Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR- STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR*
The following notes
are based
solely upon my experience
and
I
there-
fore make no claim that they
are generalizable to other persons.
Since
I
am still learning about
ESP phenomena,
I
am confident
that
additional
work in this
area will expand,
modify,
and refine
the perceptual processes
discussed below.
While
I have tried to describe these experimental
processes with
as much precision
as possible,
the use
of
seemingly pre-
cise
language
should not
leave
the impression that
the perceptions them-
selves were equally precise.
To the contrary,
I
found these perceptions
to be delicate,
transient,
and ephemeral— and yet,
at
the
same time— and
somewhat
surprisingly— unmistakably real.
1.
Perceptual Processes
Working with the ESP machine proved to be
a venture
into unfamiliar
perceptual territory which functioned according to new and different
rules.
It
took some time
(five hours
or
so with the ESP machine)
to begin to
learn not
only which perceptual processes would work but,
equally
im-
portant which would not work.
There was clearly
a learning process
in
finding those delicate
and subtle internal
cues that would allow me
to
make perceptually based choices.
After approximately
1000 trials with
the ESP machine,
five dominant perceptual modes emerged.
Subsequent work
Prepared by
a policy research analyst
at
SRI,
who was
a high-scoring
sub-
ject
(p <
10~^)
with the four-state electronic random stimulus
generator.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
with the machine
seemed to essentially expand and refine these perceptual
processes
that emerged initially.
Direct Knowing
(Used approximately
to
15 percent
of
the time)—
This perceptual
cue came
as
a "gift" that
I
did not have
to work for.
This
is not
to say that this
"cue" was
always right,
but when there was
a direct perception
of
the
appropriate response unmediated by any of the
other cues described below,
my chances
of being right
seemed quite high
(say 75 percent
of
the
time).
Internally,
this was
simply the feeling
that
I
should push one
specific button and the
knowing was
almost
im-
mediate.
If
it were not
immediate then,
typically,
one
of
the other
cues would be used.
"Closure Cues"
(Used perhaps 75 percent
of
the time)—This
cue mani-
fested itself
in
a variety of ways;
a sense
of
"fullness" with respect
to
a particular button,
an internal anticipation of the bell ringing,
a
sense
of
"hardness"
or
"firmness"
and
a sense
of being "locked
into"
the
correct response.
The validity of
this
cue
could be tested by acting and
thinking
as
if
I were
going to push
a particular button and then noting
the extent
to which these
"closure cues" became present.
This
sense
of
active intentionality— both physically and psychologically— seems
im-
portant
in that
it
allowed me to
sort
out many real from imagined per-
ceptions,
Also,
this
cue often
gave
a kind
of veto power;
i.e.,
it
did
not necessarily assure
me
as to the right answer but
it would tend to
tell me
if
I
had picked the wrong one,
i.e.,
I would not
experience
the
aforementioned cues.
Pattern Recognition
(Negligible use
initially,
but then used approxi-
mately 75 percent
of
the
time during Phase
IV)—Although
I
used this
perceptual mode very infrequently during the initial
stages
of
the
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
experiment,
it emerged rather naturally toward the
end.
This was similar
to the "direct
knowing"
but
not
isolated to
a
single button;
rather,
there was
a sense
of
the next
two to three buttons that would be
the
correct responses.
These perceptual cues were obtained in
a less objec-
tive/rational way and in more
of
a meditative
state,
highly concentrated
but without
specific focus on
a particular button.
Interestingly,
in
using this perceptual process,
I was
able to
go somewhat faster
and have
greater
access
to all
of
the buttons
in an equivalent way.
Thus,
this
mode had the advantage
of
loosening habituated perceptual patterns but
it
also made
selections
less
amenable
to conscious control
and testing.
This process proved
to be either highly accurate
or highly inaccurate.
Accuracy seemed to be
a function
of the degree to which
I
could become
synchronized with the evolving pattern of machine
selected choices— and
it was easy
to
get
out
of phase/ sequence with this pattern.
Rational Guessing
(Used approximately
5 percent
of
the
time)—Al-
though
I virtually never did try to superimpose
some rationally predicted
pattern upon the random,
machine
selection of buttons,
I would sometimes
temper my selections
(very seldom for the better)
by noting that
one button
had come up too often for
it
to be likely on the next trial
or,
conversely,
it had come up
so seldom that
it
should be given special consideration
as
a likely possibility on the next
trial.
