Progress Report No. 3 Covering the Period 1 April to 1 August 1974 Stanford Research Institute Project 3183 PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES - by Harold E. Puthoff Client Private Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08[10 CIA~RI)Pla6:-QO787ROO01000200014 SEC. CLI O~ia`IN ~(A;kr TiMb CONTROL NO N\ s 64mf 04~ Research lvst.;, MMT-w t6 IFATE OF DOC DATE REC'D DATE OUT SUSPENSE DATE -Z-ROSS REFERENCE OR' POINT OF FILING I 12/P6/% TobtecutIve Officer., M%T FROM Kamld E. -Artboff & VwselL Tirg ROUTING DATE SENT~ suBj- PERCEPTUAL AMMlTATI0lTlZkL (Finta report) Part One - EXIDOWINT SM2-.:APY (034' 21' Part Wo - RMEARC-11 RIOMET (cyt lecld part 1 2 COURIER NO. ANSWERED REPLY NO CONTROL NO. SEC. CL. OR reeseaw-b I?**. RENCE OR s SUSPENSE IPATE CROSS' REFE -A OUT DA'rq'OFA'O- DATE-REC POINT OF FILING /76 12/25 TO' DATE FROM xta-maell, T"g NG F ROYTI SENT SUBJ. (Flinal RePcxt i P~-~ rt C),~:ne -F. A-EFCTT eyT Fr-ri- NO REP COURIER NO. ANS WERED LY Approved'For Release 2000108110 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 I OBJECTIVE The purpose of the program is to determine the characteristics of those perceptual~modalities through which individuals obtain irformation 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 puipose 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 A Applied Research 1. Remote Viewing (a) Project Atlas Remote Viewing. A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client- designated target of interest, a European R&D test facility. The experiment, carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility of remote-viewing under operational conditioas. In phase 1, map coordinates were furnished to the experimenters the only additional information provided being the designation of the target'- (P/rde on a double-blind basis. The results of the experiment with Subject 1 experiment were turned over to client representatives for data evaluation. as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing 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 being 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 poiut. The, results were judged to be of sufficiently good quality', however, that Phase II was entered in which the subje.ct was made witting by client representatives. A second round of experimentation ensued with participation Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 96-0078 0001 20001-01 Approve or Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP 0 OD- LI Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 P-) m CRANE CONSTRUCTION Approved For Release 201WUbM&: &W6161-M&E0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 X/ co -1 , N P - 0 ~-i. f Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 of client representatives. The Phase 11 effort was focussed on the generation of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in the process. The en&,of 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 - k?- Subjects L, and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on a A91 combination business/pleasure trip. That is all that was known to the subjects Yd about the traveler's itinerary. The experiment 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,efive 94 from Subject 4. The results were of high quality and are presently being evaluated-in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material. Samples of that data are as follows. Of the five daily responses bbtained 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, I,. ~It 4,vav Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 jungle below, dark cool moist atmosphere," a match both with regard to topography and ambience. In the second match the subject submitted that all she got was a "picture of Dr. Puthoff sitting in a beach chair by a pool," which was entirely correct. D,uring-the course of the.'' Centr al -America expetiment, on one occasion when the test subject was unavailable, an experimenter volunteered a drawing of an image he obtained at the beginning of one of the daily ex- periments. (The target for that day was an airport, an unexpected target associated with:.a side excursion at midpoint of the week's activity.) The match was good, as shown in Figures 5 and;6. The transcript data will be examined further to determine fine structure, resolution, etc. (c) Local Targets with Feedback In this series of experiments, designed to give immediate data to experimenters, a subject is asked to take part experiment under the following conditions. The subject and two experimenters (one are in a first floor laboratory in building 30 at SRI. (H.P.) leaves the area and proceeds to a remote location-of None of the experimenters with the subject knew of the in a remote viewing. of whom was R.T.) A second experimenter his choosing. remote target location. H.P. and R.T. are in two-way radio communication via walkie-talkie, (a) to provide the experimenter at the target location real-time data and (b) to give the subject immediate feedback after he has made his assessment of the target. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 t FIGURE 4 TERRAIN AT BASE OF VOLCANO USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET SA-2613-19 FIGURE 5 AIRPORT IN SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 SA-2613-20 FIGURE 6 SKETCH PRODUCED BY -SUBJECT FROM SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, AIRPORT USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 6 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 33y this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonst.ration-of-ability test, but; rather a training step on a gradient scale of ability. In many 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. Accompanying 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.: S-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STRONG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOLfG VERTICALLY. OVER. (Talking on walkie talkie to H.P.) H.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 IffiAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. OVER. R.T.: Can you tell what the zigzag- is attached to? Whether it's part of a building or a fence on the ground? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Al; AWN-, NI V6 1~ J6, ~;A 'Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 R.T.: It's 12:41. S-4: My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal. I usually think of a fence. R.T.: 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. S-4: ..... definitely a non-yegetation-almost no vegetation around. It's mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is--either water or steel--shiny, shiny. R.T.: 72,67, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR S-4: Water.. R.T.: WATER, WE CAN'T TELL. IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATION-NO VEGETATION AROUND~... S-4: Mostly concrete . . . R.T.: IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE ... S-4: He's standing on concrete .... R.T.: YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE. OVER. H.P.: 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 DIFFERENT IATION BETWEEN THE TWO? R.T.: He wants to know whether it looks more like steel or water. S-4: It seems to have movement--that's why I would deduce that it's water. R.T.: What if you try 'to look at the whole thing. 9-4: I'm trying to get an eagle's eye view. That's a waterworks. R.T.: Why does it look like a watenvorks? In what way? S-4: There seems to be a man-made layout of channels and connections to conduct it. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved. For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA7RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 R.T.: S-4 SEES MOVEMENT IN THE ZIGZAG THINGY SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S WATER, AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN-INTADE WATERMRKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER. H.P~ THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT. IT IS A ZIGZAG MAN-DIADE WATER CHANNEL WITH CONCRETE SIDES. OVER. S -4: 1 can't believe it. The above is an excerpt from an early experiment, and is typical, rather-'- a sample of exceptionally good quality. -That experiment continued with four -------------- . 11w t~ 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 verification following the remote viewer's description. V A complete analysis is to be carried out on these transcrip s following more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the following areas: (a) perspective and'dimension are often distorted (an eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation be tween buildings may appear to be 100 feet, etc.) and, (b) written material generally cannot be read. AkAl t( (d) Local.Targets with Azimuth Bearing In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was TT- clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to determine of descriptions were essentially free of error and with no feedbac other than whether in driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine 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 ~11 result. wo Approved For Release 2000/08/~-~Flk!RDP9 87ROO~410 01 Approved For Release 2000/08/10-: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0. B. Basic Research In addition to the testing of individuals under conditions which J. 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 gifted individuals (20%); 2. Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate to paranormal activities (2076); 3. Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful- filled during thecourse of experimentation: 1) establish-.,-,and apply criteria to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered to be functional and those for who m 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 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01000200 Approved For Release _Z0_GL0LQ&1D_,._QA-R_ DJP96_-Q07_8.7R0G0_1,Q0G20001 -0 j(--L AS ',I! F I 'CAT! CN determine those correlates, if any, which relate to paranormal activity. In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn band the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re- ,search program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance v~ith the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and J funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives. Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals One of the key issues in the program is the establishment of .criteria 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 prior to this program ( in the sense that certain apparently gifted individuals did exceedingly well on at least one of the tests, wliereas the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from chance expectation). The,tests are .(a) remote viewing of natural targets, (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 L S i T ~ 1 D -N Approved For Release-2?JODII99)'10--.-CTA-RUP-96--d-619-1kdbd-1666~bool-o RS 18 TABLE 1 F M A M J J A S .0 N D J F PROGRAM SCHEDULE II MOq 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213 1. Set up neurophysiological-lab with computer 1 7 'processing debugged. 2. W.A.I.S. testing of subjects by client 7 3. Measure neurophysiological correlates during - paranormal experimentation a) paranormal EEG experiments b) other paranormal experimentation 4. Work to detergii,nii\nature of energies involved (gradiometer,~etc. 5. Medical testing, including special testing ~ 4 6. Neuropsychological testing - 4 7 V 7. Psychological.testing, including in-depth - 7 interview S. Correlate data'arid consider theoretical models IV 9. Prepare final report Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 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 Iconstrained 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 screening 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 -6 P.<10 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 leve .I of statistical significance p ZOA 10-6 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 clearly functional and non-functional categories. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects 1 -3 considered gifted, subjects 4 - 6 acting as learners or controls. Subject 1 qualifies as a gifted subject on the basis of remote viewing YP subject 2 qualifies as gifted on the basis of the random generator test; subject 3 is tentatively classed as gifted in remote viewing, although not yet completing the screening series, based on client evaluation of highly successful remote-viewing experiments carried out for the client -6 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, back-round, 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 photographer and, painter, respectively) and similar emotional and psychological makeup. Earlier 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 (b) the distinction between learners and controls was arbitrary in comparison with the distinction between these categories and that of gifted subjects as defined above. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 RS IS Approved For Release 2000108/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (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 doublein-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 tar&ets kqpt PPI blind to subject and experimenters and used without reRj~~ement. ,~ 4) To begin an experiment, an experimenter is closeted with a subject at SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin a narrative description of the remote location. Xsecond experimenter dbtains 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 experimenter 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 vieiding subject is asked to describe his impressions of the target site iAto a tape recorder. A comparison is made when the experimenter returns. Following a series of nine experiments, the results are sub- jected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the research. The judges are asked to blind Approved For Release 2000108/10 : CIA-wRDP96-00787RO00100020001-0 RS 18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 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 transcript of a given date be associated with the target of that date. Probability calculations are on the basis of the a priori proba- bility of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively assuming assignment witbout replacement on the part'of the judges. As indicated in Report # I Subject 1 has completed _10 this series, obtaining a result significant at the p = 8 X 10 level. Experimentation is in progress wit h Subject s 2 and 4, two transcripts 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 times 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 reproduce with pen on paper the line drawing now displayed at the. location. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 RSI~ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Following a period of effort not to exceed half an hour, the subject may either pass (when ho does not feel confident) or indicate he is' ready to subtait 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 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 assorciated with the research. The judges are asked to match the response data with the corresponding target data (without replacement). Such experimentation is presently in progress, a number of drawings having been obtained from several of the subjects but not yet subm1tted for judging. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (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 by an ~,Iectronic random generator. The generator does not indicate its choice- until the subject indicates his choice to the machine by pressing a button (See Figure 8 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 expe riment 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,c'hoice),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 lie 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-kDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Figure 9. 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with probability k successes in a trials 4 and no learning, the probability of observing is approximated by the probability of a normal distribution value -77 (k - n /,r3,/l6 4 For the purpose of screening, each subject is required to complete 100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2500 trials). To date,subjecte 1, 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 me an scores of 25.71 (p 0.20). Table 2 Screening Data: Four-state Electronic Rand Stimulus Generator I/S ti I Subject Mean scoreyloo Trials Binomial Probability over 2500 Trials 1 25.76 0.22 -7 2 3 x 10 6 25.40 0.33 On the basis of this test Subject 2. whose scores are plotted in Fig. 9, qualities as a gifted individual, having satisfied the criterion of producing 4 result whose:a priori probability under the null hypothesis is p < 10-6. Of further interest are this subject's personal observations of suIbjective experiences during the screening test, presented in Appendix Approved For ReleaSe 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 50 Au 4 C) 0 30 0 0 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 RUN NUMBER - 100 Trials/Run P = I per trial FIGURE 9 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 2. Identification of measurable Characteristics Possessed by Gifted 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 certain 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 inVable 3 fall in-to seven categories: 1) 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 couprehensive and electroencephalogram (sleeping and routine); 4) Audiometric examination, including comprehensive, Bekesy bone conduction, .9peech discrimination, and impedance bridge test; Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 6.) 0 0 N 0 Xj .0 0 C,~ r0, Kj 0 0 0 010 ~N "Y 0 lz;v IZ? 0 0 0 0 C 0 C*40 t 4t ki-110 0 V C 1 r"O 0 0 0 0 (P 0 2 o 0 0 0 0 A: (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 #3 t--11 00 \,J 0 0 0 1 0 0 - 0 0 & #4 0 0 0 ~ 0 L 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 . U 0 0 0 0 0 .0 CE 0 #5~ 00 too oo 0 #5 0 O 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 oo --600 -,7 0 6 E205 ,7 R C-J - - 4) 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 #7 4) 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 > 0 &- CL CL < J4--Completed Scheduled ~b MEDICAL EXAMINATION 3, subjects; #4 6, learners/controls; Personno-1 #1 7, 8, oxperimentors. 1. General Physical Examination Completo medical Family history 2. Laboratory Examinations SMA-12 panel blood chemistries oin eloctrophoresis Prot Blood lipid profile 9 Urinalyses Serology C*4 Blood type and factor Pulmonary function screening Electrocardiogram 12-lead 3. Neurological Examination 00 Comprehensive Electroencephalogram, sleepingroutine and a) (L 4.