%7Jk000&592*-k
AXved F6rAi4eoolpeA?ser4fdlld~IYO-oy^~PSI-CE)J
41 /f
                                                    "VISAGES": A COMPUTER-BASED TEST
                               OF FACE PRECOGNITION
                                         MARIO VARVOGLIS 1& MICHEL-ANGE AMORIM
                LABORATOIRE DE RECHERCHE SUR LES INTERACTIONS PSI
A computer-based psi experimen' ': was conducted to explore
whether subjects could precognlze the features of a randomly
composed face. The experiment was based upon a subset of the
              id "Photo fit" Kit used by police to help identify the facial
charact.eristIcs of a missing person or a criminal. Forty
subjects participated, each contributing a minimum of four
runs (16 trials).
Subjects were presented with 4 target packs each containing
16 different Instances of a particular facial feature (eyes,
nose, mouth and facial-outline with hair). The Instances for
     an each element were grouped, so as to suggest different
     ts degrees of resemblance between t Ihem, and, hence, between the
     subject's choice and the tacget.
our
There were two task-modal I ties. In the Scanning psi task
-ion instances were arranged as a 4 x 4 Image array, allowing the
               subject to consciously choose a particular Image using the
computer "mouse". In the Timing psi task, the images were
rced. presented in a rapidly shifting here the subject
               could only choose when to stop the "Image roulette" with the
-nd mouse. Once the subject had chosen all elements of the face,
the program randomly selected an Instance for, each of the
four elements, constructed the target face, and presented it
to the subject.
in the
I Results were evaluated through goodness-of-fit tests,
.e Over comparing the obtained distribution of hits, for 5 different
ecijic levels of scoring, against the expected distribution. The
 global test yielded a significant Chi-square for the
:.ion. experimental condition (p=.013), and chance results for a
LCate5 simulation study. Further analyses, examining scor-Ing under
.4n the two dI f f eren t task-moda I I t I es, y I e I ded a significant
of, Chi-square for the Timing task modality alone <p=.006).
-b I Y
to
A4ter
the
zher is
Main author and experimenter
 329 96-00792ROO0701060001-3
Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP

           Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
           INTRODUCTION
           The Possibility of applied Parapsychological research has
           been receiving considerable attention in recent years, both
           in the U.s. (Agor, 1984; Harary, Targ and White, 1985;
           Mishlove, 1986; Morris, 1986) and in Europe (Amorim, in
           press). An application which seems to hold particular
           promise is the use of psi to help locate missing persons or
           identify criminals. A number of popular or semi-popular
           accounts have referred to Instances In which psychics helped
           the police, but little has been done 'by way of experimental
           research. One of the few systematic Investigations In this
           area Is reported by Reiser et al (1979) who presented 12
           psychics with sealed envelopes containing Information on two
           solved and two unsolved crimes. According to the authors,
           the elicited "psychic Impressions" offered little support
           for the claim that psychics could contribute Information
           necessary for the resolution of crimes. However, in their
           book "Psychic Criminology". Hibbard & WorrIng (1982) cite a
           number of cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
           criticize the Reiser et al approach as being Insensitive to
           psychological and Interpersonal factors. Osis (1984) also
           cites numerous cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
           emphasizes the difficulties involved In attempting to
           address this topic in laboratory contexts. ..
           It is clear that the motivational characteristics of real-
           life situations cannot be reproduced in the artificiality of
           laboratory contexts. On the other hand, even If it is impos-
           sible to recreate the motivational dynamics of real-life
           psychic cz-;minology, laboratory experimentation could
           explore certain facets of this area. One such facet is the
           Identification of an Individual. In many crimes, police rely
           upon eyewitnesses to try to reconstruct the facial characte-
           ristics of the criminal. However, witnesses may not be avai-
           lable, or may be unreliable. Can "psychic witnesses" be
           reliably used to identify the facial characteristics of an
           unknown person?
           The exploration of facial characteristics as psi targets Is
           also interesting in and of Itself, Independently of any
           Immediate applications. Our perception of the face appears
           to be a very basic process In human beings; like language,
           It may constitute an Inborn, "hardwired" function, rather
           than being an acquired capacity. Could the fact that we are
           "primed" toward face-recognition translate Into a special
           sensitivity toward face -precognition or -clairvoyance? If
           experimental data were to Indicate that faces constitute
           unusually good psi targets, then this would lend some
           credence to the Idea that psi capacities are tied In to
           basic neurophysiological and cognitive functions.
           The current study, then, was conceived as a preliminary step
           In exploring the use of faces as psi-targets. Specifically,
           we explored "face precognition" through a computer-based
           version of the "Photo-fit" Kit, employed by police to Inter-
           rogate eyewitnesses, and explored In a number of investiga-
                    330 001-3
           Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060