Again,
although this was
a
tempting strategy,
I found that random processes were not
amenable to
rational anticipations and my rational guesses
seemed often to be wrong.
Tension/Vector Analysis
(Used approximately 75 percent
of
the time)—
Here the
cue was manifested
as
a sense
of tension (s)
pulling
in one direc-
tion or
another with the
selection buttons
as the
locus for that
tension.
The
cue was
also manifested
as
a feeling
of "emptiness"
and conversely as
a sense
of
"fullness."
To describe this process further,
it felt
analogous
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
to vector analysis
in physics where,
in sorting out competing tugs
and
pulls,
one finds
the "dominant" vector;
i.e.,
the one with the
strongest
"pull"
or the
one that
best
"balances"
the
other vector tensions.
Figure
A-l illustrates this phenomenon.
Although the tension/vector cues were very useful
and among the most
reliable
of
all
the
cues,
I
found them to be
at
times quite misleading.
The
source
of confusion stemmed from the role
of
time
as
a variable rather
than
a constant
in extrasensory reality
(discussed in more detail under
Section
2,
"comments
on Perceptual Processes”).
If my assumptions
as to
the temporal nature
of my perceptions did not
fit with the
actual nature
of those perceptions,
then the perceptions were quite misleading.
(Re-
call that precognition refers here
to
a button that will be selected
in
the future— typically the next trial.)
The nine-cell matrix shown in
Figure A-2 may clarify the complexity of
the perceptual process,
the need
for discriminating awareness
and the possibility for error.
Out
of nine
possible combinations
of the
assumed/actual nature
of perceptions,
only
three
are matched
or congruent
and yield accurate understandings.
Each
of
these primary cases
is discussed below:
•
Clairvoyant—Here the feeling which allows
sorting and
selection is
like that described in Figure
A-l.
•
Precognitive— The feeling,
sorting,
and selection is
like
that described in Figure A-l with clairvoyance;
the primary
difference being
a shift
in the time dimension to refer,
not to the present
target
of
the machine,
but to the
one
to be selected next.
To
act
on this perception
I would
press
the pass button to bring the future into the present
and then press
the button that corresponded to my precog-
nitive perceptions.
•
Clairvoyant
and Precognitive— The perception
is
of
a pat-
tern of buttons,
distributed through time,
that
are
and
will be
selected by the machine— the "pattern" usually
consisted
of
two to three buttons.
Again,
the time vari-
able was most troublesome—typically with greater difficulty
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
FIGURE A-1
ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS
IN OPERATION
With Button C
being
the one
selected
using
these
cues.
ACTUAL
NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
ASSUMED
NATURE OF
PERCEPTIONS
Clairvoyant
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Misperception
Precognitive
Misperception
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Misperception
Misperception
Correct
Perception
SA-2613-22
FIGURE A-2
MATRIX SHOWING CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION
IN THE USE
OF TENSION/VECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND
ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
in determining the order
in which the buttons would appear
as targets
and lesser difficulty
in determining which
buttons were targets.
Confusion and error would
arise when
I
assumed
the tension/vector
perceptions were clairvoyant when
in fact they were
(say)
clairvoyant
and precognitive
,
To explain how this felt,
I
refer back to Figure
A-l.
If
the
actual
sequence
of
correct
answers were Buttons
B and
D,
and
if
I
were assuming the perceptions were
clairvoyant
only,
then
it was not un-
common to have the perception that
the intervening button
(C)
was
the
correct
choice.
The rationale for this perception was that
it
felt
like
a balance point between Buttons
B
(present
target)
and D
(next
target)
.
In retrospect,
when
I
am more rationally aware
of
the room for error
in the use
of this
cue mechanism,
I
am somewhat surprised
as to how useful
it was
in operation.
It
should be clear from the preceding descriptions that
selections
were made by
a variety of processes which were used sometimes
in isola-
tion and oftentimes
in combination,
A typical
sequence
in the
selection
process was:
(1)
check for
"direct
knowing"
cues,
if
not
there,
then
(2)
use "tension/vector"
cues,
then
(3)
make final
selection with "clo-
sure cues,"
.