~ Audioinetric Examination Comprehensive Bekesy bone conduction U Speech discrimination Impedance bridge test 00 0 - 5. Opthalmologist Examination Comprehensive C*4 Card testing 4) Peripheral field test Muscle test Dilation funduscope 0 Indire6t opthalmoscopic and examination LL fundus 6. Special Visual Examinations > 0 Blectroretinogram (Stanford CL Med.) CL Dark ttdaptation test (Stanford) < Med. visual contrast sensitivity (SRI) 7. MU Brain Scan 0 Palo Alto Medical.clinic Stanford Medical Center SRI Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 5) Opthalmologist examination, including comprehensive, card testing, peripheral field test, muscle test, dilation funduscope, and indirect opthalmoscopic and fundus examin- ation; 6) Spe6ial visual examinations, including electroretinogram, dark adaptation test, and visual contrast sensitivity; 7) EMI Brain scan. As indicated in Table 3, medical testing is currently in progress. To date the return information is sparse, having to be collated from several clinics before a complete analysis can be completed. To provide an indication of the type of raw data that is to be collated, a small sample of data obtained on Subject 1 is presented in Appendix 3. As indicated, the M11 computerized brain scan reveals a slight enlargement of the entire right lateral vent ricle, while the left appears normal in size. An asymmetry in alpha development between left and right hemispheres is also indicated. Also noted is some concern about the EKG suggesting a coronary artery problem. The significance of these factors for our interest will be developed under the direction of Dr. Armbruster and made available to the client as available. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 b) Psychological Evaluation VP___4__1 ~5_0 The psychological evaluation of program participants consists -hoj of both baseline personality evaluation, and of ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation. The collection of baseline data.t(e.g., in- depth interview, W.A.I.S., etc.) is for the purpose of identifying base- line characteristics possessed by gifted subjects. The ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation. (e.g.,, Mood Adjective Checklists) is for the purpose of identifying psychological correlates of successful versus unsuccessful performance tasks. 1) Baseline Data The bulk of the baseline evaluation has been assigned to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program is being handled by Dr. J.E. Heenan, Chief Clinical Psychologist of the Department of Psyc hiatry. The baseline evaluation, outlined in Table 4, consists of (1) In depth interviews, including objective events and subjective views relating -to the discovery and enhancement of paranormal capacities; socio-econ6mic, cultural, familial, rdligious environment; outstanding peaks, traumas; values, motivation, interpersonal style; (2) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (W.A.I.S_._); (3) Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (DI.M.P.I.) N~' Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 2) Cognitive Style Preference Test In connection with testing hypotheses associated with hemispheric' specialization of the brain, Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Lan-ley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, San Francisco, has been brought into the program as a consultant. In his capacity as consultant, Dr. Ornstein has provided an instru- ment named the Cognitive Style Preference Test.. This test was developed for use in differentiating between individuals preferring a gestalt- oriented cognitive style as compared with a verbally-oriented cognitive style. For the purpose of the,program this instrument is administered to determine whether individuals exhibiting paranormal functioning prefer, as a group, one style of cognitive functioning predominantly as compared with individuals in a control group. The test is administered once to each individual. A sample of the test is included below. Preliminary results indicate some preference for a verbally-oriented cognitive style on the part of good subjects (Figure 10), but further data is required before any significance is to be attached to the results tabulated thus far. Should a correlation of test results with paranormal functioning be found, it would be'appropriate in later work to determine whether this test instrument would be useful as a screening device, i.e., deterndne whether other individuals sharing the profile also exhibit paranormal functioning. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 50 40 W P4 20 10 0 10 20 ~30 P4 43 40 4) 50 0 ,rs FIGURE 10 SUMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERMiCE Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved Fo~ Re.1n~2490/~k%~r~-W?N-COZMBBOITOI)029001 -0 INSTRUCTIONS 0--S Please do not turn over the pages until I ask you to do so. On each page of this booklet there are sets of three items arranged in rows. Two 0.f them are alike or fit together in some way. Your task is to select which one is different and doesn't belong with the other two. The two columns on the first page are samples. There are three designs or shapes in each row. Each design has a word printed on it. In the first row of the first column all the words are the same. Most people would say that the first and second shapes go together and the third one doesn't belong. Would you agree? (If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X then. In the second row most people would say that the first one is different and the last two go together. Do you agree? Then mark the first.one with an X. In the third row the shapes are all the same, but the words HORSE and SADDLE go together and the world FAULT doesn't belong. Do you agree? (If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X. Which would you pick as the odd.one in the 4th row? [Color Und one)] In the 5-th row you could choose either a word that doesn't belong or a shape that doesn't belong. Which is the odd word? (TROUT.) Which is the odd shape? [the CIRCLE (DIME)] Either one of these answers is right, Mark either one of them. The last row also has two possible right answers. Which is the odd word? (SHIRT.) Which is the odd shape? [The second one (DOG)] Mark either one of them with an X. On some of these sets people find it easier or more natural to pick out the odd word, and one some they find it easier to pick out the-odd shape. Either way is correct. We want you to make your selections whichever way seems most comfortable and natural to you. Mark only once in each row, and go as fast as y-au can. Any questions so far? Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 The second column has more samples. When I say begin, please mark an odd member in each row, and say "STOP" as soon as you finish this sample column. BEGIN. (Check forced choices--) Any questions? Then when I say "BEGIN" turn over the next page. Work as fast as you can, and continue until you..have finished the booklet, then say "STOP". Ready? BEGIN. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 r-IJ-1 ~b ~~- Lbfti QbI --)-, rrbO ~f rrWI--j t E) 000 13 [j 00 0 OCQIM cWm Ocalm 0 M 00 00 00 become 0 wirAowo dwr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 P~J e4D if ~-r -1 et P e~3 <. =.d I- jW C-ry V.-Ir f-b L4,] Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 -w-k] G~, Jjjht ~f- Dd Ct-/ my, - &PPY Q~j Bowater(clxk FbA-~ I^IeM 45) Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 QVIZJ UI-14 IX 9D Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 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. Test: Mood Adjective Checklist Source: Psychology Department, Stanford University (Hypnosis Lab) Purpose: 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 is to determine whether measures of success in the experimental phase correlate with pre-experiment mood indicators. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release ~000/0p/10: CIA-R'DP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 MOOD ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST Each of the words in the followin,', list describes feelinps or mood. Please use the list to describe your feelin-s at this moment. Vark each word accordinq to these instructions: If the word definitely describes hoi., you feel at the moment you read it, circle the double check (17V) to the ripht of the word. Por examlle, if the word is calm and you are definitely feelinp. Sa~ at the noment, circle the double check as follows: calm V ? no (This means you definiteiv feel calm at this morient.) If the word only slightly applies to your feelings at the moment, circle the single checl~ as follows: calm W ~v h no (This means you feel sliphtly calm at this vnoment.) If the word is not clear to you or if you cannot decide whether or not it describes your feelings, circle the que8tion mark as follows: calm VV V, r? no (This nea-is you cannot decide w~iether you are calm or not.) If you clearly decide that the word does not aT)ply to your feelin.c's at this norent, circle the no as follows: calm VV V ? (This means you are sure Ono you are not calm at this moment. Work rapidly. Your first reaction is best. Work down the first column before going to the next. Please mark. all the words. This should take only a few minutes. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 angry concentrating drowsy affectionate apprehensive blue boastful elated active nonchalant skeptical sho cked calm bold earnest slumoish forsivin~' clutched up lonely cocky lighthearted quiet vv v ? no energetic vv v ? no vv,v ? no playful vv v ? no VV v ? no suspicious vv v ? no VV V ? no startled vv V ? no vv v ? no relaxed vv v ? no -~ivV ? no defiant vv v ? no vv v ? no enr!aRed in thought vv v ? no VV v ? no Vv V ? no pleased vV V ? no Vv V ? no tired vv v ? no vv v ? no fearful vv v ? no vv v ? no re,.,retful vv v no vv v ? no egotistic vv V ? no vv v ? no overjoyed vv v ? no vv v ? no viporous vv v ? no Vv v ? no witty vv v ? no VV V ? no serene vv v 7 no vv v ?