PUTHOFF 4xp proved Forel Easer20 O0/08/08A0bA-RDR96-00789R008RG120001 -4 335 class of paranormal perception phenomenon exists. At all times, we and others responsible for the overall program took measures to prevent sensory leakage and subliminal cueing and to prevent deception, whether intentional or unintentional. To ensure evaluations independent of belief structures of both experimenters and judges, all experiments were carried out under a protocol, described below, in which target selection at the beginning of experiments and blind judging of results at the end of experiments were handled independently of the researchers engaged in carrying out the experiments. Six subjects, designated S1 through S6, were chosen for the study. Three were considered as gifted or experienced subjects (S1 through $3), and three were considered as learners (S4 through $6). The a priori dichotomy between gifted and learners was based on the experienced group having been successful in other studies conducted before this program and the learners group being inexperienced with regard to paranormal experimentation. The study consisted of a series of double-blind tests with local targets‘in the San Francisco Bay Area so that several in- dependent judges could visit the sites to establish documenta- tion. The protocol was to closet the subject with an experi- menter at SRI and at an agreed-on time to obtain from the subject a description of an undisclosed remote site being visited by a target team. In each of the experiments, one of the six program subjects served as remote-viewing subject, and SRI experimenters served as a target demarcation team at the remote location chosen in a double-blind protocol as follows. In each experiment, SRI management randomly chose a target location from a list of targets within a 30-min driving time from SRI; the target location selected was kept blind to subject and experimenters. The target pool consisted of more than 100 target locations chosen from a target-rich environ- ment. (Before the experimental series began, the Director of the Information Science and Engineering Division, not other- wise associated with the experiment, established the set of lo- cations as the target pool which remained known only to him. The target locations were printed on cards sealed in envelopes and kept in the SRI Division office safe. They were available only with the personal assistance of the Division Director who issued a single random-number selected target card that con- stituted the traveling orders for that experiment.) In detail: To begin the experiment, the subject was closeted with an experimenter at SRI to wait 30 min before beginning a narrative description of the remote location. A second ex- perimenter then obtained from the Division Director a target location from a set of traveling orders previously prepared and randomized by the Director and kept under his control. The target demarcation team, consisting-of two to four SRI experi- menters, then proceeded by automobile directly to the target without any communication with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. The experimenter remaining with the sub- ject at SRI was kept ignorant of both the particular target and the target pool so as to eliminate the possibility of cueing (overt or subliminal) and to allow him freedom in questioning the subject to clarify his descriptions. The demarcation team remained at the target site for an agreed-on 15-min period following the 30 min allotted for travel.4 During the observa- ‘The first s bje p (S1) w haved NE Re it was found min. The pai Ate was therefore reduced to !5 min for subjects $2 through S6. (Baseedddo sibs: C tion period, the remote-viewing subject was asked to describe his impressions of the target site into a tape recorder and to make any drawings he thought appropriate. An informal com- parison was then made when the demarcation team returned, and the subject was taken to the site to provide feedback. A. Subject S1: Experienced To begin the series, Pat Price, a former California police com- missioner and city councilman, participated as a subject in nine experiments. In general, Price's ability to describe correctly buildings, docks, roads, gardens, and the like, includ- ing structural materials, color, ambience, and activity—often in great detail—indicated the functioning of a remote per- ceptual ability. A Hoover Tower target, for example, was recognized and named by name. Nonetheless, in general, the descriptions contained inaccuracies as well as correct state- ments. A typical example is indicated by the subject’s drawing shown in Fig. 3 in which he correctly described a park-like area containing two pools of water: one rectangular, 60 by 89 ft (actual dimensions 75 by 100 ft); the other circular, diameter 120 ft (actual diameter 110 ft). He incorrectly indi- cated the function, however, as water filtration rather than recreational swimming. (We often observe essentially correct descriptions of basic elements and patterns coupled with in- complete or erroneous analysis of function.) As can be seen from his drawing, he also included some elements, such as the tanks shown in the upper right, that are not present at the target site. We also note an apparent left-right reversal, often observed in paranormal perception experiments. To obtain a numerical evaluation of the accuracy of the remote-viewing experiment, the experimental results were subjected to independent judging on a blind basis by an SRI r@search analyst not otherwise associated with the research. The subject’s response packets, which contained the nine typed unedited transcripts of the tape-recorded narratives along with any associated drawings, were unlabeled and pre- sented in random order. While standing at each target loca- tion, visited in turn; the judge was required to blind rank order the nine packets on a scale 1 to 9 (best to worst match). The statistic of interest is the sum of ranks assigned to the target- associated transcripts, lower values indicating better matches, For nine targets, the sum of ranks could range from nine to eighty-one. The probability that a given sum of ranks s or less will occur by chance is given by [55] (a) - 1 where s is obtained sum of ranks, NV is number of assignable ranks, n is number of occasions on which rankings were made, and / takes on values from zero to the least positive integer k in (i- n)/n. (Table I is a table to enable easy application of the above formula to those cases in which N =n.) The sum in this case, which included seven direct hits out of the nine, was 16 (see Table II), a result significant at p= 2.9X 10° by exact calculation. In Experiments 3, 4, and 6 through 9, the subject was se- cured in a double-walled copper-screen Faraday cage. The Pr (s or less) = => 3 (-1) isn [20 Faraday cage provides 120-dB attenuation for plane-wave radio-frequency radiation over a range of 15 kHz to 1 GHz. re CPE i ert At 15 kHz and CIASRO to HU7BERGD S10 5120 re) rT-4 order judging (Table II) indicate that the use of Faraday cage electrical
CPYRGHTApproved For Release 2000/08/08
: ClA-RDPOe-OOySOROO^IO^EOOO^-^E IEEE -, MARCH 197
FLAT
GROUND®
h k
[=
POOL HOUSE
f SERVICE
CONCRETE BLOCK
\ YARD
> ^
FIRE
STATION^^A
r-'J
\
XX
'PICNIC AREA/
m
wt
i
i
•
!