           
    M5 - CIA-RDP96,00792ROO070 .060001-4
   Approved For Release 2000108
   tions of face recall and recognition (e.g., Ellis, Sheperd &
   Davies, 1975; Sergent, 1984). This kit contains a very wide
   range of noses, eyes, mouths, jaws, etc., drawn on transpa-
   rencies; It thus allows an Interviewer to "mix and match"
       different instances of facial features, so as to
   approximate the face recalled by a witness.
   In our study, we selected a subset of facial features (face-
   outline, eyes, nose, mouth) and a small subset of instances
   for each feature, and passed these into the computer. Then,
   we created a program which can randomly mix and match these
   'instances, and compose a face. The subject,s task was to
   attempt to choose the facial character, Ist Ics which would
   most approximate the features of the computer-chosen face.
   Despite certain superficial similarities, however, this task
   was not quite analogous to psychic criminology. For one
   thing, we used "normal" (rather than special) subjects.
   Also, the psi task was "elementaristic" in nature, insofar
   as subjects would be focusing upon facial features, rather
   than attempting to precognize the face as a whole. Some
   researchers (e.g., Ellis, 1975; Sergent, 1984) suggest that
   important facets of face perception are holistic, and are
   not captured by elementarlstic approaches. In order to
   compensate somewhat for this problem, we decided not to
   provide "plecemeal" feedback following each trial, but give
   .feedback only once the entire face has been composed (i.e.,
   after all four elements have been chosen). Though subjects
   would still make their selections one feature at a time, at
   least the moment of feedback would involve a holistic
   perception; if precognitive Information derives from this
   feedback point, then It would orient the person's psi toward
   the whole face, rather than an Isolated feature.
   A more important deviation from psychic criminology, in our
   approach, was that the experimental context Included none of
   the human elements which lend meaning and significance to
   the task In real I If e. Rather, It Involved guessing the
   features of a fictional face, one stripped of any meaningful
   descriptors or history. To address this, we sought to give
   the fictional target-face some Identlity, associating it with
   a randomly selected name and biography; these were derived
   from a large pool of possibilities. The relevance of this
   "meaningfulness" device was to be explored by comparing
   subject scoring with the biography present vs. absent.
   Another factor explored, "psi - task modality", was meant to
   address the potential problem of response biases. There Is
   little doubt that, to different degrees, we are attracted or
   repelled by different faces (or facial characteristics). In
   a psi task In which subjects can freely choose from among
   al-i possibilities within a target pack, such aesthetic
   factors could easily drown out subtle psi Information,
   leading people to choose Images they like and avoid those
   they dislike. As it seemed that this could not be completely
   avoided, as long as the subject is free to choose among the 1-3
   Possibilities, we decided to add a is E)W
   6OTfmj-gR~OQ7Q1P6000
   which the subject could 161 ose an image.
              e f66
   Releas 019?P*
   proved For
   Ap

          Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
          This second modality was a ,timing-- psi task, demanding of
          the the subject only a decision as to when to stop a rapidly
          changing "Image roulette,' containing all possibilities.
          Thus, there were two task-moda 1 1, t I es: one based upon the
          Implicit question "when is the target passing by" (the
          timing task), the other based upon the question "where Is
          the target", and Involving the usual scanning of possibi-
          lities In order to make a choice (the scanning task).
          METHOD
          Subjects
          The subjects of this study were 35 female and 5 male
          volunteers, ranging In age from 19 to 59 years old. Thirty
          four of these participants came to the laboratory following
          an article in a Popular womans magazine, which presented
          the laboratory's computer-based psi research. The remaining
          6 subjects were either acquaintances, or had heard about the
          laboratory through acquaintances. Personal and psychological
          data on all subjects were collected using french versions of
          the Personal Inventory Form (PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-
          Inventory (MBTI); these data have not yet been analyzed.
          Hardware
          The experiment was run using an Amiga 1000 with a color
          monitor, two disk-drives, a 2-megabyte random-access memory
          extension, and a "mouse" for subject Inputs. The transfer of
          Photo-fit images into the computer was accomplished using a
          surveillance camera and an Interface which permits the
          "d1gitization" of video inputs.
          Software
          The Program controlling the present experiment was based
          upon a compiler-language named "The Director", similar to
          BASIC, but explicitly oriented toward graphics- and sound-
          manipulations.
          Pseudo-Random function-. The random numbers for the p1rogram
          are generated by the Director language's pseudo-random
          function, reseeded every cycle by the Amiga clock (read in
          in micro-seconds). A "Cyclic Redundancy Check" scheme
          scrambles the clock values and ensures the adequacy of the
          random distribution. In a personal communication, the
          creator of the Director, language stated that tests of the
          random function have shown that it yields the expected range
          and frequency of values. While no detailed assessment of the
          random function was undertaken by the experimenter, a one-
          line program was written to at least ensure that the
          function was reseeded each time. Run Immedlatly af ter the
          "booting" of the computer, this program served to verify
          that the pseudo-random function was Indeed bein ft001-3
          y I Wl$P&L!~d fFfff Rlbleft~400010613 C:CdAL--RMP96ffAW07
          1S32
               it V
               th
               Pa
               e1
               Pr
               St,
               Pr
               ai
               P;
               a
          A
          c
          P
          t
          t

          
       Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
       "V!5age5" Pfograml The Vlaageo pcecngnition te5t, WC;tt_--Fi b
       the f Irst author, Presents subjects with 4 graphic target
       packs, each containing 16 distinct instances of a facial
       element, and, on the basis of the subject/s choices,
       Progressively constructs a graphic face. Then, once the
       subject Is satisfied with the face as constructed, the
       Program uses the Amiga/s pseudo-random function four times,
       selecting, for each facial element, one of 16 Possible
       Instances. Finally, the program calculates feedback scores
       (i.e., measures of the proximity between the subi ect -chosen
       and the randomly-chosen elements), stores the results,
       provides feedback (showing the target-face and the score),
       and offers the subject options to continue or quit.
       A slightly modified version of the program serves to collect
       control or "simulation" trials, in which no subject is
       present. The program essentially creates two faces, on the
       basis of two sets of random numbers; the first set substi-
       tutes for the subject's guesses, while the second defines
       the target face as described above.
       A more detailed description of the programs operation is
       given In the Target-preparation and Procedure sections.
       Target-preparation
       The Target pool was based upon a portion of the Penry Photo-
       fit Kit, kindly provided by the central police department of
       Paris (MInistere de I/Interieur), In photocopy form. The kit
       Involves transparencies showing different male facial ele-
       ments (eyes, noses, mouths, etc.); these can be freely
       combined and mixed, and so as to produce a very wide range
       of possible male facial types.
       Four facial elements were used for this study: eyes, nose,
       mouth, and facial outline (showing hair, forehead, and jaw).
       To select from among the many instances provided, we used
       our subjective judgement and several criteria; for example,
       selection of as wide a range of characteristics as possible,
       for each facial element and avoidance of facial characteri-
       stics which area too striking or, weird. We then passed this
       subset of photo-fit Images Into the computer through a
       "digitization" process, and each digitized Image was treated
       with diverse computer graphic tools, so as to maximize
       definition and clarlty. Then, for each element, we selected
       16 different Instances (I.e., sixteen noses, sixteen mouths,
       etc.), and arranged these images Into 4 computer bit-map
       Screens or "pages", which would serve as target packs (Two
       of these pages are illustrated In Figures I and 2).
       The 16 Instances of each page were arranged In a 4 x 4
       array, images being grouped according to different levels of
       resemblance between them. Taking Figure I as an example, we
       see that the top two rows are distinguishable from the
       bottom two ("little hair" vs. "lots of hair"). Then, the 4
       Instances of a fa rxglbU700600014
            A-5L' rmyedtFort Rol e snort hair,
       PP A%%~Q ear- a
       333