~no rebellious vv v ? no vv v ? no serious vv v ? no vV v ? no T-7arkThe-artedvv v ? no VV ? no insecure vv v ? no VV V ? no self- centered vV ? no still vv v ? no Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00MR0001 00020001 -0 Test: Semantic Differential Checklist Source: SRI Urban and Social Systems Division Purpose: The Semantic Differential Checklist is one of a number of pre- experiment instruments designed to provide a measure of subject conceptualization about an experiment in which he is about to participate. The purpose is to determine whether measures of success in the experiment correlate with pre-experiment conceptualization. Approved For Release 2000108/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96.-OO787ROO01 00020001 -0 Semantic Differential Checklist The purpose of this rating sheet is to obtain your candid reactions regarding the conditions surrounding the experiment. For eadh numbered item you will find a concept to be judged. You are to rate each in order. This is how you are to use the scales: If you feel,that the concept is highly or closely related to one end of the scale, you should place your checkmark as follows; impractical 11" practical impractical V~ practical If your feelings on the concept are neutral, place your checkmark in the middle space, etc. Work at fairly high speed through this rating sheet. Do not puzzle over .individual items. Give your first impressions, your immediate feelings about each item. Conditions surroundina exp~jriment J..good 2. unfriendly 3. stimulating 4. positive 5. unhelpful 6. right 7. uninteresting bad friendly dull negative helpful wrong interesting 8. unorganized organized Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100026001-0 9. satisfying disappointing prepared 10. unprepared my involvemen-t in experiment bad 1. good 2. useless valuable 3. stimulating dull 4. positive negative 5., passive active 6. capable incapable 7.. important unimportant 8. unsuccessful successful 9. prepared unprepared practical 10, impractical Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 TABLE 4 pSyC110LOGICAL EXAMINATION Personnel #1 - 3, subjects; #4 6'learners/controls; #7 experimenters. NY A e) YQ YQ N~' e, YJ 0 C) XJ y1J YQ XJ 0 0i 0~ K~~ cc) CIO z .4 e, 0 6 OV 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0- 0 #2 (3(b 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -C) 0 .0 0 #3 ' 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 LQ 0 - 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---* 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 #4 3 0 0 a 0 0 -0 . 0 ~01 1 0 0 0 0 0 L o ff 0 0 0 0 0 Q i 0 o Z) Q D 0 L 0 P - 1 0 0 - 0 - - - - ! ED e -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q =O 0= #6 - ' 0 0 0 0 0 R 0 ~ ~ 0 #7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #8 0 0 1 0 0 Q I ~U 0 0 Q-~ !0 0 0 SRI 0 Palo Alto Medical Clinic 0 Client Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 (4) Benton visual Memory Test and Wechsler Memory Scale; (5) Thematic Apperception Test (T.A.T.) and Rorschach projective tests (6) Bender Gestalt Test, (7) Luscher colortest (8) Strong Aptitude/Values Test (9) Cognitive Style Preference Test As indicated in Table 4, the psychological testing is well underway. There is, of course, a considerable lag between testing and results. To date, only a partial analysis of data from Subject 1 is available. We present this data in Appendix 4 as a sample of the type of analysis that will become available. We notein passing that the data on Subject I from the W.A.I.S. appears to correlate with that obtained from the client-administered W.A.I.S., an indication of the uniformity of results available from such testing. * Private communication. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (c) Neuropsychological Evaluation In addition to the measurement of the physiological components of the neurologica 1 system covered in the medical evaluation, a neuro- psychological profile is being obtained by the administration of the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery, which includes the Category Recognition Testl, '~hctual Performance Test,, Halstead-lVepman Aphasia Screening Test, and other appropriate measures. This phase of the program is being handled by Dr. Donald Lim of the Palo Alto VeterarL,ls Administration Hospital, who has personally consulted with Dr. Reitan on testing procedures and interpretation. The neuropsychological evaluation program is scheduled for the first half of September. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 3. Identification of Neurophysiological Correlates Which Relate to Paranormal Activities High on the list of priorities for the program is the identification of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal activity. The purpose of this part of the study is twofold: (a) to obtain information about the neurophysiological state associated with paranormal activity in general, and (b) to obtain indicators which differentiate between correct and incorrect responses to a paranormally applied stimulus, so that an independently-determined bias factor can be applied during tho generation of databy the subject. Two facilities are in use for the purposes described above. One is a standard EEG facility under the direction of Dr. Jerry Lukas, head of SRI'sSleep Studies program. This facility consists of two sound-isolated rooms with appropriate signal lead connections, an eight-channel polygraph for visual recording, and a magnetic tape/ computer processing/ printer readout which provides on-line processing? of the polygraph data. In our keonfiguration we obtain a hardcopy printout of 5-second averages of eight channels of polygraph information fifteen minutes following a fifteen minute run. At present we monitor broadha, alpha (7-14 Hz) and beta (14-34 Hz) brainwave components from the left and right occipital regions, galvanic skin response, and two channels of plethysmograph data (blood volume and pulse height). Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 The second facility is a smaller semi-portable four-channel polygraph with a GSR channel, reflected-light plethysmograph indicating blood volume/ pulse height, one channel of unfiltered EEG activity, and a fourth EEG channel with zero-crossing digital filtering. The latter permits percent-time measurements in any band, with upper and lower band edge settings in I Hzincrements. Considerable data has been obtained with both facilities. The bulk of the data awaits further analysis which will occur at completion of various series::underway. However, several results have been obtained which we describe below. (a) Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe Ene-Timent As discussed in Report #2, a variety of evidence from clinical and neurosurgical sources indicates that the two hemispheres of the human brain are specialized for different cognitive functions. The left hemisphere is predominantly involved in(~errb:al~d other analytic functioning, the.right in spatial anId otheV1k46_1 Y Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00 A~ 787R4QaDD6~DW In our investigations to date we have not found a strong correlation between the observed physiological states and the subjects' descriptions. Of the correlates being monitored, the one which seems the most promising is the unfiltered BEG. , In our preliminary analysis of the data it appears that there is often an overall reduc tion in EEG power in the twenty-second period j"st before a subject renders a correct description. Subsequent to this observation, we have learned that Janet Mitchell at the American Society for Psychical Research,made similar observations in her work with Subject 3 (Swann), also in remote viewing experiments. A sample chart record is shown in Figure .11. (Time runs from right to left.) The traces, top to bottom, are the unfiltered EEG, blood volume/pulse height, GSR, and filtered (alpha). EEG. Protocol, verbal description, and photograph of the location accompanying this chart are given in Section A. 1. (c). Seven experiments of t1lis type have been completed as a pilot study. Upon completion of the analysis of this data, any findings will be tested -under rigorous no-feedback conditions. 4. Identification of the Nature of Paranormal Phenomena and Energy (10%) This portion of the program,is devoted to efforts to understand the nature and scope of paranormal phenomena, including investigation of the physical and psychological laws underlying the phenomena, determination of the manner and degree to which known processes are mediated by little understood or undiscovered mechanisms or energies, definition of the prrcise nature of the channels involved, etc. At this point in the effort three psychokinetic'ttasks have been - . _rted below. R000 I 0002000tv - - F- RI -1- F- : 4 4 ~ I A 1- P4 1. -7 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (a) Universal Randomization Protocol It was deemed desirable in our work to establish a universal randomi- zation protocol independent of the particular expetiment under consideration. The only exceptions were to be automated experiments where target selection is determined by radioactive decay or electronic rando mization. The randomization procedure is designed around a ten-unit base, e.g,, ten targets, ten work periods, etc. A ten-digit sequence governing an experiment is blind to both experimenter and subject, and is uncovered by means of the following procedure. A three-page RAND Table of Random Digits (Table 5) is entered to obtain the ten-digit sequence, the entrance point being determined by four throws of a die, t the first 1, 2, or 3 determining page, the next 1, 2, 3, or 4 determining column block, and the final throw determining from which of the first six rows in the block the ten-digit sequence is to be taken. An opaque card with a single-digit window is then moved across-the row to uncover digits one at a time. If a multiplicity of targets exist, the digits 0 through 9 are employed directly. If a binary command is required (e.g. , incre ase/de crease or activity/no activity) the parity of the digit (even or odd) is employed. t A technique found in control runs to produce a distribution of die faces differing nonsignificantly from chance expectation. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RD.P96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 CPYRGHT TABLE 5 Table of Random Digits* 11 16 43 63 IS 75 06 13 40 60 31 83 23 53 73 61 76 74 61 52 21 21 59 17 91 76 83 15 40 94 15 69 95 86 09 16 86 78 35 85 10 43 84 44 82 66 55 83 73 50 58 55 95 31 79 57 76 49 34 72 36 79 22 62 36 33 26 66 39 41 21 11 44 28 93 20 65 83 60 13 73 94 40 47 73 12 03 25 57 99 47 54 62 74 85 11 14 14 67 48 49 56 31 28 72 14 06 39 61 83 45 15 46 98 22 85 31 04 91 99 64 20 84 82 37 41 70 17 91 40 27 79 51 62 10 07 31 17 72 27 31 48 67 28 75 38 60 52 58 29 98 20 12 51 07 94 93 41 38 80 99 75 62 63 60 64 51 61 40 68 49 33 88 07 64 13 79 71 99 48 71 32 55 52 17 13 01 57 75 97 86 08 07 46 20 55 29 07 42 98 65 28 59 71 98 12 13 85 34 55 63 88 26 77 60 68 30 10 98 61 17 26 45 73 27 38 22 42 65 99 05 25 06 77 75 71 93 01 70 48 95 63 99 97 54 31 19 99 16 38 11 25 41 68 78 75 25 58 50 69 61 35 57 64 04 86 21 01 52 45 88 78 35 26 79 13 18 08 88 80 78 13 79 87 68 04 68 98 33 00 78 92 00 84 48 97 71 30 56 07 62 49 09 92 15 84 98 72 38 71 23 08 58 86 14 90 87 59 15 12 24 21 66 34 44 21 28 30 58 72 20 19 18 66 96 02 70 44 36'78 16 97 59 54 28 33 22 65 26 18 86 5L 35 14 77 99 59 03 94 97 59 13 83 95 42 71 16 85 12 89 35 07 25 58 61 49 76 09 40 48 29 47 85 96 52 50 41 43 33 18 68 85 09 53 72 82 19 66 13 46 96 15 59 50 09 27 42 97 79 89 32 88 39 25 42 11 29 18 94 48 29 62 16 65 83 62 96 61 48 44 91 44 12 61 94 38 24 68 51 02 12 63 97 52 91 71 02 01 94 20 50 68 98 35 05 61 72 65 42 59 14 54 43 71 34 54 71 40 38 64 80 81 31 37 74 00 24 01 92 78 - 09 83 41 04 29 24 75 66 62 69 54 03 40 38 88 27 13 33 60 28 67 64 20 52 04 30 69 74 17 02 64 85 87 51 21 39 48 06 97 37 64 04 19 90 11 61 04 02 48 07 07 02 53 19 77 37 73 09 68 48 17 04 89 45 23 97 44 45 30 15 99 83 77 84 61 15 99 04 54 50 93 03 98 94 16 52 79 51 12 14 89 31 36 16 06 50 06 31 22 31 82 24 43 43 92 96 60 71 73 83 87 24 86 39 75 76 72 20 70 67 96 99 05 52 44 70 69 32 73 54 74 95 63 23 95 55 52 55 37 59 09 11 97 48 03 97 30 38 07 27 79 79 42 12 17 69 87 01 32 17 37 66 64 12 04 47 58 97 65 12 84 07 49 32 80 98 83 64 83 34 46 49 26 15 94 26 72 95 38 71 66 60 21 20 50 99 82 72 13 80 08 43 31 91 72 08 32 02 31 92 17 73 72 00 86 57 08 39 64 58 10 01 17 50 04 86 05 44 57 23 82 61 48 75 23 29 11 90 74 64 92 42 06 54 31 16 53 00 24 21 94 08 53 16 15 78 55 47 10 90 35 54 25 58 65 07 30 44 31 30 94 02 33 00 24 76 70 10 93 87 86 59 52 62 47 18 55 22 20 75 09 72 61 96 66 28 94 91 70 24 1 72 11 53 49 58 03 69 28 53 78 26 65 43 78 51 85 91 37 43 95 This table appears through the courtesy of The RAND Corporation and the McGraw-Hill Bouk Company, fnc. and is reprinted by permission from The Compleat Stratesyst, by J. D. Williams, pp. 219-221 [441. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROOO 100020001 -0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 CPYRGHT 07 42 85 88 63 96 02 38 89 36 97 92 94 12 20 86 43 19 44 85 35 37 92 79 22 28 90 65 50 13 40 56 83 32 22 40 48 69 11 22 10 98 22 28 07 10 92 02 62 99 41 48 39 29 35 17 06 17 82 52 90 12 73 33 41 77 80 61 24 46 93 04 06 64 76 24 99 04 10 99 63 00 21 29 90 23 51 06 87 74 76 86 93 93 00 84 97 80 75 04 40 77 98 63 82 48 45 46 52 69 02 98 25 79 91 50 76 59 19 30 43 21 61 26 08 18 16 78 46 31 94 47 97 65 00 39 17 00 66 29 96 16 76 43 75 74 10 89 36 43 52 29 17 58 22 95 96 69 09 47 70 97 56 26 93 35 68 47 26 07 03 68 40 36 00 52 83 15 53 81 85 81 26 IS 75 23 57 07 57 54 58 93 92 83 66 86 76 56 74 65 37 10 06 24 92 63 64 24 76 38 54 72 35 65 27 53 07 63 82 35 53 40 61 38 55 38 51 92 95 00 84 82 88 12 48 25 54 83 40 75 55 17 28 15 56 18 85 65 90 43 65 79 90 19 14 81 36 30 51 73 40 35 38 48 07 47 76 74 68 90 87 91 73 85 49 48 21 37 17 08 18 89 90 96 f2 77 54 15 76 75 26 90 78 81 73 71 18 92 83 77 68 24 12 53 40 92 55 11 13 26 68 05 26 54 22 88 46 00 63 52 51 55 99 11 59 81 31 06 32 51 42 58 76 81 49 88 14 79 97 00 92 21 43 33 86 73 45 97 93 59 97 17 65 54 16 67 64 20 50 51 15 08 95 05 57 33 16 68 70 94 53 29 58 71 33 38 26 49 47 08 96 46 10 06 04 11 12 02 22 54 23 01 19 41 08 29 19 66 51 87 28 17 74 41 11 15 70 57 38 35 75 76 84 95 49 24 54 36 32 85 66 95 34 47 37 81 12 70 74 93 86 66 87 03 41 66 46 07 56 48 19 71 22 72 63 84 57 54 98 20 56 72 77 20 36 50 34 73 35 21 68 75 66 47 57 19 98 79 22 22 27 93 67 80 10 09 61 70 44 08 75 02 26 53 32 98 60 62 94 51 31 99 46 90 72 37 35 49 30 25 It 32 37 00 69 90 26 98 92 66 02 98 59 53 03 15 18 25 01 66 55 20 86 34 70 18 15 82 52 83 89 96 51 02 06 95 83 09 54 06 11 47 40 87 86 05 59 46 70 45 45 58 72 96 11 98 57 94 24 81 81 42 28 68 42 60 99 77 96 69 01 07 10 85 30 74 30 57 75 09 21 77 17 59 63 23 15 19 02 74 90 20 96 85 21 14 29 33 91 94 42 27 81 21 60 32 57 61 42 78 04 98 26 84 70 27 87 51 54 80 17 69 76 01 14 63 24 73 20 96 19 74 02 46 37 97 37 73 21 12 05 68 63 02 43 34 13 40 29 36 50 19 77 98 69 86 49 76 87 09 52 99 24 66 50 89 91 05 73 95 46 95 46 75 36 28 96 88 19 36 94 51 89 39 84 81 47 86 77 50 82 54 96 26 76 31 12 34 98 99 00 IS 47 21 86 78 90 67 54 89 61 79 88 16 00 80 01 88 47 42 .87 46 26 31 65 79 81 66 16 30 57 66 62 90 55 46 51 80 14 87 68 69 25 87 16 12 27 34 81 76 29 80 56 49 94 66 87 26 22 30 20 09 44 29 62 41 38 21 67 68 06 71 13 49 39 19 59 97 62 47 60 93 58 15 04 50 52 08 21 53 13 93 44 68 85 58 31 58 83 66 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 *Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 CPYRGHT 51 39 28 59 36 43 89 85 05 96 28 54 99 83 27 99 94 32 53 77 54 23 94 19 18 79 52 64 62 74 40 87 16 18 03 25 76 75 54 94 57 89 27 33 94 07 16 09 02 62 47 70 43 83 55 71 70 88 01 17 02 33 07 47 36 53 27 44 44 68 62 61 It 96 98 09 30 42 92 65 76 11 52 92 47 55 34 25 12 99 03 04 78 39 81 11 91 60 92 67 63 31 28 IS 86 29 08 52 01 01 26 46 05 05 01 31 73 11 89 38 27 63 22 15 70 34 27 45 64 26 01 76 42 59 59 69 29 38 98 75 06 33 56 21 11 44 01 45 25 67 11 76 25 48 06 02 65 15 29 12 64 14 28 76 76 21 35 88 87 73 31 73 63 16 95 11 52 36 42 13 28 43 62 54 68 75 23 57 53 70 97 15 54 87 06 52 23 92 18 31 09 52 28 38 55 85 97 31 58 88 31 18 14 96 72 17 23 70 40 24 93 71 41 54 14 93 71 20 27 42 32 11 58 26 83 67 18 28 90 30 15 68 15 35 99 58 18 57 38 40 07 06 87 59 47 71 74 36 92 85 77 71 22 39 14 08 90 74 37 68 26 62 27 41 84 75 16 69 67 48 78 45 35 48 44 61 50 90 12 45 02 80 55 26 76 22 51 94 78 48 24 86 06 82 84 19 36 72 90 73 32 30 15 87 01 04 19 33 01 42 37 28 40 68 44 78 88 75 72 76 26 33 95 69 09 39 33 14 21 01 35 48 85 24 73 37 63 43 25 69 95 27 40 95 08 81 01 24 24 13 51 59 55 99 09 35 22 34 49 91 24 27 53 96 32 09 77 79 88 00 90 66 03 51 71 30 02 19 11 20 36 11 64 21 28 65 40 19 41 99 47 50 50 20 08 20 30 08 71 88 96 19 50 70 59 13 26 63 13 89 13 35 00 84 14 64 04 99 43 77 22 40 89 49 58 19 09 55 80 35 33 00 69 26 90 69 24 89 74 43 53 89 62 35 08 16 22 75 69 29 55 21 66 38 86 06 80 41 18 61 22 56 50 24 75 00 25 87 90 18 21 99 12 62 28 14 80 11 91 92 49 43 82 07 72 60 84 66 97 32 71 02 52 82 12 10 47 42 75 22 65 62 03 46 84 00 21 00 48 63 65 52 21 52 42 84 55 47 45 60 20 24 62 69 41 41 29 80 47 63 27 97 55 49 23 90 65 00 61 70 09 43 30 91 67 35 16 63 27 31 07 30 00 97 04 36 09 96 15 77 95 55 27 34 56 16 57 88 81 40 54 35 71 36 89 19 56 90 38 14 76 05 30 51 50 69 12 56 94 42 00 97 70 44 81 42 04 40 86 49 34 82 23 58 43 78 46 88 23 80 13 92 07 87 61 12 31 19 28 08 07 75 30 40 73 58 52 08 00 22 08 39 53 70 43 37 88 03 41 72 04 20 49 44 34 62 79 88 19 02 46 16 66 72 06 01 61 94 37 69 96 77 01 94 40 29 70 04 20 93 87 76 77 76 07 03 74 20 16 13 65 98 96 28 43 10 91 73 44 58 29 88 09 52 88 21 64 44 65 87 06 64 49 47 84 66 99 56 18 12 36 24 83 66 66 L4 89 45 92 73 88 95 04 60 77 34 65 11 20 38 12 38 62 96 56 30 47 42 59 64 21 48 29 54 22 02 00 23 36 71 52 06 87 38 01 52 18 81 94 91 55 13 76 10 39 02 00 66 99 13 41 72 75 21 71 56 71 90 60 54 98 44 18 15 29 59 60 76 52 25 3 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (b) Exp eriments with Develco-Superconducting Differential Magnet- ometer (Gradiometer) One of the first psychoenergetically-produced physical effects observed, by SRI personnel in early research (1972) was the apparent perturbation of a Josephson.effect magnetometer. The conditions of that pilot study, involving a few hours use of an instrument committed to other research, prevented a proper investigation. The number of data samples was too few to permit meaningful statistical analysis, and the lack of readily available multiple recording equipments prevented in- vestigation of possible "recorder only" effects. Therefore, at -the suggestion of the client, a series of experiments were carried out using a client-supplied Develco Model 8805 superconducting second-derivative gradiometer manufactured by Develco, Inc., Mountain View, California. The assembled device is shown in Figure-12. Basically the gradiometer is a four-coil Josephson effect magnetometer device consisting of a pair of coil pairs wound so as to provide a series connection of two opposing first-derivative gradiometers, yielding a second-derivative gradiometer (i.e., a device sensitive only to second and higher order derivative fields). As a result, the device is relatively insensitive to uniform fields and to uniform gradients. This arrangement allows for sensitive measurement of fields from nearby