I
:
I
I
L
l __L _l__i
Fig,
3. Swimming pool complex as remote-viewing target,
(a) City map of target location,
(b) Drawing by Price (Si).
TABLE
I
Critical Values of Sums of Ranks for Preferential Matching
Number of
Probability
(one-tailed)
chat
the
Indicated
Sum of Ranks or Less Would Occur by Chance
Assignable
~i
r
i
.
0.005
0.002
0.001
ar^he
e
iXrinl
a^
le^P
-
lieS
to
.those
sPecial Mses to which ‘he number of occasions on which objects
are being ranked
(n)
is equal to the number of assignable ranks (N).
Eachjentry represents the lamest
number that is significant at the indicated p-level. Source
R. L. Morris [55]
.
P
shielding does not prevent high-quality descriptions from being
obtained.
As
a backup judging procedure,
a panel of five
additional
SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the research were
asked
simply
to blind match the unedited typed
transcripts
(with
associated
drawings) generated by
the remote
viewer
against
the
nine
target
locations which they independently
visited in turn.
The transcripts were unlabeled and presented
in random
order.
A correct match consisted of a transcript
of a given date being matched to the target of that date.
In-
stead of the expected number of
1 match each per judge, the
number of correct matches obtained by the five judges was 7,
matches were obtained.
B.
Subject S4: Learner
This experiment \yas designed to be a replication of our pre-
vious experiment with Price, the
first replication attempted.
The
subject
for
thip experiment was Mrs. Hella Hammid,
a
gifted
professional jphotographer.
She was selected
for
this
series on
the
basis jof her
successful performance
as a per-
cipient in the EEG jexperiment described earlier.
Outside of
that interaction, shejhad no previous experience with apparent
paranormal functioning.
At the time we began working with Mrs. Hammid, she had
no strong feelings about the likelihood of her ability to suc-
ceed
in
this
task.
This was in
contrast
to both Ingo Swann
a lengthy and
apparently successful" series of experiments with Dr. Gertrude
Schmeidler at City College of New York (56] and Pat Price
PUTHOFF A,^jStb^da¥^R^g^^Dm(¥8W^A-
1ROP^-00789R003'ftfeX§6cWT-4
PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS TARGET
©
<r
<
C— C-
Fig. 4.
Subject Hammid (S4) drawings described as “some kind of diagonal trough up in the air.”
TABLE
II
Distribution of Rankings Assigned to Transcripts
Associated with Each Target Location for Experienced
Subject Price (SI)
Target Location
Hoover Tower,
Stanford
Bay land s Nature
Preserve,
Palo Alto
Radio
ceLescope,
Portola
Valley
Marina,
Redwood
City
Bridge
coll
plaza,
Fremont
Drlve-in
theater,
Palo Alto
Arts and Crafts
Plaza,
Menlo
Park
Catholic Church,
portola
Valley
Swimming pool
complex,
Palo Alto
Total
sum of
ranks
who
felt that he used his remote-viewing ability
in his every-
day life.
In comparison with the
latter two, many people
are more
influenced
by
their
environment
and
are
reluctant
under
public scrutiny to attempt activities that are generally thought
to be impossible.
Society often provides inhibition and nega-
tive
feedback
to
the
individual who
might
otherwise
have
explored
his own nonregular perceptual ability. We
all share
an
historical
tradition of “the
stoning of prophets and the
burning of
p&f
0*08*88^
tion of those who claim to perceive things that the majority do
not
admit
to
seeing.
