cA A tA DO : , Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 I OBJECTIVE The purpose of the program is to determine the characteristics of those perceptual modalities through which individuals obtain information about their environment, wherein such information is hot presented to any known sense, ‘The program is divided into two categories of investigation of approximately equal effort, applied research and basic research, The . purpose of the applied research effort is to explore experimentally the potential for applications of perceptual abilities of interest, with special attention given to accuracy and reliability. The purpose of the basic research effort is to identify the characteristics of individuals possessing such abilities, and to identify neurophysiological correlates and basic mechanisms involved in such functioning. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
ane na Da A PTO Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 A. Applied Research 1. Remote Viewing (a) ‘Project Atlas Remote Viewing A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client- designated tdrget of interest, a European R&D test facility. the experinent, carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility of remote -viewing under operational conditims, In phase I, map coordinates were furnished to the experimenters, the only additional information provided being the designation of the target° 7 ~7~"™ as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing , experiment with Subject 1 (pri 2) on a double-blind basis. The results of the | ya” experiment were turned over to client representatives for data evaluation. Figure 1 shows the level of detail for a sample early effort. at building layout, and Figure 2 shows the subject's first effort at drawing .a gantry crane he observed, both results peing obtained on a double-blind basis before exposure to client-held information, An artist's conception of the site as known to the client (but not to contract personnel) prior to the experiment is shown in Figure 3. Were the results not promising, the experiment would have stopped at this point. The results were judged to be of sufficiently good quality ,; however, that Phase II was entered in which the subject was made witting by client representatives. A second round of experimentation ensued with participation pte ete taser tinea etter Ae RESTA tt ORR vo * Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
AVG 1 LNOAVT DNIGTING LV quodaa Loarans 1 wuNnoOLs ele Ba Approved,For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 20001-0 A ee ? ® Pe x a * ™ - 7 * a . ~ a mea ~ _* ? » may * TN, a, Me ms, hay NS cal ne ps fo iw) Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 m
q poameees at pte ent emer erat OS eed a ane i i 4 t we 0 ‘ci - “a sf of ane Approved For Release euioer i a a * wo fe, a £. Approved For Release 2000708AA 0” CHR NEB SHIH RAT TOSS SOI} STRUCTION
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 FIGURE 3 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 of client representatives, The Phase Il effort was focussed on the generation of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in the process. The endoof Phase II gradually evolved into the first part of Phase III, the generation of unverifiable data not available to the client, but of interest nonetheless. Evaluation of the data by the client is under- way. (b) Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment SO il Subjects in and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment Aho" be | | bie fe involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the Ly” 9 wh experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on 4 ef . TE, combination pusiness/pleasuve trip. That is all that was imown to the subjects | u about the traveler's itinerary. The exporiment called for Dr. Puthoff£ to keep a detailed record of his location and activities, including photographs, each day at 1330 PDT. Six daily responses were obtained from Subject 1, five 4 from Subject 4. — . | bye The results were of high quality and are presently being a We evaluated _in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material. Samples of that data are as follows. Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two were in excellent agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the first of the two matches, Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at the base of a volcano | (Figure 4) and the subject's response was “large bare table mountain, yf Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 . oe ye