sources while discriminating against relatively uniform magnetic fields produced by remote sources. The device is ordinarily Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 .. ......I ' 1 11, 4z~ 0 11 1 1 1 ~ SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER FIGURE 12 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 used to measure mag~netic fields originating from processes within the human body, such as action currents in the heart which produce magneto- cardiograms~. The sensitive tip of the instrument is,simply placed near the body area of interest. In our application, however, the subject is located at a distance of four meters from the gradiometer probe. As a result the Subject is located in a zone of rialative insensitivity; e.g., standing up, sitting down, leaning forward, and arm and leg movements produce no signals. From this location the subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the probe. Tbe results of his efforts are available to him as feedback from three sources; an oscilloscope, a panel meter, and a chart recorder, the latter providing a permanent record. After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF interference effects, which required modificaton by the manufacturer, the gradiometer was available for use by the contractor from June 10 to June 21. Some RF interference effects remained., due in part to environmental proximity to other instrumentation, but the device was usable nonetheless. Protocol for subject paxticipation was instituted as follows. The subject removes all metal objects, and the effects of body movements are checked at the start of each experimental period. The subject then works with the machine in a learning mode, observing effects being produced, if any, via feedback front the instrumentation. Once satisfied that a possibility exists of pro&jcing effects on command under experimenter Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 control.- the experimenter announces the start of the experiment. The universal randomization protocol (discussed in previous section) is then used to generate ten activity/no activity periods of equal length (e.g., obse"rved, signals appear in each of these three periods. The signal appearing in period 9 was strong enough to cause loss of continuous twenty-five seconds) pro-determined by the experimenter. A sample run (Run 1, Subject 1) is shown in Figure 13. The rand,omly-generated ON (activity) periods are Nos. 2, 8, and 9. As tracking. This latter type of signal can be theresult of an exceptionally 9 2 2 - 1.6 x 10- Gauss/cm (second derivative ;jB z/ ), equivalent to - 3.5 x 10- Gau ss referred to one pickup coil. strong flux change, or an RF burst whether subject-generated or artifactual, and are handled on the basis,of statistical correlation as discussed below. 44 An artifact due to the passage of a truck in the parking lot adjacent to the laboratory (under continuous surveillance by the experimenter) is noted in period 6. Each of the signals on scale corresponds to an input The interpretation of such observations must be subjected to careful analysis. For example, the emphasis on "corresponds to" is based on the following: although the probe is designed to register magnetic fields, and-the simplest hypothesis is that an observed signal is such, in a task as potentially complex as "psycbokinesis", one must be cautious about assigning a given obaerved effect to a specific cause. Therefore, without multiple measurement employing equally sensitive apparatus, which time and lack of instrument availability did not permit, one can only conclude that generation of a magnetic field is the most probable cause. With APPOO)Vectir&iRab&siif&d&b8/1-,.hedA,~b~ ~Ixqer~ved s~imult~aneou~sly c~,nthr~ee TU-: recording-_ devices, and -thus a "recorder only IT effect can be considered Approved Foi Rel ase 00/08/10 CIA-RDP91;-00787ROO0100020001-0 J ESD OFF F ON ON OFF TRUCE OFF on V21, OFF ....... .... ON OFF FIGURE 13 BASELINE mmmi START h GRADIOINIETER DATA Approved For Release 2000108f10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 low probability, although an electronics interference effect ahead of all display cannot be ruled out. We therefore treat the magnetic cause as tentative, although most probable, and concentrate our attention on whether a correlption exists between system disturbances and subject efforts. Subject 1 logged the most time in controlled runs, thirteen ten-trial runs. Each of the ten trials in the run lasted fifty seconds each,* the activity/no activity command for each trial being generated by the universal randomization protocol technique. In the 13 x 10 = 130 trials, consisting of a random distribution of 64 activity and 66 ho-activity periods, 63 Ovents of signal-to-noise ratio > I were observed. Of these 63 events, 42 were distributed among the activity periods, 21 among the no-activity periods, a correlation significant at the p = 0.004 level. Subjects 2 and 6 also interacted with the device. Although subject efforts and observed perturbations sometimes coincided, activity was generally low and did not appe ai to be a signature of correlated activity under control. '-.A controlled ten-trial run with Subject 2 and two such runs with Subject 6 yielded non-significant results. AIU VP Given the limited availability of the instrument and somewhat noisy environment, from our best effort.we nonetheless conclude that for Subject I the observed numb er of precisely timed events in pilot work coupled with the statistically significant (p 0.004) correlation between subject effort and signal output in controlled runs indicate a With the'excoption of the first run where ~5-second trials were used. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 highly probable cause-effect relationship. Thus it appears that a gifted subject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of sensitivity - 10-9Gauss/cm2 from a distance of four meters. Further work would be required to determine absolutely the precise nature of the interaction, although given the equipment design the generation of a magnetic field is the most probable mechanism. (c) E eriments with Laser-Monitored Torsion Pendulum In this series of experiments we examine the possibility that a subject-' may be able to exert a physical influence on a remotely located physical system. The target is a torsion pendulum suspended by a metal Tiber inside a sealed glass bell jar. The pendulum consists of three 100 gram balls arranged symetrically at 120' angles on a 2 cm radius. The entire apparatus is shock mounted., and protected from air currents by the enclosing bell jar. The angular,position of the pendulum is measured by means of an optical readout system. The system consists of a laser beam from a lo- power argon lasert reflected from a small mirror on the pendulum onto a tt position sensing silicon detector 1.5 meters from the pendulum. The detector yields an output voltage proportional to spot position. The output from the detector is monitored by a chart recorder ttt w ic provides a continuous!sine wave record of pendulum position. t 7SPectra Physics Model 262 tt United Detector Technology Model SC/10 ttt Brush Model Mark 200 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 The system exhibits a sensitii~ity of approximately 10 microradians. Under typical experimental conditions random accoustical fluctuations drive the pendulum in its torsional normal mode of 10 second period to a level - 100 microradians angular deviation. During control runs the pendulum executes harmonic motion with a maximum variation in'.- amplitude of 10 percent over an hour period. Sudden vibrational perturbations in the environment produce oscillation of the pendulum in the vertical plane at a frequency of I M,,, as contrasted with the torsional mode in the horizontal plane at .0.1 Hz. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO'0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 The subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the pendulum motion, the results of which would be available as feedback from the chart recorder The subject is then encouraged to work with the pendulum from a distance of 1 meter, observing effects being produced. If satisfied that there is a possibility of producing effects (typically following a week's activity, a couple of hours per day), an experiment is begun. As in other experiments, subject efforts to increase or decrease oscillation amplitude are determined by an experimenter utilizing the uni versal randomization protocol described in (a). Each expexiiment lasts one hour and consists of six 5-minute work periods alternated withsix 5-minute rest periods. In later work, the subject is removed to a room 12 meters down the hall with three intervening office spaces to determine whether eff ects can be produced from a remote location. The subject is provided feedback at the remote location either by closed circuit video or by a second chart recorder in parallel with the recorder in the enclosed target laboratory. The remote aspect was instituted both to prevent artifactual effects from body beat, etc., and also to determine whether energy-can be coupled fta the remote viewing channel to a remote location.t +_ Both experimental evidence and theoretical work indicate that distance may not be a strong factor in paranormal phenomena. See, for example, E.H. Walker I'Properties of Hidden Variables in Quantum Theory: Impli- cations for Paraphysicsyll U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 In pilot studies we observed,considerable evidence indicating that a gifted subject located in the same room is able, by concentration, to increase