Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96- 00791R000200100003- 3 220 The Journal of Parapsychology TABLE B1 TaRGET—RESPONSE 9004 Element Name Target Response 20 Roads 0.30 0.00 23 Agricultural fields 0.05 0.00 32 Urban 0.00 0.50 33 Rural, pastoral 0.60 0.50 : 44 Town, village 0.00 0.50 : 45 City 0.00 0.40 46 Single peak 0.70 0.00 ! 47 Hills, slopes, bumps, mounds 0.10 0.40 48 Mountains 0.00 0.60 49 Cliffs 0.00 0.10 : 60 Vegetation, trees 0.30 0.00 64 Blue 0.50 0.00 65 Green 0.30 0.00 ' 69 White 0.10 0.00 : 70 Grey 0.20 0.00 76 Obscured, fuzzy, dim, smoky 0.20 0.00 77 Cloudy, foggy, misty 0.20 0.00 79 Weathered, eroded, incomplete 0.00 0.10 80 Smooth 0.00 1.00 | 81 Fuzzy 0.20 0.00 82 Grainy, sandy, crumbly 0,20 1.00 : 90 Other implied movement 0.20 0.00 a 91 Congested, cluttered, busy 0.10 0.30 92 Serene, peaceful, unhurried 0.40 0.00 | 93 Closed in, claustrophobic 0.00 0,10 | 94 Open, spacious, vast 0.60 0.00 95 Ordered, aligned 0.00 0.40 | 97 Buildings, structures 0.00 1.00 98 Rise, vertical rise, slope 0.60 1.00 | 99 Flat 0.30 1.00 | 100 Light/dark areas 0.10 0.00 | 101 Boundaries 0.30 1.00 103 Land/sky interface 0.50 0.00 104 Single predominant feature 0.60 0.00 ! 105 Odd juxtaposition, surprising 0.30 0.00 | 106 Manmade, altered 0.20 0.80 107 Natural 0.70 0.20 | 108 Rectangle, square, box 0.00 1.00 109 Triangle, pyramid, trapezoid 0.60 0.00 115 Cone 0.60 0,00 | 117 Irregular forms 0.00 0.20 118 Repeat motif 0.10 0.60 119 Stepped 0.10 0.70 120 Parallel lines 0.10 0.00 121 Vertical lines 0.10 1.00 122 Horizontal lines 0.10 0.00 123 Diagonal lines 0.40 0.00 125 Inverted V-shape 0.70 0.00 ; 126 Other angles 0.00 0.10 | or | Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003- 3
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 - CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3 dvances in Remote- Viewing Analysis 991 aay Figure B5. Target for Session 9005. Pug aw. PS 345° Texgeh dy Wf ECA rs “rng wake Cond breele Figure B6. Page one of response (Session 9005, Target 1005). Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
‘Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96- 00 222 The Journal of Parapsychology 791 R0002001 00003- 3 Figure B7. Page two of response (Session 9005, Target 1005). Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
a Approved For Release 2001/03/0 : C14; RDP96-00791R000200100003-3 nces in Remote-Viewing Analysis frreale. Figure B8, Page three of response (Session 9005, Target 1005). Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96- 00791R000200100003- 3 224 The Journal of Parapsychology ~ IN : Figure B9. Page four of response (Session 9005, Target 1005). Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
La nnn nrtne ances in Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : ClA- ;RDP96- 00791R000200100003- 3 ewing Analysis Figure B10. Page five of response (Session 9005, Target 1005). ‘Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
TABLE B2 TARGET— RESPONSE 9005 /Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96- 00791R000200100003- 3 Ee 7 Element Name Target Response Taeog TOR 14 Spire, minaret, tower 0.00 0.20 0 0.00 20 Roads 0.10 0.10 0 0.00 32 Urban 0.80 0.70 1 0.70 38 Canal, manmade waterway 0.00 0.10 0 0.00 44 Town, village 0.00 0.30 0 ~—-0.00 45 City 0.90 0.70 1 0.70 | 46 Single peak 0.00 0.20 0 0.00 47 Hills, slopes, bumps, mounds 0.00 0.10 0 0.00 54 Unbounded large expanse water 0.00 0.40 0 0.00 56 Partially bounded water 0.30 0.30 1 0.30 : 58 River, stream, creek 0.00 0.40 0 0.00 59 Coastline 0.00 0.20 0 0.00 60 Vegetation, trees 0.20 0.20 1 0.20 64 Blue 0.25 0.00 1 0.00 | 65 Green 0.20 0.00 1 0.00 67 Brown, beige 0.50 0.00 1 0,00 | 69 White 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 70 Grey 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 80 Smooth 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 81 Fuzzy 0.00 1.00 0 0.00 82 Grainy, sandy, crumbly 0.00 1.00 0 0.00 83 Rocky, ragged, rubbled, rough 0.00 1.00 0 0.00 91 Congested, cluttered, busy 0.70 0.70 1 0.70 \ 94 Open, spacious, vast 0.10 1.00 0 0.00 95 Ordered, aligned 0.00 0.30 0 0.00 96 Disordered, jumbled, unaligned 0.30 0.00 1 0.00 97 Buildings, structures 0.80 0.90 1 0.90 98 Rise, vertical rise, slope 0.00 1.00 0 0.00 | 99 Flat 0.50 1.00 1 1.00 100 Light/dark areas 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 101 Boundaries 0.20 1.00 1 1.00 : 102 Land/water interface 0.30 1.00 1 1.00 103 Land/sky interface 0.10 0.10 0 0.00 104 Single predominant feature 0.10 0.40 0 0.00 106 Manmade, altered. 0.80 0.80 1 0.80 107 Natural 0.20 0.20 1 0.20 108 Rectangle, square, box 0.70 1.00 1 1.00 111 Cross-hatch, grid 0.30 0.00 1 0.00 112 Circle, oval, sphere 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 116 Semicircle, dome, hemisphere 0.10 0.30 0 0.00 118 Repeat motif 0.40 0.80 l 0.80 119 Stepped 0.20 1.00 1 1.00 120 Parallel lines 0.30 0.30 1 0.30 121 Vertical lines 0.50 1.00 1 1.00 122 Horizontal lines 0.10 0.00 0 0.00 123 Diagonal lines 0.10 0.20 0 0.00 125 Inverted V-shape 0.00 0.20 0 0.00 127 Arc, curve 0.30 1.00 1 1.00 128 Wave form 0.00 0.10 0 0.00 tee eye ee Totals 21.20 22.00 12.60 Totals Accuracy = 0.573 Reliability = 0.594 __ Figure of merit = 0.340 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