Comments
on Perceptual Processes
Rather than work rapidly,
I
chose to work deliberately,
consciously,
and therefore
slowly.
I
would typically take five
to thirty seconds
to
select
a button—enough
time
to have
a firm and conscious
sense
of
my
internal cues
and what
I
thought
they meant.
The typical
sequence would
be
as follows:
•
Clear mind
and become quiet
•
Concentrate
internal
awareness
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
•
Observe various
cues
•
Rationally interact
with cues
to
sort
them out
•
Select
a button
and press
it
•
Integrate feedback from response
•
Clear mind
and become quiet.
Except during 'pattern recognition/' when
all buttons
seemed equally
accessible ,
I
found that
the
top
two buttons
on the machine were much
more
accessible
than the bottom two.
Three plausible explanations emerge
to account
for
this.
First
(and
least
likely
I
think)
is
a psychological
predisposition against
the bottom two buttons— perhaps because
of
the
color
of
the
buttons
or because
of
the pictures
associated with
the
tar-
gets.
Second
is
the possibility that
the circuitry
of
the
ESP machine
in
some way favors the
top two buttons
or obscures
the bottom two.
Third
(and most plausible
to me)
is the possibility that
to
the extent
I
used
the
tension/vector"
cue ,
then the bottom two buttons would be without
a
vector below them—making
it more difficult
to
"bracket"
the bottom two
buttons with this perceptual
process.
In
later phases
of
the experiment,
I was more
able
to access
the bottom two buttons
and this
seemed to corre-
spond with increasing use
of
the
"pattern recognition"
cues
and
the
de-
creasing use
of tension/vector
cues.
The
longer
I worked with
the ESP machine,
the more
apparent
it
be-
came
that,
in
an extrasensory perception reality,
time becomes
fluid.
In other words,
although the experiment
was designed to test clairvoyance
(selecting the current
target)
only,
I
found that
the perceptual
cues
would oftentimes
be equally applicable
to precognition
(selecting
a
future
t arget--usually the next
one).
Therefore,
making
a correct
selec-
tion required doing two things:
first,
finding the correct
"pattern"
of
buttons that would
be randomly selected by the machine
(typically
the
pattern consisted of
two to three buttons),
and second,
associating
a
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
time component
with the buttons in that
pattern.
Stated differently,
the
same
cues discussed above held equally well
for precognition or for
clairvoyance— so the problem of making
a selection was compounded by
the
additional difficulty
of having to determine whether
a perceptual cue was
associated with the button that
had already been selected by the machine
the button that would be selected
in the next
or even subsequent
trial,
I
definitely felt
that
if
I
could consistently separate clairvoyant from
precognitive dimensions
of
identical
cues,
that
I
could substantially
in-
crease the
accuracy
of overall
scores.
The cues were not
always consistent
in their presence
and meaning.
For example,
I
might
be obtaining good results with the use
of tension/
vector cues
and then find them become
ambiguous,
with
a commensurate
decline
in my
score.
Then
I would rely more heavily upon other
cues.
Or,
the cues might work well for clairvoyant perceptions for
a while
but
then shift to operate for precognition—then
I would have
to "recalibrate"
myself
to the
cue mechanisms.
So,
it was
a fluid,
dynamic perceptual
process which required flexibility
and patience.
Highly significant
scores
and perceptions
seemed to
go
in spurts
of ten trials
or
so,
then
I would fall back to
a chance
level until
I
could resynchronize myself
with the machine
and
the character
of my perceptual
cues.
I
tend to agree with the notion that
it might
be more
appropriate
to call these processes
"extraconceptual perception" rather than "extra-
sensory perception."
The perceptual cues were definitely present
and
they had sensory dimensions even though they do
not
fit
into our tradi-
tional
sensory categories.
Just
where"
and "how" these
sensory cues
were present
is not
clear to me— but
these
are essentially conceptual
rather than sensory issues.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
3.
Problems
in Perceptual Translation
A basic problem in using the
ESP machine was not
so much the obtaining
of perceptual data
as the translating of
those data into sufficient
in-
formation to allow the action of
selecting the correct
button.
While
the
act
itself
is
so simple
as to be trivial,
the information processes
(gathering,
filtering,
dynamically translating)
underlying that
act
seemed
to me very
substantial.
