Approved For Release 2g>E©R HA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
9.
(U)
Psychological Correlates to Remote Viewing
(S/NF)
Psychological
correlates
to
remote
viewing
have
provided
weak,
but
significant, evidence
for correlations with some forms of psychological variables.
In the early
work with the
Personality Assessment System, SRI found that many of the group G1
viewers
clustered near each other in PAS space.
In later work, the PAS predicted viewer performance to
a
significant
degree.
SRI’s work
with
self-report personality
tests has
not been
successful;
however, Honorton reports small, but significant correlations with the thinking/feeling dimension
in the Myers-Briggs Type
Inventory. 11
In general, psychological
correlates have been weak
and/or unreliable.
10.
(U)
Shielding and ELF
(S/NF)
The
main
purpose
of
searching
for
shielding
against
psychoenergetic
functioning
is
to
provide
for
a
secure
environment.
I.
M.
Kogan
proposed
a
model
of
psychoenergetic information transfer based on extremely low-frequency (ELF) electromagnetic
radiation. 12
In that model, Kogan proposed that the brain
is, in effect,
a 10-Hz oscillator and
the body is a crude antenna.
Radiation at that frequency would exhibit many of the properties of
psychoenergetic functioning known at that time.
(S/NF)
Too
few
data were
collected under known
shielding conditions
to make
definitive statements with regard to shielding.
Two trials were collected in a 30-dB shielding at
10 Hz.
These trials showed significant evidence of remote viewing
(n -
2,
z =
1.92,
p < 0.027, d =
1.358).
In another experiment, when the target material was contained
in
a
SCIF,
significant evidence
for remote viewing was observed
(n =
6,
z =
1.91, p < 0.028,
d
=
0.780).
The
trend,
however,
is
clear:
electromagnetic
shielding
does
not
inhibit
psychoenergetic acquisition of target material.
11.
(U) Audio Analysis
(S/NF)
In
a
single study involving
trials with
a
single viewer from group Gl,
a
significant
correlation
of
remote
viewing
quality
with
the
audio/linguistic
character
of
the
response was found
(n =6 ,
r - 0.995, p < 0.050, d = 0.800).
One purpose
for determining
within-session correlations with remote viewing quality
is to provide
for an independent and
a priori measure of quality.
(U)
SRI recommends that this type of investigation be continued to determine the
degree to which the result can be generalized across viewers.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
; CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Approved For Release S6©RsE?IA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
12.
(U)
Search and Tracking
(S/NF)
As was seen
in
Section V.-B.,
above,
significant evidence
for search was
found overall
(
=
3,790,
z = 2.61, p < 0.0045, d = 0.042).
Most of these trials were collected
in experiments using computer techniques.
In a few experiments, however, the target material
was physical objects in a laboratory setting. The effect sizes from these experiments do not differ
significantly from the overall result.
(S/NF)
Search has always been a challenge. On a few occasions, operational use of
search has proved extremely useful
data, but on the average, both the laboratory experiments
and operational use have been disappointing.
SRI recommends continued
effort in search to
determine those factors that can enhance a potentially very useful phenomenon.
13.
(U)
Precognitive Remote Viewing
(S/NF)
The
first SRI precognition experiment provided significant evidence
of the
phenomenon
(n
=
4,
z =
1.73, p <
0.042,
d =
0.864). 13
From FY
1975
to FY
1987,
precognition was not studied in any systematic manner.
During FY 1987, one experiment was
conducted using natural
sites
as targets and one of the group G1
viewers.
The result was not
significant
(
=
10,
z = -0.476, p < 0.683, d = -0.150).
A second experiment using novice
viewers was conducted in the same year.
This also did not reach a significant level
(
= 55,
z = 0.070, p < 0.472, d = 0.064).
Therefore, the results of SRI’s investigations are mixed.