or decrease pendulum motion on command while sitting quietly one,meter from the bell jar. The change-to-baseline ratio is often 5:1 or better so the effects are not small. A sample chart showing a rest period followed by a. decrease period is given in Figure 14. Vibrational artifacts can be ruled out on the basis that when such inputs occur, a marked I Hz oscillation signal due to vertical motion is superimposed on the 0.1 Hz torsional motion. IThat is especially interesting are the decreases which take the motion below that generally observed due to en- vironmental noise driving. Such observations indicate the application of a constraint which couples energy out of the pendulum motion. Similar ob- servations have been observed with the subject removed to the second location 12 ni-eters away. Although less pronounced (change-to-baseline ratios typically 2:1), the effect remains easily observable. The, universal randomization protocol is used throughout to determine increase/decrea5e periods. Control run data are being collected to be sub- jected tothe same analysis. Multiple recording is used throughout to rule out artifacts due to recorder effects. Finally, an electrometer with the base of the bell jar serving as one electrode.. is monitored to record acoustic vibration independently. Due to the potential significance of such findings, considerable data is being taken in order that the matter can be subjected to statistical analysis over a large sample involving hundreds of work periods. A few hundred data samples have already been collected for this purpose, an the results will b ailable. Approved For Release 2000/0.8/10-.-CW-RDP96-00~Beooool,(~Oi,0104,2-0~001-0 ~-!C- !~--~-~,_,'96-00787ROOI El rt rt 0 0 rt gal Lai 1-" Appro% 7 Ei TITZ 7A 1100020001 -0 HT 1 4 Fit 6 1z If t '44 TT 4 4E 6-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 (d) Experiments with Geiger Counter As part of a continuing search for mechanisms involved in para- normal phenomena, a series of experiments were conducted with Subject 1 to determine whether a geiger counter in the ray mode (i.e., .beta shield in place) would register subject-directed efforts. The output of a geiger counter, fed into a Monsanto Model 1020 counter/timer, indicates a background count due to cosmie rays 35 counts/minute. Experimental protocol requires the subject to try to change the registered count by concentration on the geiger counter probe from a distance 0.5 meters. Each run consists of 15-60-second trials, with 10-second separationsb~etween the trials. Preceding each subject run is a control run of equal duration. In four runs to date the results, shown in Table 6, indicate no effect of statistical, SILM'ficance, neithe e mean nor standard ------------- deviation of counts. OCDM Item No. CD V"700, Model No. 66, Electro-Neutronics, Inc., Oakland, CA. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-60787ROO0100020'001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 TABLE 6 Geiger Counter Experiment Contro Runs Ex2erimental Runs 1 'Run - Stand iatiol e an Mean 'rd Dev M ~ Sta_nda 1 36.07 35.33 6.00 73 5.33 6 .00 6 '07 5.73 5 ~ 2 34.87 6.23 7.27 4 .87 6 23 3 7.27 3 _ 87 33.87 3 33.87 34.00 5.25 88 .8 5.88 33 7 5 4 35.20 5.09 35.67. 5.77 3 5_20 5 .09 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 3. Basic Research Summary The basic research program to date has been spread over a number of subjects and over number of activities, generating a considerable amount of data. It was deemed desirable in the first half of the research program to cover as much material as possible in a horizontal development in order to deteimine the best subjects and the fruitful directions for concentrated effort in the second half of the program. We intend to concentrate on analysis of the large amounts of data already obtained while subjects are involved in extramural medical and psy- chological testing. Base d on the findings, a few carefully-chosen items will be culled for final specific testing following discussion with client representatives. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01000200 01-0 APPENDIX 1 Randomness Tests of Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator The design objective was to build a four-state machine, with each state equally likely to occur on each trial, independent of the past sequence of states. If the machine meets this objective, it should not be possible to devisea rule for future play that significantly differs from chance. A simple example of such a rule would be to select the machine state observed in the preceding trial; if this strategy were to produce scores significantly above chance (25 percent hits), we would reject the hypothesis of randomness of the machine under test. Before experimentation, four machines, purchased from Aquarius Electronics, Albion, California, were extensively tested for randomness. Data were analyzed on a CDC-6400 computer, and three machines finally selected for use in screening met established criteria for randomness. In developing randomness tests, we.;-are guided in part by a knowledge of the machine logic. When one of the four choice keys or the pass key is depressed, the current machine state is displayed; then a brief time after release of the key, a new machine state is established (but not shown to the subject) by sampling the instantaneous state of a high-speed four-state elec- tronic counter. For the machine to be random, the times of dwell of the counter in each of the four states must be precisely equal; otherwise, the distribution of outcomes will be biased. The first randomness test is thus based on tallying the number of occurrences of'each of the four states. This Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08110: C1A-RDP96-OOs787R&OPffWOMsQ To test for test should detect a stable bias, yet may mis this second possibility we also tally the distribution of outcomes in each group of 100 trials, then compute a likelihood ratio teat statistic (see below) for each group. Under the null hypothesis of equal likelihood of the four states, these statistic values are distributed approximately as chi-square with three degrees of freedom and their sum for m groups distributed,approxi- mately as chi-square with three m degrees of freedom. This tbst may also detect stable bias, but is not as powerful for this purpose as the first test. Vaxiable bias of still shorter period, if substantial, can be tested for by tallying the frequency with which the previous machine state is repeated; an overall repeat ratio significantly above 0.25 is indicative of such bias. If for any reason the machine were to fail to sample the counter to establish a new state, the previous machine state would be repeated. To test for this possibility, we tally the number of repeats following the depression of each key. A repeat ratio significantly greater than 0.25 should be con- sidered a danger signal. We also tally the initial machine states following reset and the tran- sitions between states., In each case, the,number of occurrences of each of the four possible outcomes should be approximately equal. When repeats are deleted from the sequence of trials ("nondiagonal transitions"), the four states should also be approximately equal in,frequency. In testing the null hypothesis of four equally likely outcomes of a trial, a likelihood ratio test is used. The statistic + Alexander Mood, Introduction to the Theory of Statistics (McGraw Hill, New York, 1950). Approved For Release 2000/08/1 o : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 4 (114 ni 'e nn under the null hypothesis is distributed approximately as chi-square with three degrees of freedom,'with rejection for large values of this statis- tic. Thecomputer program used in testing randomness includes a subroutine for computing the probability of a chi-square value as large or larger than that observed. In testing the null hypot hesis that the probability of a repeat is 0.25, the binomial probability of obtaining the observed number K or more repeats in N trials is computed. For K greater than 1000, a normal distribution approximation is computed, assuming the statistic N L_ -1/2 - 0.25 N 16 to be approximately normal with mean zero and standard deviation one. The typical test pattern used was six passes followed by twenty-five choices of one color, repeating this for each of the four colors. In this way each of the five keys other than rest were given approximately equal use. Typically, 2,000 to 6,000 trials were madej in each sitting. In the absence of any unusual results in the randomness tests, a minimum of 10,000 trials were made before using a machine with experimental subjects. With 10,000 trialsv the expected fraction of re- peats is 0.25 with a standard deviation of 3/200 = 0.00866. A sample computer listing of the results of randomness tests on Machine 4 is included in Table 1. Of the four machines tested, three were found suitable for use in screening activity. The fourth machine was returned to the manufacturer for adjustment. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Table I RANDONVESS TESTS--NIACHINE 4 Buttons Number Binom. of Chi-Sq. Yellow Green Blue Red Prob. Trials Initial states107 116 113 128 464 1.996 0.57 Transitions 728 764 765 790 3047 2.573 0.46 777 784 773 863 3197 6.745 0.08 776 796 '810 773 3155 1.158 0.76 787 852 803 805 3247 2.877 0.41 All states 3175 3312 3264 3359 13110 5.667 0.18 Nondiagonal transitions 2340 2412 2341 2426 9519 2.630 0.45 Binomial Key N-Trials Repeats Ratio Diagonal Prob. transitions Yellow 2774 705 0.2541 0.313 Green 2755 674 0.2446 0.748 Blue 2761. 