It
is within this unseen and unrecorded portion
of
the ESP testing process
that most
of
the
' action
takes place.
From
this vantage point
I
would
like to suggest
two impediments
that might
partially account
for relatively
low
scores.
First,
I
am still not
fluent
in the
"language"
of extrasensory per-
ceptions— analogously ,
it
is
like hearing many
separate commands
in
Russian
(or another unfamiliar
language),
each time
spoken in slightly
different ways
and with different
intonations and inflections.
The call
for action may be clearly heard but the translation
of
that command into
operational reality
is
an imprecise process until
the
language can be
better understood.
Second
is
the problem created by
shifting back and forth between
rational
and intuitive
knowledge processes during the
course
of
the ex-
periment.
In selecting
a single button
I
would use intuitive knowledge
processes for perception and oftentimes,
rational
or semirational knowledge
processes
to interpret
those perceptions.
This
is not
to say that
the
rational component
is absolutely necessary,
but
it
did seem to be useful
for
me.
In any event,
since
the experiment covers thousands
of trials
(button selections)
it required thousands
of translations from one
knowledge mode to another.
Although the rational mode did seem helpful
for interpretation,
it was
also "costly"
(i.e.
,
by shifting to
a rational
mode,
I
could be thrown slightly off-balance
in maintaining contact with
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
the
subtle
and delicate
intuitive processes— thereby introducing
an
additional element
of
ambiguity
and error).
Related
to the problem
of differential
knowledge processes
is
the
problem of having
to translate between states
of consciousness
in order
*
to act upon extrasensory perceptions.
LeShan
analyzed
the experiential
properties
of what
he has
termed Clairvoyant Reality
and found that while
certain events
(such
as telepathy ,
precognit ion,
and clairvoyance)
are
"normal''
to this reality,
certain other events
(such
as being able
to take
directed action toward
a
goal)
are
"paranormal."
For me this was mani-
fested experient ially
as
the feeling that when
I obtain extrasensory per-
ceptions,
I
am
so much
a part
of,
and immersed
in the Clairvoyant Reality
that
in order to
act,
I
must
causally
separate myself from the Clairvoyant
Reality and enter
the dualistic,
subject/object Reality that
LeShan terms
"Sensory Reality."
Encouragingly,
the "pattern recognition" process
seemed to offer
a means
of both perception and
action,
which did not
re-
quire
the
same degree
of
transfer between these
subtly different
states
of
consciousness.
The preceding points
suggest
that
one difficulty
in testing
and
assessing extrasensory perception may be
the
apparent
need to translate
it
into
an output
that
is
not
isomorphic with
the perceptions themselves
a person must translate
the perceptual
"language"
to
a familiar
form,
across rational
and intuitive dimensions,
and relatedly,
from one
state
of
awareness
to another.
Is
it possible,
then,
that
our means for testing
ESP may not
be highly congruent with the nature
of
the phenomenon,
and
this may inherently reduce
the
significance
of
the test results that
can
be obtained?
Lawrence
LeShan,
The Medium,
the Mystic,
and
the Physicist
(Viking Press,
New York,
1974).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
4.
Two Views of the ESP Process
I
suspect
that,
to an external observer,
my work with the ESP machine
might
appear
as fairly consistent
scoring slightly above chance— the
logical inference
could then be made that
a small
amount
of extrasensory
perception was mixed with
a substantial
amount
of pure guessing.
While
the
scoring data may support
this inference,
my awareness
of
the
input
process does
not.
Consider
the
following:
on the first
run,
a person
could
get
"hits”
out
of
25 by pushing buttons
at random;
then on the
second run,
he could
get
6 "hits” out
of
25 by using extrasensory per-
ception.
To the
statistician who looks
only
at
the
output,
the
scores
are identical— they are
no more than would occur by chance— and the
logical
inference would be that
the input processes were
identical
or
at
least
very
similar.
However
alike they might
appear externally,
internally
they could feel
like quite different
runs.
In the
second instance,
the
chance
level
of scoring would be
the result
of
an imperfect but operative
extrasensory perception process.
Obviously,
then,
measurement
of
ESP by
statistical output
alone obscures
the nature and extent
of
the extrasen-
sory
input.
A relatively modest
score on
the ESP machine
can——I
think——
substantially understate
the
amount
of
learning
and perceptual development
that
actually occurs.