However,
in
a recent meta-analysis of the precognition forced-choice literature conducted by
one of SRFs subcontractors, 50 years of experimentation involving 50,000 subjects showed highly
significant evidence for the phenomenon
(n
10 e
,
z = 24.23
, p < 4 X
10~52
, d = 0.041).
This
result
is consistent with the forced-choice real-time studies conducted
at SRI
(d = 0.052).
(S/NF)
Taken as a whole, there appears to be compelling evidence for precognition.
When precognition
is used as the underlying assumption for a heuristic model of psychoenergetic
functioning, 15 years of random number generator data
fall on the predicted theoretical curve. 14
14.
(U)
Analytics (Forced-Choice)
(U)
Forced-choice remote
viewing
(defined
in
Section
IV. -A.)
has
traditionally
provided weak but consistent evidence for a psychoenergetic phenomenon.
In the experiments
conducted during the Rhine era, over one million trials were conducted with ESP cards
(i. e
.
,
a
one-in-five target system). 15
Strong significances were observed, but effect
sizes were of the
order of 0.02.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
: CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Approved For Release 2&E£/REIa-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
(S/NF)
Table 3 shows the results for 19,675 trials collected at SRI since 1973.
The
effect size
is consistent with the early results of Rhine
(
d
= 0.052).
In fiscal years 1986-1988,
one of the viewers from group G1 was able to increase the effect size by a factor of 10
(
n
= 50,
P
<.
0.00015,
d =
0.51),
meeting Cohen’s
definition
of a
strong
effect.
While
there was
significant improvement with this viewer during the three years, the number of formal trials was
small, and thus interpretation
is
difficult.
(S/NF)
SRI
recommends
that
a
forced-choice
investigation
be
continued
to
determine
if such strong effects can be observed in other viewers.
15.
(U)
Conducting an RV Experiment
(S/NF)
No
formal
experimentation
has
been
conducted
to
examine
session
parameters that enhance remote viewing.
SRI does not use any formal induction technique, and
the
sessions
are conducted
in
a businesslike atmosphere
with the viewer and monitor
sitting
upright and opposite each other across a table.
Since the overall effect size
(
d
= 0.385) observed
for group G1 meets Cohen’s definition of a medium-sized effect, these session conditions do not
appear to hinder the phenomenon.
16.
(U)
Countermeasures
(S/NF)
The
first
step
in
investigating countermeasures
for remote
viewing
is
to
examine whether
it
is possible to shield against psychoenergetic intrusion.
As was discussed in
Section V.-C.-10, E&M shielding does not appear to be effective.
(S/NF)
To provide an effective shield or a useful physical countermeasure,
it must
be determined whether psychoenergetic phenomena
interact with the physical
world.
In the
remote action studies conducted at SRI, most of the studies have not demonstrated any evidence
of psychoenergetic interaction with the physical world.
(S/NF)
Two exceptions are worthy of discussion.
In a study conducted in FY 1979
involving random number generators, the
significant results were consistent with the
historical
database of such experiments.
Later,
it was shown that these results are not due to a physical
interaction, but rather due to precognition. 14
(S/NF)
During FY 1975, a striking anomaly was observed when one of the viewers
from group G1 attempted to influence a shielded magnetometer.
The device was perturbed in a
significant manner, but no other experiments were conducted that showed similar non-statistical
results.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
: CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Approved For Release 2§E
<®R £c|A-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
(S/NF)
In an experiment designed to replicate claims made in the People’s Republic
of China, SRI determined the degree to which pulses from a photomultiplier tube correlated with
the quality of remote viewing.
While strong evidence for remote viewing was seen, no significant
correlations with the tube output were observed.
(S/NF)
At this time, there
is no evidence that psychoenergetic phenomena can be
shielded against nor effectively countermeasured.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
: CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Approved For Release gipg^£:pA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
REFERENCES (U)
1.
Zimbardo,
P., Psychology and Life,
12th Ed.,
Scott, Foresman and Company, Boston,
MA,
p. 54
(1988) UNCLASSIFIED.