       
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
 ful
 art
      Th
      Wh
      -IC
      Tt
      fe
      ti
      f(
      r'I
      C!
      Ik
      r
      i
      C
                                       Figure 1. Target pack for
                                    face-outline
                                       fLeIre 3. Face with three
                                  elements selected

 
  Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO07
  full hair and long-hair). Finally, within each row, 2 groups
  are distinguishable (e.g., in row D, DI / D2 and D:3 / D4).
  The Idea behind this arrangment was to create a psi task
  which could allow for different degrees of psi -accuracy or
  -resolution - from vague feelings to detailed Information.
  The scoring scheme, accordingly, was meant to reflect dif-
  ferent degrees of resemblance between subjects/ choices and
  the target Image. For example, let us assume that the target
  for facial-outline were D2. Selection of any instance within
  row C - the other row of the same half-page - implies having
  correctly identified that the target-face generally has
  "lots of hair"; this would be a "half-page" hit. Selecting
  D3 or D4 - the other pair on the same row, or a "row" hit -
  Implies having Identified the target face as having specifi-
  cally long hair. Selecting D1, the other member of the pair,
  would be a "pair" hIt - whereby the subject has found the
  instance which most resembles the actual target. Selecting
  D2, of course, Is a direct hit.
  As mentioned in the Introduction, the target face was
  accompanied by a name and, In half the trials, a biography.
  The names were drawn from a file containing 80 names com-
  monly found In France. The biography was drawn from a second
  file, containing 200 statements, ocganized Into 10 theme-
  related groups (sports and leisure, living quarters, child-
  hood and education, mood and temperament, social life, para-
  normal experiences, reactions to world events, beliefs and
  philosophy, favorite sayings, health).
  Procedure
  Upon arrival at the laboratory and preliminary exchanges,
  the subject was placed in front of the Amiga, and Instructed
  on the utillsation of the mouse. The subject then took
  computer-based (French) versions of the PRL Personal
  Inventory Form (PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-Inventory
  (MBTI). Following feedback on the MBTI, the subject was
  switched to the Apple-based computer-RNG test "Volition".
  Then, after a minimum of two Volition runs, the subject was
  brought back to the Amiga, for the Visages precognition
  test; the experimenter remained present throughout the
  Visages session.
  The subject was told that, unlike Volition, the Visages test
  was geared toward receptive psi. It was explained that the
  computer would create a face, randomly selecting instances
  for the four facial elements; the person was asked to use
  their Intuition to guess which Instances of each element
  would be selected by the computer. It was emphasized that
  the computer would not select those Instances on the basis
  Of any aesthetic criteria, but on the basis of random
  decisions.
  ,The run, consisting of four trials (one for each facial
  element), begins with the presentation of erikL
                        -QQ79 oiypp - 3
  $ pot
  rp$~bVecPF&EReldti96 2Q0Q1W116LcrClA4Wf?f*
  335

  
            Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
            !' Ncjoe If , 11 L I Pe" r The. Progrzim ziwal to the. --'UbJ ect P~a !se I er,,t I on
            of one of these, using the mouse. (For the f irst run, the
            experimenter encouraged the subject to start with face-
            outline, and progressively fill In the other elements of the
            face). Once an element Is selected, the computer presents
            the subject with the target pack, I e. , the 16 Instances of
            that element.
            Depending on the psl-task modality, the target-pack is
            presented in one of two different ways. In the scanning
            condition, all 16 possibilities are present on the screen
            simultaneously, arranged in the 4x4 array described above;
            the person uses the mouse to place the cursor over one of
            these 16 instances and then "clicks" to select it. In the
            timing condition, only one of the 16 instances Is visible on
            the screeen at any moment; the Images succeed each other
            very rapidly in a random sequence (giving the impression of
            a nose changing shape, a mouth talking, etc.), and selection
            is made by clicking on the mouse and stopping the "Image
            roulette" at some particular Image. The image actually
            selected, however, is not the one last seen by the subject,
            but rather one which is randomly generated just after mouse
            input; irrespective of how fast their reaction time might
            be, subjects cannot consciously select a particular target.
            The order of task presentation, fixed across subjects, was
            based upon a predetermined schedule allowing for different
            permutations of the blogr-ahpy and task-modality variables.
            The first four runs were scanning/biography, scannIng/no
            biography, timing/biography, timing/no blogcaphy.
            In both scanning and timing modes, the specific Instance
            chosen by the person is Immediately added to those
            previously selected. Thus, as subjects proceed through the
            four facial elements and select a particular face-outline,
            set of eyes, nose, and mouth, they see the face being
            constructed. (Figure 3 Illustrates a face with three
            features already chosen and lips not yet selected). The
            process of face construction is automatic: placement of the
            feature chosen on the face depends not upon the subject, but
            upon predefined coordinates.
            Following the subject's selection of all four elements, and
            thus the completion of the face, the individual Is presented
            with options 5:"Review Face", and 6:"See target". Option 5
            allows subjects to review the face constructed, in case
            they/ve changed their mind about a particular selection (in
            which case, they can re-initiate the selection process by
            clicking on the corresponding number In the Menu).
            Option number 6, once clicked, launches the construction of
            the target face. The program generates four random numbers,
            between 1 and 16, each corresponding to a particular
            instance of the four features. The program also randomly
            selects a name out of the name-fIle, and, In 'Che "biography"
            condition, constructs a biography by randomly selecting 6
            statements from the 2.0 categories of statements. The program
            ApprovddftT ReleaseL2000/08/15 CiCdA-RE)12$6.iW92RBOO!7Q*OSDDD~b3
                                         3366