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 By this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonstration-of-ability test, put rather a training step on a gradient seale of ability. In mony of these experiments we monitor physiological correlates as discussed in Section B.3 (b). (Nine of these experiments have been completed to date, seven with the measurements of physiological correlates.) The following is a sample of an experiment with Subject 4. In this experiment we monitored physiolocial. correlates of the remote viewing activity. As is apparent in the following text, the subject initially had only a fragmentary picture of the remote site, but with what we judge to be a small amount of feedback, the subject was able to put images together into a correct description. Accompany ing the verbal description presented below is a photograph of the actual scene at the remote location (Fig. 7). The experimenter with the subject (R.T.) was, as always, kept ignorant of the target location to prevent guidance in the questioning. The capital letters. signify walkie-talkie communication. | R.T.: It is now 12:35, S~4: ...-very strong diagonal....like a zigzag that goes this. way, vertically. R.T.: $-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STRONG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOING VERTICALLY, OVER, (Talking on walkie talkie to HP.) U.P.: THERE IS A STRONG ZIGZAG AT MY PLACE, BUT IT IS NOT VERTICAL BUT RATHER HORIZONTAL; BUT IF SHE IS LOOKING FROM THE AIR, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE, OVER. R.T.: . Can you tell what the zigzag is attached to? Whether it's part of a puilding or a fence on the ground? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
‘Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 R.T.: S-4: S~4: RT. S-4: It's 12:41, My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal. q usually think of a fence. Why don't you go up and look down and view the whole thing from above and see if you can get the whole gestalt of where he is. »«.. definitely a non-vegetation...almost no vegetation around. It's mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is--either water or steel--shiny, ‘gigzag,..definitely shiny. 267, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR Water.. WATER, WE CAN'T TELL, IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATION- “NO VEGETATION AROUND:... Mostly conerete. . . IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE... He's standing on conerete.... YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE, OVER, IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS IS SHINY AND IN MY NEAR VICINITY IT Is BARREN AND CONCRETE OR CONCRETE-COLORED EARTH, SHE SAID THAT IT LOOKED LIKE STEEL OR WATER, CAN SHE MAKE THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE TWO? He wants to know whether it looks more like steel or water. It seems to have movement--that's why I would deduce that it's water. What if you try to look at the whole thing, I'm trying to get an eagle's eye view. That's a waterworks. Why does it look like a waterworks? In what way? io There seems to be a man-made Layout of channels and connections to conduct it. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 R.T.: 8-4 SEES MOVEMENT IN THE ZIGZAG THING, SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S WATER, AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN-MADE . WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER, H.P, | THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT, IT IS A ZIGZAG MAN-MADE WATER CHANNEL WITH CONCRETE SIDES, OVER, , 8-4: I can't believe it. a sample of exceptionally good quality. That experiment continued with four eee more site descriptions, three of which were of equal quality. One experiment of this nature has been carried out with Subject 1, one with Subject 2, two with Subject 3, and five with Subject 4. A number of descriptions were essentially free of error and with no ro other than verification following the remote viewer's description. wi N! Ke ap! ye A complete analysis is to be carried out on these aan following au | more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the - following areas: (a) perspective and dimension are often distorted (an ye $y | | | We 4 eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation between Ais ' | | Us buildings may appear to be 100 feet, etc.) and, (b) written material (w bow generally cannot be read, wl Tey wv (d) Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing pe fe, a wet! of clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort.was made to determine whether in _ driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine sete neene e the location of the > target team by triangulation with a bearing Compass. The triangulation lines were essentially uncorrelated with each other and with the target location, and therefore provided a myll result. gp zen Approved For Release 2000/08/ i sat RDP9G gv
1.md come BULL eee Approved For Release 2000/08/1 0: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0. B. Basic Research In addition to the testing of individuals under conditions which : fag cyt yield data indicating the feasibility of the application of paranormal abilities to operational needs, fifty percent of the effort is devoted to: 1. Identification of measurable characteristics possessed by eifted individuals (20%); - | a | —-- 2. Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate to paranormal activities (20%) ; 3. Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful filled during the course of experimentation: 1) establishsand apply criteria to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered. to be functional and those for whom it is not; 2) obtain sufficient medical and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against which (a) one individual may be compared with another, and (b) an individual may be compared to himself at different times to determine whether para- normal functioning occurs in an altered neurophysiological state, 3) specific validation experiments must be conducted with sufficient control to ensure that all conventional communication paths are blocked, and with outcomes sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether paranormal functioning occurred; 4) obtain neurophysicological data during experimentation to att? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001000200 )