2.
Rosenthal,
R., Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research , Applied
Social Research
Methods Series, Vol.
6, Sage Publications, Beverly
Hills, CA (1982) UNCLASSIFIED.
3.
Light,
R.
J.
and
D.
B.
Pillemer, Summing
Up,
The
Science
of Reviewing Research
,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1984) UNCLASSIFIED.
4.
Hedges, L. V. and
I. Olkin, Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis, Academic Press, Inc.,
New York, NY (1985) UNCLASSIFIED.
5.
Feingold, A., “Matching for Attractiveness in Romantic Partners and Same-Sex Friends:
A Meta-Analysis and Theoretical Critique,” Psych
.
Bull., Vol.
104, No.
2, pp. 226-235
(1988) UNCLASSIFIED.
6.
Cohen,
J.,
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences,
(rev.
ed.) Academic
Press, New York, NY (1977) UNCLASSIFIED.
7.
Targ, E., R. Targ, and O. Lichtarge, “Realtime Clairvoyance: A Study of Remote Viewing
Without Feedback,” The Proceedings of the Parapsychological Association 28th Annual
Convention,
Tufts
University,
Medford,
MA,
pp.
335-342
(August
1985)
UNCLASSIFIED.
8.
Honorton,
C.,
D.
B.
Ferrari,
and
G.
Hansen,
“Meta-Analysis
of
Forced-Choice
Precognition
Experiments,”
Psychophysical
Research
Laboratories'
Technical
Report
(1989) UNCLASSIFIED.
9.
May,
E.
C.,
R. Targ, and H.
E.
Puthoff,
“Possible EEG Correlates to Remote
Stimuli
Under Conditions of Sensory Shielding,” Proceedings of Electro 77 Professional Program
of the IEEE,
Special Session on the State of the Art in Psychic Research, New York
(April 1977) UNCLASSIFIED.
10.
May, E.
C., W. W, Luke, and T.
J.
Frivold,
“Neurophysiological Correlates to Remote
Viewing (U),” SRI International, Menlo Park, CA,
Final Report—Objective D, Task
1,
Project 1291 (December 1988) SECRET.
11.
Private communication.
12.
Kogan,
I.
M,,
“Is Telepathy
Possible?”
Radio
Eng.,
Vol.
21,
P.
(January
1966)
UNCLASSIFIED.
13.
Puthoff,
H.
E.
and
R.
Targ, “A
Perceptual Channel
for
Information
Transfer Over
Kilometer
Distances:
Historical
Perspective and Recent Research,”
Proceedings
of the
IEEE,
Vol.
64, No.
3, pp. 329-354 (March 1976) UNCLASSIFIED.
14.
May,
E.
C.,
D.
I.
Radin,
G.
S.
Hubbard,
B.
S.
Humphrey,
and
J.
M.
Utts,
“PSI
Experiments
with
Random
Number
Generators:
An
Informational
Model,”
SRI
International,
Menlo
Park,
CA,
Final
Report
Project
8067
(October
1985)
UNCLASSIFIED.
15.
Honorton,
C.,
“Error Some
Place!,” Journal of Communication
,
pp.
103-116
(Winter
1975) UNCLASSIFIED,
SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
: CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Approved For Relej
13/Q9/J
6-00792R000500350001 -4
Publication Information
Page:
Coder I.D:
Date:
Form
I.D:
Rules for Meta-analysis Coding
Organization
5.
Use one Publication Information sheet for each publication.
Use as few Experiment Information sheets as necessary.
t
..
.
.
,
A Unit
is the smallest level at which the most basic hypothesis
(usually psi versus no psi) was tested.
Results for a hypothesis that cannot be reconstructed from the basic units should be coded as a separate
“experiment”.
The Type should be listed as O:
gprrelatian-
.
For an experiment,
staple together all Unit Information sheets with the Experiment Information sheet on
top.
Clip together all experiment packets from the same publication.