            
                                                      1-3
  Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO070106000
  the target face on the screen, along with a name, a graphic
  "button" for re-viewing the subJect-chosen face, and another
  button for reading the biography <*).
  The screen with the subJect-chosen face allows for compa-
  risons with the target-face; it also shows the scores
  obtained for each of the four elements. These scores give
  subjects a numerical estimate of the proximity of their
  choices to the target-instances. For each element, the
  Possible .,scores ace 0 (no relation between target and
  choice), 2 (half-page success), 4 (row success), 8 (pair
  success) and 16 (direct hit). Thus, the total score for the
  run could range from 0 to a very unlikely 64 (direct hits on
  every trial).
  SubJects were asked to complete at least four runs (sixteen
  trials), but were allowed to contribute additional runs, if
  so desired. Thus, following feedback they could either click
  on a Replay button, to Initiate a new run, or, If they had
  completed 4 runs, c1 Ick on a Stop button to close the
  Visages program and end the session.
  Simulation Runs: In order to ensure that the RND function of
  the Amiga operates correctly, and that there were no
  probl,ems In the program"s logic, we conducted a simulation
  -study, based upon a slightly modified version of the Visages
  program. In this progam, the subject-s scanning or timing
  guesses for each element were replaced by the generation of
  random numbers between 1-16. Thus, the program would
  construct a face on the basis of 4 random numbers, and then
  a second, target-face on the basis of 4 move random numbers.
  Once launched, the simulation program ran automatically,
  until It completed 9 runs; It was then re-launched by the
  experimenter. This process continued until the number of
  runs accumulated equalled the total of experimental runs.
  4 The screen with the biography text was intended to examine
  the meaningfulness factor mentioned in the Introduction.
  From the f Irst few sessions, subjects appeared to be con-
  fused as to the role and purpose of the statements; the
  biography seemed incongruent with the stated nature of the
  k.ask-precognizing a randomly constructed face. Following
  repeated negative comments by several subjects, the experi-
  menter realized that the biography was not appropriate for
  assessing meaningfulness, and decided to drop assessment of
  this factor from the study. From that point on, he no longer
  directed subjects to click on the blography button, and
  Practically no one did.
  337
  Approved For Release 2000108115:
  -00792ROO0701060001-3
  CIA-RDP96

            Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
            RESULTS
            Collectlvly, the 40 participants contributed a total of 212
            experimental runs (848 trials). Individuals" contribution to
            this database was quite uneven: 28 of the 40 participants
            completed just the minimum of 4 runs each, while the remai-
            ning 12 contributed between 5-14 runs. Using subjects/ mean
            feedback score as an index of individual performance, we
            find that the average score for the group contributing 4
            runs is 10.16, while for the group contributing more runs it
            is 9.18. A t-test for Independent means shows no difference
            between the two groups (t=.752, 38 df, ns). Figure 4, depic-
            ting mean feedback scores for all subjects, also shows that
            there are no consistent trends distinguishing the scores of
            the 28 subjects who contributed exactly 4 runs, from the 9
            contributing 5-9 runs, and the 3 contributing 10-14 runs.
            The evaluation of overall results, utilizing the trial as
            unit, was based upon two goodness-of-fit tests - one for
            experimental and one for simulation data. These analyses
            examine whether the observed distribution of hits, for all
            scoring levels, conforms to the binomial expectation (the
            probability corresponding to each scoring level multiplied
            by the number of trials). The probabilities used to estimate
            expectation for each scoring level represent the likelihood
            of obtaining exactly (rather than "at least") a pair hit, a
            row hit, etc.; they thus allow each scoring level to be
            treated independently. The probabilities corresponding to
            each level of hitting are direct hit, 1116; pair hit, 1/16;
            row hit, 1/8; half-page hit, 1/4; and miss, 1/2. (For,
            example, in the facial-outline example cited earlier, with
            D2 as target, there Is exactly I way to obtain a direct hit,
            1 way to obtain specifically a pair hit <D1), 2 ways to ob-
            tain a row hit (D3, D4), 4 possibilities for a half-page hit
            (all of row C) and 8 ways to obtain a miss (rows A and B)).
            Table i summarizes the results of the goodness-of-fit tests.
            The first row represents the expected number of hits for
            each scoring-level, given a total of 848 trials. The second
            and third rows show the obtained number of hits for simula-
            tion and experimental trials (respectively). As can be seen
            from this table, simulation trials conformed quite closely
            to expectation. In contrast, the distribution of scores in
            experimental trials departs significantly from expectation
            (chi-sq C4 df I = 12.632; p=.013). This latter, result Is
            associated with an effect size of .076 (obtained by
            converting the p-value to a one-tailed z-score, and dividing
            the latter by the square root of N, I.e., of 848).
            The significant effect for the experimental trials was
            mainly due to a shift from the expected number of hits In
            the three partial-hit levels (pair, row and half-page).
            Post-hoc chi-square analyses, comparing each of the five
            hitting levels with the other four, suggest that the main
            effect was due to a shortage of hits at the pair-hits level
            (chi-sq (1 dfl=5.813,, P=0.16), and an excess of hits at the
                              AOPW>%f&cbFoO Raftas~P200=8115 :dMk-'RlDP96*GPMGOM1ftGOOqt3
            338

            
  Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
  FIGURE -4: MEAN FEEDBACK SCORES FOR 40 SUBJECTS
  M     . ....  .. ...   .. ...  . . ... ..            
                    .                                  
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  E                                                    
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  A                                                    
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  N                                                    
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  s                                                    
  10                                                   
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  C                                                    
                                                       

                             0                         
                                                       

  0                                                    
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  R                                                    
                                                       

                                                       
                                                       

  E                                                    
            7                                 --       
                                                       

  8   6 3 8502                                 133 5    
  L                         19 21                        
                                                       

                              39 30 Jb sa 'WU
  MEAN SCORE BASED UPON: 4 RUNS:* 5-9 RUNS: X 10-14 RUNS:
  Table 1:                         scoringlevels
  Frequency                               
  of hits                                 
  for 5                                   
  '                                       
                                          

              for Experimental    and          trials
                             Simulated       
                                          

              DIR PAIR   ROW H.PGE MISS   CHI-SO !~4
                                          DF
                                          

  EXPECTED                                
                                          

              53  53     106 212   424    
                                          

  SIMULATION                              
                                          

              so  56     112 213   417    .799
                                          

  EXPERIMENTAL                            
                                          

              60  36     88  238   426    12.632
                                          

  Table 2:    Frequency       hitsfor          levels
              of             5            
                             scoring       
                                          

              for        and Timing       
              Scanning           task         
                             modalities       
                                          

              DIR PAIR   ROW H.PGE MISS   CHI-SO (4 DF
                                          

  EXPECTED                                
                                          

              26.526.5   53  106   212    
                                          

  SCANNING                                
                                          

              33  20     4-17104   220    4.207
                                          

  T I ", I N '13
                          27 16 41 134 206 14.453
      Approved For Release 2000/08/le3blA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3