: - CIA- - 100003-3 Approved For Release 2991/03/07,: CIA-RDP96 00791 R000200' ie-Viewing Analysis APPENDIX C “GROUND TRUTH” INSTRUCTION AND CODING FORM Analysts’ Instructions for Remote-Viewing Series 900X Thank you for helping us perform a post hoc assessment of a series of remote viewings. The targets were actually 35-mm slides that were attached to a photomultiplier, a device to measure small amounts of light. We were searching for possible physical correlates to remote viewing. You will find in your packet 6 remote viewing responses labeled 9001— 9006 respectively. Also shown is the target number of the intended photo- graph. We have supplied the original, rather than the 35-mm slide. We would like you to make a subjective judgment as to the degree of correspondence between the remote viewing response and its associated tar- get. Familiarize yourself with the task by first looking at all the responses and their intended targets. Then, on a session-by-session basis, rate your assessments. You are completely free to define what is meant by “Degree of Correspondence.” Indicate your judgment by marking one line across the appropriate continuous scale shown below. A vertical line near the “None” end of the scale will indicate that you feel there is very little correspondence between that response-target pair. Likewise a vertical line near the “Com- plete” end of the scale will indicate that you feel that there is a significant degree of correspondence. Many of the responses begin with a little information and build toward a composite drawing at the end. Please assess the response in its entirety as best you can. Thank you again, SESSION DEGREE OF CORRESPONDENCE None Complete b+ 103 1042 1065 1094 1005 1024 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3
Approved For Release 2001/0 : CIA- . , | 228 Sees or partner” 00791 R000200100003-3 REFERENCES Dawes, R. M. (1988). Rational choice in an uncertain world. New York: Har- court, Brace, Jovanovich. Honorton, C. (1975). Objective determination of information rate in psi tasks with pictorial stimuli. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 69, 353-359. Hussarp, G. S., May, E. C., & FRIVOLD, T. J. (1987). Possible photon pro- duction during a remote viewing task: A replication experiment. Final Report, SRI Project 1291, SRI International, Menlo Park, California. Humpurey, B. S., May, E. C., TRASK, Vv. V., & THomson, M. J. (1986). Remote viewing evaluation techniques. Final Report, SRI Project 1291, SRI International, Menlo Park, California. Humpurey, B. S., May, E. C., & UrTs, J. M. (1988). Fuzzy set technology in the analysis of remote viewing. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conven- tion of the Parapsychological Assoctation (pp. 378-394). Jann, R. G., DUNNE, B. J., & JAHN, E. G. (1980). Analytical judging pro- cedure for remote perception experiments. Journal of Parapsychology, 44, 207-231. May, E. C. (1983). A remote viewing evaluation protocol. Final Report (re- vised), SRI Project 4028, SRI International, Menlo Park, California. May, E. C., HUMPHREY, B. S., & MATHEws, C. (1985). A figure of merit analysis for free-response material. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Con- vention of the Parapsychological Association, (pp. 343-354). PuTHorF, H. E., & TARG, R. (1976). A perceptual channel for information transfer over kilometer distances: Historical perspective and recent re- search. Proceedings of the IEEE, 64(3), 329-354. ‘ SoLFvIN, G. F., KELLY, E. F., & BURDICK, D. S. (1978). Some new methods of analysis for preferential-ranking data. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 72(2), 93-110. | Tare, R., Purnorr, H. E., & May, E. G. (1977). State of the art in remote viewing studies at SRI. 1977 Proceedings of the International Conference of Cybernetics and Society (pp. 519-529). Zick, R., CARLSTEIN, E., & BUDESCU, D. V. (1987). Measures of similarity among fuzzy concepts: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1(2), 221-242. SRI International 333 Ravenswood Av. Menlo Park, CA 94025 Division of Statistics University of California, Davis Davis, CA 95616 | | Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000200100003-3