RS 18 pc cme npameecnietneeet beng tes yontitornan or tc ane fn Hi an gc team Fomine Ain ee phoma i a Me cee ee cnn in ee ee ms cae sn ent rete tame meee AE ORE ata mma Am a a = tam determine those correlates, if any, which relate to paranormal activity. — In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn ‘and the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re~ search program ig shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance i agen i 3 { : A + : funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives», with the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and | a : een anee Le Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals One of the key issues in the program is the establishment of -eriteria capable of differentiating individuals apparently gifted in paranormal functioning from those who are not. | Three experimental paradigms were chosen to act as screening tests on the basis that these tests had been useful for such purposes * ef ‘prior to this program ( in the sense that certain apparently gifted individuals did exceedingly well on at east one of the tests, whereas the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from chance expectation). The tests are (a) remote viewing of natural targets, “ . Teh ae (b) reproduction of simple line drawings hidden from the subject but viewed by an experimenter, and (c) determination of the state of a four-state elec- tronic random stimulus generator. . The first test constitutes a so-called "free-response" paradigm in which the subject originates freely about contents of his awareness; furthermore, the channel in general may involve both direct perception of the remote site and perception of the mental contents of an observer Approved For Release 2000/08/10 = CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 t ? AS i i H
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Alm slats lolnujolsalr TABLE 1 eM MONTHS ri2ialaj)si6i7 [8 {9 {ro {a j22 23 1. Set up neurophysiological lab with computer _processing debugged. mo 2. W.A.L.S. testing of subjects by client PROGRAM SCHEDULE - II 3. Measure neurophysiological correlates during paranormal experimentation a) paranormal EEG experiments b) other paranormal experimentation 4. Work to determine\nature of energies involved (gradiometer,Vetc.) QQ 4 5, Medical testing, including special testing 6. Neuropsychological testing 7. Psychological testing, including in-depth interview 8, Correlate data ard consider theoretical models . PP Ey TTT TLL LEI ee Ree 9, Prepare final report Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 at the site. The second test is more constrained than the first in that the target information is more analytical or abstract, being associated with a graphical representation of an item of interest rather than the item itself, The third test is the most\constrained in that the target is blind to all participants in the experiment. and. the subject's choice is precisely constrained. The details of these tests are given below. For the purpose of screening the criteria as to what constitutes a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily, Viz For the purpose of sereeni ng.a result is to be considered paranormal if, the a priori probability for the occurrence of the result | by chance, under the null hypothesis, is” p g10° | Although the above requirement is exceedingly strict by usual psycho~ | physiological standards, it is chosen here (a) because the controversial nature of the subject requires strict handling, and (b) in our work and elsewhere, a bimodal distribution has been observed empirically in which a subset of individuals participating in paranormal research produce re- sults at a level of statistical significance p = 10° in comparison | with the bulk of individuals who cluster about the mean as expected, Therefore, we base our criteria on an observable natural division into eleariy functional and non-functional categories. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
RAS 18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 best pe yp ve | Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects 1-3 considered gifted, subjects 4 ~ 6 acting as learners or controls. F Subject 1 qualifies as a gifted subject on the basis of remote viewing ; subject 2 qualifies as gifted on the basis of the random generator test; a = subject 3 is tentatively classed as gifted in remote viewing, although a not yet completing the screening series, based on client evaluat ion of highly successful venote-viewing experiments carried out for the client ~ in the previous program, and also on the basis»of meeting the p< 10" criterion in experimentation at another laboratory. | Subject 5 (learner/control), a male, age 54, is paired with gifted subject 1, a male, age 55. Learner/control subject 6, a female, age 34, is by age, background, and temperament paired with gifted subject 2, a male, age ,/ 31. Learner subject 4 (female, age 53) and gifted subject 3 ( male, age 41) | are paired on the. basis of artistic occupations (professional pho tographer a =e: q A ‘and painter, respectively) and similar emotional and psychological makeup . '* Harlier in the program nine subjects were’ to be placed in three categories, | _ three subjects each; gifted subjects, learners, and controls. However, experience in the early part of the program indicated that (a) a best effort would require spending more time with fewer people, and (hb) the distinction between learners and controls was arbitrary in comparison with the distinetion between these categories and that of gifted subjects as defined above, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