Number all of the sheets consecu
tively within a publication.
3.
1.
Circle (or slash) the appropriate choice.
2.
Use
[
] around data to indicate a coder guess or calculation.
3.
If Other (O:) then specify.
Fvperiment Parameters. Kn own Target Parameters and Feedbask:
Use publication date
if Experiment date
is unknown.
Generally, independent variables are those manipulated by the experimenter
However
this space can
also be used for variables that differ unintentionally within an experiment.
See Rule #4 under
Unit In-
SS lANL experiment
is coded as follows: Experiment Tyj^
RV-Lab:
Principal Hypothec
CNSre^ionds to remote, external stimuli;
Independent Variable!
Timing of remote stimuli.
Targeting Method: Prompting means a sound or gesture
(e.g., Gina’s bell).
SrStal S'S,Sr:
Code the primary mode.
YiSUll Feedback:
Photograph
(e.g.
,
MaUre). AMkt Feedback:
Jus. a sound
(e.g., Bel! from Ih.Je.ehm; ma-
chine).
Verbal Feedback: Verbal debrief (e.g., You did well.
The target was
...).
Sll£ Feedback.
Physical visit to the target site (e.g., Outbound experiment).
lalvsis
:
Rank R = number of choices for ranking, including target and
ail decoys.
Analvsis scale, n = maximum,
(e.g., 0 -> 4, n = 4).
Judgment means a qualitative estimate (e.g., by-gosh-by-golly)
;
1 = complete miss, 4 = complete hit.
Statistic means z-score or F ratio,
etc.
1 Same
is "Session” for a single RV session, but “Trial” for a single forced choice.
In forced choice
experiments, there are usually several trials in a single session.
Unit
I D
is blank most of the time.
Use Ops lag when appropriate.
, H
3’
viewer I.D.
is according to our most current list.
Therefore,
if a known viewer was listed under an old
T D
note the person’s name so the current I.D. can be entered in the data base.
4.
Parameters thaf differ should be filled in only for those cases where “differs” was circled on the Expen-
mPn t Sheet
If the variable was intentionally manipulated,
circle Y.
.
.
,
5.
lvalue should be entered as -1
if
it
is unknown,
to avoid confusion with the default missing value code
of 0, which could be a legitimate P-value.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
:
a
CUL-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4
Experiment Information
y
n
Sub-experiment or Condition? Q Q
Page:
Coder I.D:
Date:
Form I.D:
ExDeriment Parameters
Pages Within Document
Principal Investigator
Number of Subjects
Principal Hypothesis
Independent Variable (s)
not included below;
list
categories or describe
in space provided.
Experiment Task
Known Target Parameters
Target Name
Targeting Method
Type
Distance (km)
Location
When Selected
Shielding Type
Feedback
Basic Analysis
RV-Lab
RV-Ops
Forced-Choice
Screening
Training
Search
Oi
Beacon
Abstract
Coordinates
Prompting
Seif
Unknown
Differs*
Q=-_
Ops
Real Site
Photograph
Alpha/Numeric
Person
Objects
D iffers*
O:
<1
<50
< 5000
> 5000
Unknown
Differs*
Oi
Inside
Outside
Both
Differs*
O:—
—
Retrocognition
Real Time
Precognition
Differs’
O :
Unknown
E&M Cage/Room
Water
SCIF
Differs*
Oi
—
Immediate
<5 min
<1 hr
<1 day
>1 day
Unknown
Differs*
Oi
Blind
Post Hoc
__
—-—
—
Rating Rank R
Fuzay Bi,
Disc,
Bit
Concept
Hits_
Sca le n_
Judgment
Match O
tf of choices
Depndt. Variable
Scott’s //rows
FM
SRI
Client
0:_
Sum-of-Ranks
Statistic
O
RV
PK
Utility
Demonstration
O:
* When “ Differs’’
is circled, information must be entered
at the unit level.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/09
: CIA-RDP96-00792R000500350001-4