The foregoing
is consistent with my impression that
my scores,
though statistically significant,
still did not reflect
the
actual
amount
of
learning that had occurred.
5.
Supportive Mind
Set
There emerged,
after
a time,
what
seemed to be
a series
of precondi-
tions
to good performance
in terms
of mind
set.
These were:
•
A high level
of motivation seemed essential.
The task of
pushing one
of
four buttons over thousands
of
trials could
be rather boring—enough
to allow one's attention to wander.
With each trial,
it was necessary to have
a high level
of
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
motivation to ensure
adequate
levels
of concentration
and
focused attention.
•
Although motivation
concentration,
and attention were
im-
portant,
it
was
also necessary not
to be too concerned with
the
success
or failure associated with each selection.
If
I
became
"attached"
to
the outcome
of
a previous trial,
whether
a success
or
a failure,
it
could divert
a signifi-
cant
amount
of attention from the present trial.
Therefore,
each trial must
be separate/fresh/clear/unconditioned by
the
actual
success
or failure of previous
trials
and separate
from the imagined
successes
or failures
of upcoming trials.
•
A relatively
stable,
undisturbed emotional
state
also seems
important.
I noticed the most
substantial fluctuation in my
scores when
I
was emotionally stressed
(angry,
hassled,
and
so
on)
•
Feeling rested physically also
seemed important.
This was
particularly true
if
I were to work with the machine for
an
hour
or
two— as this required
a substantial
amount
of
energy,
•
A positive
attitude— a feeling that
I could do well
and could
always
score
at
least
at
the chance
level—was also important.
A corollary to
this was that
I found
I
did better when
I
"al-
ways liked myself" even
if
I
did poorly.
Self-deprecation
seemed to be
a
sure way
of rapidly diminishing the
accuracy
of
the perceptual processes.
6.
The Environment
There were
attributes
of
the
surrounding environment
that
seemed
to
enhance
the accuracy of my selections.
The more
significant factors
seemed to be the following:
•
It was helpful
to have
a relatively quiet working environment.
Or,
if
there were noises,
to have them of
a
sort— fairly con-
stant
ones that remained in the background— that could be
readily filtered out
of my consciousness.
My impression was
that external
sensory information— particularly sounds— could
readily overload/override
subtle
and delicate
internal
sen-
sory
information.
•
It
also seemed
to help
to have
low light
levels— I
would
al-
ways turn out
the overhead lights
in the testing room.
I
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
experimented with closing my eyes to further reduce external
sensory
stimulation
and
I
found that
this would increase
the
sensitivity
of
sensory
cues,,
but
this
increase
in
sensi-
tivity was offset by
a lack of visually based feedback to
verify the
accuracy of
the
selections#
As
a consequence,
I
chose to keep my eyes
open.
•
I
found
it essential to work with the ESP machine by sitting
somewhat
above
it
so that
I
could look down on the face
of
the machine#
For
some reason,
perceptual discrimination
seemed much more difficult when
I would
sit
at
a lower
level
which placed the buttons
in
a plane more nearly horizontal
to my face
and upper body.
7#
Transferability
of Processes
The perceptual
learning gained
in this experiment
seemed generally
transferable
to other
situations where
I
might use
ESP abilities,
in
particular,
telepathy,
precognition,
and clairvoyance.
The
inference
is
that
a process or faculty
is being developed which has numerous applica-
tions
in other situations which would rely upon ESP.
Analogously,
just
as jogging could exercise muscles
to make
a person more
adept
at playing
football,
dancing,
swimming,
and the
like,
the use
and development
of
these
"psychic" muscles
seems
to have
some degree
of transference
to
other
situations.
8.
Conclusions
I
found the experiment
to be
a very substantial
learning experience
in which,
I
feel,
I
learned much more than was reflected
in the
scores.
It
allowed me
to begin to identify an ability which
I presume was largely
latent within— never having had
a prior opportunity for overt expression.
Finally,
it
suggests
to me that
this must
be
a common ability among many
people
that they simply do not recognize—primarily because they have
never had the opportunity to explore
it
as
a legitimate
and
real
phenomenon.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
SAMPLE OF RAW DATA—MEDICAL EVALUATION OF SUBJECT
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Next 21 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
PRELIMINARY NOTES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
103
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0