Therefore,
in addition to maintaining
Distance
(km)
Rank
of
Associated
Transcript
3.4
l
6.4
l
6.4
6.8
l
14.5
5.1
l
1.9
8.5
3.4
(P-2.9X10
-6
;
scientific
rigor, one of our primary
tasks
as researchers
is to
provide
an
environment
in
which
the
subject
feels
safe
to
explore the possibility of paranormal perception.
With a new
subject, we also try to stress the nonuniqueness of the ability
because from our experience paranormal functioning appears
to be
a
latent
ability
that
all subjects can articulate to some
degree.
Because of Mrs, Hammid’s
artistic background, she was ca-
pable of drawing and
describing
visual images that she could
not identify in any cognitive or analytic sense. When the target
demarcation
team
went
to
a
target
location which
was
a
pedestrian overpass, the subject
said
that she saw “a kind of
trough up
in the
air,” which she indicated in the upper part
of her drawing in
Fig.
4.
She went on
to
explain,
“If you
stand
where
they
are
standing you
will
see something
like
this,” indicating the nested squares
at
the bottom of Fig.
4.
As
it turned out, a judge standing where she indicated would
have a view closely resembling what she had drawn, as can be
seen from the accompanying photographs of the target loca-
tion.
It needs to be emphasized, however, that judges did not
have
access
to
our photographs
of
the
site, used
here
for
illustrative purposes only, but rather they proceeded to each
of the target locations by list.
In
another
experiment,
the
subject
described
seeing “an
open bamlike structure with
a pitched roof.”
She
also saw
a “kind of slatted side to the structure making light and dark
bars on
the
wall.”
Her drawing and
a photograph
of the
associated bicycle shed target are shown in Fig. 5.
(Subjects
are encouraged to make drawings of anything they visualize
C4jd^
$@04>2
winss they
make are in general more accurate than their verbal description.)
As
in
the
original
series with Price, the results of the nine-
CPYRGHT
| PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, MARCH 1$7
Fig. 5.
Subject Hammid (S4) response
to bicycle shed
target described as an open "barn-like building” with "slats
on the sides” and
a “pitched roof.”
!
TABLE
III
Distribution of Rankings Assignfd to Transcripts Associated
Target
Location
Distance
Rank
of
As soc laced
Hechodlsc
Church,
Palo Alto
L ,9
l
Nea* Auditorium,
Menlo park
0.2
Merry-go-round,
Palo Alto
3.4
l
Parking garage,
Mountain
View
B.l
SRI
International
Courtyard,
Menlo
Park
0.2
Bicycle
ihed,
Menlo
Park
0.1
Railroad
treitle
bridge,
Palo Alto
1.3
Pumpkin patch,
Menlo
park
1.3
Pedaatrian overpaas,
Palo Alto
5.0
Total
a um
of
ranks
(p. 1.8x10*®)
experiment
series were submitted for independent judging on
1 blind basis by an SRI research analyst not otherwise associ-
ited with the research.
While at each target location, visited
n
turn, the judge was required
to
blind rank order the nine
inedited
typed manuscripts of the tape-recorded
narratives,
ilong with any associated drawings generated by the remote
iewer, on a scale
1 to 9 (best to worst match).
The sum of
anks assigned to the target-associated transcripts in this case
i/as
13, a result significant at p = 1.8 X 10'6 by exact calcula-
'Pwstee\&aA&2QMmm<z GiA
nd four second ranks (Table III).
Again,
as a backup judging procedure, a panel of five addi-
tional
judges
not
(Otherwise
associated
with
the
research
were
asked
simply jo blind match
the unedited typed
tran-
scripts and associate^ drawings generated by the remote viewer,
against
the
nine
target
locations which
they
independently
visited
in
turn.
A
(jorrect match consisted of a transcript of
a
given
date
being jnatched
to
the
target of that
date.'
In-
stead
of
the
expected number of
match
each
per judge,
the number of
correct matches obtained by the
five judges
was
5, 3, 3, 2, and
2, respectively.
Thus, rather than the ex-
pected
total numbej of 5
correct matches from the judges,
15 such matches wer£ obtained.
C.
Subjects S2 and S3: Experienced
Having completed d series of 18 remote-viewing experiments,
each
with
experienced
subject SI
(Price) and
learner S4
(Hammid), additionaj replication experiments, four with each
subject, were carried jout with experienced subjects S 2 (Elgin)
and S3 (Swann) and (learners S5 and S6. To place the judging
on
a basis comparable to that used with S
1 and S4, the four
transcripts each of experienced subjects S 2 and S3 were com-
bined into a group o| eight for rank order judging to be com-
pared
with
the
similarly
combined
results
of
the
learners
S5 and S6.
;
The series with S2 (Elgin, an SRI research analyst) provided
a further example of jthe dichotomy between verbal and draw-
«
Hterature, case histories often
o4results.)
The ex-
periment
described
ijere was
the
third conducted with
this