum is 56, with a p-value of 0.93.
Since neither of these p-values is
significant,
it
appears
that
there
has
been
no
information
transfer
in
this
experiment.
Comparisons with previous work by these
viewer’s would be superfluous,
since
there
is no
significant evidence of
RV.
Approved For Release 200
6-00789R003200200001 -4
6-00789R003200200001 -4
IV DISCUSSION (U)
T
RV has been demonstrated to be a weak phenomenon such that success on any
given!XL be expected 100 percent of the time.
Hie Mowing discussion focuses on
three other possibilities for failure to achieve positive results in this study.
The Ant possibility
is that the hypnotic trance was disnipdve to the usual RV
processed each of the viewers had panicked in weli over 100 previous RV trials. their
particular methods of producing an RV response were
relative!, habuuated.
The
vtewets
received no particular training on how to perform under trance, how the RV expenence wou
differ while in vance. or extensive practice with hypnosis RV sessions.
It seems reasonable to
conclude that the addition of a training period prior to the taking of expenmental data may have
produced more positive results.
llHiconversely
it ma, be dm. the demands of the RV production process are such
that thetance state
is no. a. all conducive to producing high-quality RV.
It Otis is so
then a
decrease in performance over time might be expected as the viewers become accomplished «
trance induction and deepening.
Both viewers showed a tendency in the dtrectton o
dea-easme
performance as Use study progressed (r * 0.510 with 15 df for viewer t 372. r a 0.3
8 wtt
for viewer * 137).
In the pilot work mentioned above the viewer produced hts responses while
the waking sure using
a
stimulus word that served as a post-hypnotic
suggestion
Further
experimentation may show this to be the more efficient protocol, since
i, dovetails mcely wuh ou,
standard stimulus-response method of conducting an RV session.
A second possibility is that die viewers chosen for this study were not the optimal
individual this work.
While ranking relatively high on the
scale of hypnotiaibility. these
particular viewers were not hypnotic virmosos.
Demonsuation of an effect using h^notis may
require the most highly susceptible subjects, corresponding to a score of
12 on the
ianfor
Hypnotizability Scales.
A third potential source of interference in die hypnosis task could have been
what
is known in die parapsychoiogy literature? as -displacement.-
In this instance the term
refers to the inability of the viewer to distinguish accurately between elements of the target and
elements of its decoys in the targe, packet. The division of die targe, poo, into 20 Packedt of f
«
was done arbitrariiy for simpiicity of judging in another experiment.
In prior years a given urge
Approved For Release 2000/08
-Q0789R003200200001 -4