aN ae RS 18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 (a) Remote Viewing of Natural Targets The first screening test is based on previous SRI research results which indicate that it is possible for a subject to describe randomly-chosen geographical sites located several miles from the subject's position and demarcated by some appropriate means. This experiment consists of a series of double-blind tests involving local targets in the San Francisco Bay area which can be docu~ mented by independent judging. Target locations within thirty minutes driving time from SRI are randomly chosen from a list of targets kept Od To begin an experiment, an experimenter is closeted with a oi — aT blind to subject and experimenters and used without replacement. “subject at SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin a narrative description of the remote location. A. second experimenter abtains a target location from the target pool and proceeds directly to the target without communi cating with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. ‘The second -experinenter remains at the target site for an agreed-upon thirty-minute period following the thirty minutes allotted for travel. During the ‘observation period, the remote viewing subject is asked to describe his impressions of the target site into a tape recorder. A comparison is made when the experimenter returns. Following a series of pine experiments, the results are sgub- jected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientiats fae? ee a i aig eat t ~ not otherwise associated with the research. The judges are asked to.blind Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 match locations, independently visited, against typed manuscripts of tape-recorded narratives of the remote viewer, A given narrative can be assigned to more than one target location. A correct match requires that a tramscript of a given date be associated with the target of that date. Probability calculations are on the basis of the @& priori proba- bility of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively assuming OS Few assignment wit hout replacement. on the part of the judges. _ _ ag As indicated in Report # 1 » . Subject 1 has completed ay he “10 fi dd this series, obtaining a result significant at the p = 8 x 10 level. — wir el” Experimentation is in progress with Subjects 2 and 4, two transcripts Me having been obtained from each to date, (b) Line Drawings A pool of fifty simple line drawings of everyday objects has been drawn, randomized, and placed in a secure location, During experimentation, experimenters and subject are separated by either an experimenter or subject entering a shielded room so“that from that time forward the subject is at all tines visually, acoustically, and electrically shielded from personnel and material at the target location. Following isolation a target is chosen by means of the universal randomization protocol technique described in Section 4(a), used in this case to generate a two-digit number modulo 50. ‘The subject's task is then to re produce with pen on paper the line drawing now displayed at the sorset Location, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020004-0 RAS le
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Following a period of effort not to exceed half an hour, the subject may either pass (when he does not feel confident) or indicate he is ready to submit a drawing to the experimenters, in which case the drawing is collected by an experimenter before the subject is permitted to see the target. The experiment is then repeated with replacement Seaecnneenseoeennnnns until ten drawings have been obtained from the subject. To obtain an independent evaluation of the correlation between target and response data, the experimenters submit the data for judging on a blind basis by two SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the research. The judges are asked to match the response data with the comrespouding target data (without replacement). Such experimentation is presently in progress, a number of a drawings having been obtained from several of the subjects but not yet . a submitted for judging. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 (c) Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator The determination of the state of a four-state electronic random stimulus generator comprises the third screening test, The target is in the form of one of four art slides chosen randomly (p = £4) by an electronic random generator. The generator does not indicate its choice: until the subject indicates his choice to the machine by pressing a button (See Figure 3 ). As soon as the subject indicates his choice, the target slide is illuminated to provide visual and auditory (bell if correct) feedback as to the correctness or incorrectness of his choice. ‘Until that time both subject and experimenter remain ignorant of the machine's choice, so the experiment is of the double-blind type. Five legends at _— the top:of the machine face are illuminated one at a time with increasing correct choices (6,8, 10, ....) to provide additional reinforcement. The machine choice, subject, choice), cumulative trial number, and cumulative hit number are recorded automatically on a printer. Following trial number 25, the machine must be reset manually by depressing a RESET button. A methodological feature of the machine is that the choice of a target is not forced, That is, a subject may press a PASS button when he wishes not to guess, in which case the machine indicates what its choice was, and neither a hit nor a trial is scored by the machine, which then goes on to make its next selection. Thus the subject does not have to guess at targets when he does not feel that he has an idea as to which to choose, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Figure &. ESP Teaching Machine used in this experiment. An incorrect choice of target is indicated. Two of the five "encouragement lights" at the top of the machine are illuminated. The printer to the right of the machine records data on fan-fold paper tape. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with probability 4 and no learning, the probability of observing 2k successes in n trials is approximated by the probability of a normal distribution value 2 (k - > - 4) / fare For the purpose of scréening, each subject is required to complete 100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2500 trials). To date,subjecte i, 2, and 6 have completed this phase of the screening program, and their results are tabulated in Table 2. Subject 4 has completed 2100 trials with “mean scores of 25.71 (p = 0.20). Table 2 " : wis Sereening Data: Four-state Electronic Randg Stimulus Generator Subject ; Mean ScoreY’100 Trials Binomial Probability | : . Over 2500 Trials . 25.76 . ? | " ra) 7 & : 29.36 I b sl ul {  p OO” 25.40 | eae = OA On the basis of this test Subject 2. whose scores are plotted in Fig. 9, qualifies as a gifted individual, having satisfied the criterion of producing a result whose: a priori probability under the null hypothesis is -~G . p<10.°, Of further interest are this subject's personal observations y - of subjective experiences during the screening test, presented in Appendix Be Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
* . Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 50 40 30 Out of 100 trials/run. 20 HITS/RUN 10 ¢) 10 20 30 _ RUN NUMBER - 100 Trials/Run p = + per trial FIGURE 9 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 26 Identification of Measurable Characteristics Possessed by . Gitted Subjects (20%). . a) Medical Evaluation The medical evaluation of program participants has been assigned. to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program is being handled by Dr. Robert Armbruster, Director of the Clinic’s Department of environmental Medicine. The Clinic, in turn, has subcontracted -gertain special tests to the Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University. One visual sensitivity test is being administered by the Bioengineering Group of the Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory of SRI.. The testing procedures, outlined inTable 3,fall into seven categories: D General physical examination, including complete medical and family history; 2) Laboratory examinations, including SMA-12 panel blood chemistries, protein electrophoresis, blood Lipid profile, urinalyses, serology, blood type and factor, pulmonary function screening, and 12-lead electrocardiogram; 3) Neurological examination, including comprehensive and electroencephalogram (sleeping and routine); 4) Audiometric examination, including comprehensive, Bekesy bone conduction, speech discrimination, and impedance bridge test; Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 SG GS fH 4 = Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 SL sw ©) & @& #1 Gs Ca ¢ @ ee be] fd bel Cl & F OBL Oa & BAA. be fe Bs Se oP a Soe Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Ge Ga KS Ce) bes & & © © © @) Ss BD go> © ee o @O ®& Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 Se of LDA oe i my i co OD = DODD G8 @ ends Dey. de) Se 4 éi @®& Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
ee Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 3) Midtesting (SRI-administered) Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation is carried out to provide indicators as to the effects of mood and conceptualization on success in experimentation. Conclusions will be drawn in the final stage of project effort. fest: Mood Adjective Checklist ; Source: Psychology Department, Stanford University (Hypnosis Lab) Furpose: The Mood Adjective Checklist is one of a number of pre-experiment instruments designed to provide a measure of a subject's feelings of the moment as he enters the experimental situation. The purpose ig to determine whether measures of success in the experimental phase correlate with pre-experiment mood indicators. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0