706 0.2557 0.250 Red 2742 667 0.2433 0.793 Pass 1614 375 0.2323 0.953 All 12646 3127 0.2473 0.763 Randomness in groups of 100 trials: Chi-sq. = 299.6141 D.F. = 345 Prob. = 0.9628 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Appendix 2 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 experiential processes with as much precision as possible, the use of seemingly precise language should not leave the impression that the perceptions themselves 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 important 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 Prepared by a policy research analyst at SRI, who was a high-scoring subject (p < 10 with the four-state electronic random stimulus generator. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 work with the machine seemed to essentially expand and refine these perceptual processes that emerged initially. Direct Knowing (Used approximately 5 to_15 percent of the time)--This perceptual cue came as a It 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 immediate. 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 manifested 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 important in that it allowed me to sort out many real from imagined perceptions. 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 approximately 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 .. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 J 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 objective/ rational way and in more of a meditative state, highly concentrated but without spocific 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 (see the s.econd point under Section 2 next page). 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)--Although I virtually never did try to superimpose some rationally predicted pattern upon the random, machine selection of buttons I would sometimes tem er p 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 direction or another with the selection buttons as the locus for that tension. The cue was also manifested as a feeling of "emptiness" and Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 conversely as a sense of "fullness." it felt analogous to vector analysis competing tugs and pulls, one finds with the strongest "pull" or the one To describe this process further, in physics where, in sorting out the "dominant" vector; i.e., the one that best "balances" the other vector tensions. Figure A-1 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 mis- leading. 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 "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. (Recall 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: 0 Clairvoyant--Here the feeling which allows sorting and selection is like that described in Figure A-I.. Precognitive--The feeling, sorting, and selection is like that described in Figure A-1 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 precognitive per- ceptions. Clairvoyantand Precognitive--The perception is of.a pattern 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 variable was.most Approved For Release,2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 LIGHT PULL/UNBALANCED STRONG PULL OR/BALANCE EMPTY LIGHT PULL/ UNBALANCED SA-2613--21 FIGURE A-1 ILLUSTRATION OF TENSIONNECTOR ANALYSIS IN OPERATION With Button C being the one selected using these cues. ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS ASSUMED NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS SA-2613-22 FIGURE A-2 MATRIX SHOWI NG CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION IN THE USE OF TENSIONNECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS Approved For Release.2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Clairvoyant ClairvoyantPrecognitiveand Precognitive ClairvoyantCorrect MisperceptionMisperception Perception PrecognitiveMisperceptionCorrect Misperception Perception Clairvoyant Correct and MisperceptionMisperceptionPerception Precognitive Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 troublesome--typically with greater difficulty 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, refer back to Figure A-1. If the actual sequence of correct answerg-were Buttons B and D, and if I were assuming the perceptions were clairvoyant only, then it was not uncommon 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 and oftentimes in combination. A typical sequence process was: (1) Check for "direct knowing" cues, (2) Use "tension/vector" cues, then (3) Make final cues. f2. Comments on Perceptual Processes sometimes in isolation in the selection if not there., then selection with "closure 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 ~ 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 cor- respond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the decreasing 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 target--usually the next one). Therefore, making a correct selection 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 secondY associating a time component Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 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 or the button that would be selected in the next or even subsequent trial. I definitely felt that if I could consist&Yitly separate clairvoyant from precognitive dimensions of identical cues, that I could substantially increase 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 becoming 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 f'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 .ith 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 I'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 traditional 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 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 information 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 poi nt I would like to suggest two impediments that might partially account for relatively low scores. First, I am still not fluent in the "language'Iof extrasensory perceptions--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 experiment. In selecting a single button I would use intuitive knowledge processes for perception and oftentimes, rational or semirational knowledge processes to in'-~rpret 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 inter- Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 pretation, it was also "costly" (i.e., by.shifting to a rational mode, I could be thrown slightly off-balance in maintaining contact with 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 experiefitial properties of what he has termed Clairvoyant Reality and found that while certain events (such as telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance) are If normal" to this reality, certain other events (such as being able to take directed action toward a goal) are "paranormal." For me this was manifested experientially as the feeling that when I obtain extrasensory perceptions,, 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 require the same degree of transfer between these subtly different states of con- sciousness. 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 familiarform) across rational and intuitive dimensions, and relatedly, from one state of awareness to another. Is it possible, then, that our means for testing Lawrence LeShan, The Medium, The Mystic., and -the Physicist (Viking Press, New York, 1974). Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROOO 100020001 -0 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? 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 six "hits" out of twenty-five by pushing buttons at ranciom; Tnen on the second run, he could get six "hits" out of twenty-five by using extrasensory perception. 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, measure- ment of ESP by statistical output alone obscures the nature and extent of the extrasensory 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. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO01 00020001 -0 Approved For Release 2000108/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 5. Supportive Mind Set There emergedp after a time, what seemed to be a series of pre- conditions 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 motivation to ensure adequate levels of concentration and focused attention. ~ Although motivation, concentration, and attention were important, 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 significant amount of attention from the present tri'al. 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 corollaryto this was that I found I did better when I ti always 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: Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 ~ It was helpful to have a relatively quiet working environ- ment. Or, if there were noises., to have them of a sort-- fairly constant 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 sensory information. ~ It also seemed to help to have low light levels--I would always turn out the overhead lightp in the testing room. I 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 sensitivity 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 plarie 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 appli- cations 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. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 S. 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-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 APPENDIX 3 SAMPLE OF RAW DATA - MEDICAL EVALUATION OF SUBJECT 1 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 SGFOIA3 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0 Next 14 Page(s) In Document Exempt Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0100020001-0