Approved For Release 2000108m,: CIA-RDR86J00789R002200670001-4
D.
(U) Program Objectives
(U) There
are
three
basic program
objectives:
(1)
to document
that
psychoenergetic
phenomena
are
real and
reproducible;
(2)
to determine
the
mechanism(s)
underlying
these
phenomena;
and
(3)
to
bring
the
field
of psychoenergetics
into
the
mainstream
of human
performance research, by providing a scientific foundation equivalent to that of the
rest of the
performance
research
field.
In
the minds
of some,
there
is no doubt
that psychoenergetic
phenomena are real and reproducible.
In the minds of many others, both scientific professionals
and informed lay persons,
this
is not the case.
(
The categories
of research
interest under consideration
form
a
hierarchy ranging from basic research on fundamental mechanisms
to
methodologies
for applications
including:
•
Identifying explanatory mechanisms
(e.g.,
electromagnetic
effects,
neurophysiological mechanisms).
•
Specifying phenomenological properties
(e.g.,
the effects
of
distance and shielding)
.
•
Determining physical,
physiological,
and psychological
correlates
(e.g.,
geophysical environment,
EEC and GSR
measures,
and personality profiling).
•
Developing optimal
strategies
for use
in applications
(e.g.,
statistical averaging)
.
E.
(U)
Program Resources
(U) To meet the above objectives,
the SRI program
is using both in-house and external
expertise.
For over a decade, a core group of researchers at SRI has been studying a wide variety
of
subjects
in
psychoenergetics—augmented
by
access
to
specialty
centers
such
as
our
neurosciences and our microbial genetics
laboratories'.
(U) Some of the work
is being subcontracted to institutions, groups, and consultants who
have a demonstrated track record in this research area.
Other subcontractors may have had no
association with
this
field
but, because of their specific area
of expertise, can make
valuable
contributions
to our program
goals.
Thus,
the widest possible
interdisciplinary viewpoints are
available to the program, and the mixture of resources
will ensure
that peer group review and
scientific
interactions
are
maximized.
Subcontractors
and
consultants
currently
include
personnel from Princeton University, Syracuse University, John F. Kennedy University, the Palo
Alto Medical
Clinic, MARS Measurements Associates,
Psychophysical
Research
Laboratories,
the
Parapsychology
Sources
of
Information
Center,
Mind
Science
Foundation,
and
the
il08
: CIA-RDpJb-
Approved For Release 2000/081(08
: CIA-RDPS6-00789R002200670001 -4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200670001-4
UNCLASSIFIED
II PROGRESS TO DATE (U)
(U)
During this reporting period
(1 October 1987 to 30 September 1988), onr primary
progress was made in the areas of RV screening, neurophysiological correlates, and binary RV.
A.
(U)
Status of Subcontracts
Res
Ttr
8 FY 1987 ’ WC
l6t °ne PUrCh3Se °rder Subcontract to P^chophysical Physical
esearch Laboratories.
This contract concluded 31 July 1988.
(U)
Status of Consultants
(U)
Table
1 Shows the contractual status of the consultants for FY 1988.
*
Table
(U)
STATUS OF CONSULTANTS FOR FY 1988
Name
Number
of Days
Emerson
Farrelly
Kiernan
Langford
Ley
McMoneagle
100
Morris
Press
Saunders
Sidwell
Skyrms
Spottiswoode
Swann
Terzian
Vallee
Wartell
Yaru
Zachariasen
Zarafonetis
Zimbardo
n\TOT
A
n,
-T
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Rel4yM£/lfiAi®SI|£iEB3Pd6-00789R002200670001-4
C #
(U)
Progress to Date for Each Objective/Task
(U) The
progress
to
date
for each
Objective and Task
in
the
Statement
of Work
is
described below.
1.
(U)
Objective A, Task
1— Statistical Protocols and Research Design
(U)
In June, we sent four separate protocols to the
Scientific Oversight Committee
(SOC)
for review.
They were:
(1)
An RV experiment to be conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
(2) A hypnosis experiment to be conducted at SRI.
(3) A mass screening procedure.
(4)
A neurophysiological investigation using magnetoelectroencepholography
techniques.
Because we did not receive any comments back from the SOC on these protocols, we proceeded
with the various experiments as stated.
2.
(U)
Objective A, Task 2—Access to Ongoing Experiments
(U)
During the year, three members of the SOC,
Dr. M.
Wartell,
Dr.
B. Skyrms,
and Dr.
R.
Morris, paid
site
visits.
3.
(U)
Objective A, Task 3—Critical Review.
(U)
In
order
to
review
the
year’s
work,
SRI
International
hosted
a
two-day
conference for the SOC on November 3 and 4, 1988.
Their comments and SRI’s responses can
be found
in the Appendix.
4.
(U)
Objective B, Task 1— Identify New and
“Excellent’’ Remote Viewers
(U)
During FY 1988, SRI screened a total of 196 individuals from SRI,
the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Society for Scientific Exploration
for remote
viewing
ability.
The video disk technology and protocol that were developed during FY 1987
were used
in
this
effort.
•{
Of the 196 individuals who participated in the
first-level screening,
16 were
selected forTs^ond-stage screening that involved
trials under SRI’s normal remote viewing
protocol.
Of these, 2 produced excellent results and have subsequently been invited to join the
research
effort as part-time viewers.
-rdI><
Approved For Release 2000/03/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200670001-4
5.
(U)
Objective C, Task
1—Obtain Successful Replications Of RV
(U)
This task was abandoned by agreement with the sponsor in order to focus more
attention on Objective D, Task
1.
6.
(U)
Objective D, Task
1—Determine Physiological Indicators Of RV
(U) A contract was
let to Los Alamos National Laboratory
in order
to determine
whether there are neurophysiological indicators of remote viewing. Two protocols were designed
that represented replications of earlier work.
One was
a remote-conditioning design where
a
viewer received
a
direct stimulus
(light)
after
a remote
light had
flashed.
The second was
a
replication
of earlier SRI work
in which
it was found that one
individual exhibited
significant
alpha blocking as the
result of a remote stimulus
(light).
L
Six individuals participated in experiments conducted at Los Alamos.
Some
of them exhibited a response to a remote stimulus approximately 100 ms after the onset of the
stimulus.
Given the shielding environment,
it remains possible that the central nervous systems
of these individuals are sensitive to high-frequency electromagnetic radiation.
High-frequency
radiation should be shielded
in any
further investigations.
f
All of the three
individuals who participated
in the SRI
replication attempt
demonstrated
significant changes
in alpha power across the remote stimulus boundary.
7.
(U)
Objective E, Tasks
1 and 2—Determine The Effects Of Robust Feedback On
RV Quality
(U) We
have
used
the
data
from
the
second-level
screening
screening
task
(Objective
B, Task
1)
to examine the role
of robust feedback on RV performance.
The data from 85 second-level screening remote viewings were used
in the
analysis.
One of the
target categories,
Natural, showed
a
significant tendency over the other
categories c
]
Science/Industrial, and
Projects)
to produce better remote viewing.
One
single target in the Projects category (Deep Quest—an underwater scene and submersible)
also
showed
a
significant tendency to be
"visible.”
\
We have examined the possibility that such results could arise because of a
judging preference
for more interesting targets.
In one case, there was bias against one of the
less interesting targets, but judging biases are unable
to account
for the
target preferences.
As
was found in other laboratories,
it appears that moving targets with complete
(video and audio)
feedback provide the best RV targets,
static images with no audio feedback the worst.
Approved For Release 2000fQ8J08
: CIA-
-00789R002200670001 -4