  
Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
aesthetic criteria, SubJects consistently selected certain
Instances and avoided other ones; whereas one would expect
each Instance of a particular element to be chosen about an
equal number of times - specifically 106/16, or 6.625 times-
there were Instances which had been chosen just once or
twice, and others chosen 15 or even 20 times!.
By comparison to the conflicts Induced by the scanning task,
the timing task was effortless and entertaining. Given that
all subjects went through both conditions, it is possible
that the significant timing-task result simply reflects a
preferential effect: this condition may have faced better
because subjects perceived It as less frustrating. Alter-
natively, Insofar as subjects had little control over their
selections during the timing-task, and just had to press the
button when they felt the time was "right", they were less
prone to counter-productive psychological sets (e.g., trying
too hard) and more apt to adopt a passive, "goal -oriented"
approach. The study"s results may be seen as analogous to
those of RNG-PK studies suggesting the superiority of goal-
oriented over process-oriented strategies (Morris, Nanko and
Phillips, 1979; Levi, 1979), or of hidden RNG-PK tasks over
explicit ones (Berger, 1988; PRL,1984; Varvoglis, 1989).
It should be noted, though, that the specific distcibution
of scores In the timing task does not lend Itself to any
simple Interpretations . It is not clear why hitting should
manifest at a level at which it is least rewarding, and at
which psi-information Is least useful. Similarly, it is not
clear why the trend toward missing (most apparent in the
overall results) should manifest at the pair-level, at which
psi-information was quite precise, and a hit, presumably,
quite rewarding.
CONCLUSION
a
d
n
e
   0
)f
ie
in
,ie
it
nd
of
It is obvious that this study's results, though significant,
are not 'particularly encouraging for psychic criminology
applications. The overall patterning of experimental scores
seems to have been due to a combination of hitting and
missing, with the most conspicuous hitting occurring at too
low an informational level to be especially useful.
On the other hand, It should be stressed that the task was
as removed from real psychic criminology as could be -
involving repeated trials, "normal" subjects, and fictional
faces, rather than a single trial by a "psychic" attempting
to describe a dangerous criminal. Also, insofar as the
procedures encouraged Subjects to focus upon facial-features
rather than upon the face as a whole, our tasks may have
been simply too elementaristic to fairly assess the utility
Of faces as psi targets.
Be that as It may, we are looking to shift our approach with
Visages. Leaving aside psychic criminology, for now, we are
  :E1 )
e rqffrf q
341 y resp nz)e iases whic


          Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
          block subjects/ receptivity to psi information would render
          them -effective PK agents. Next time, 'rather than asking
          participants to fight their. feelings and preferences and
          response biases, we/re going to tel I them to go for It, and
          (try to) have it their-'way ...
          REFERENCES
          Agor, W.H. (1984). Intuitive management: Integrating left
          and right brain management skills. Prentice Hall Press: NY
          Amorlm, M.A. (in press). Applications et apprentissage en
          parapsychologie. Revue Francalse de Psychotronique, Vol 3.
          Berger, R. (1988). Psi effects without real-time feedback.
          Journal of Parapsychology, 52, 1-28.
          Ellis, H. (1975). Recognizing faces. British Journal of
          Psychology, 66, 409-426.
          Ellis, H., Sheperd, J. & Davies, G. (1975). An Investigation
          of the use of the Photo-fit technique for recalling faces.
          British Journal of Psychology, 66, 29-37.
          Harary, K., Targ, R., & White, A. (1985). An applications
          orientation to psi research. In R.White and J.Solfvin (Eds.)
          Research in Parapsychology 1984, (pp. 119-120). Scarecrow
          Press: Metuchen, NJ.
          Hibbard, W.S. & Worring, R.W. (1982). Psychic criminology.
          An operations manual for using psychics in criminal Investi-
          gations. Springfield, III: Charles C. Thomas
          Levi, A. (1979). The influence of imagery and feedback on PK
          effects. Journal of Parapsychology, 43, 275-289.
          Morris B., Nanko, M. and Phillips, B. (1979). Intentional
          observer influence on measurements of the quantum mechanical
          system: a comparison of two Imagery strategies. In W.G.Roll
          (Ed) Research in Parapsychology 1978 (pp.146-150). Scarecrow
          Press: Metuchen, NJ
          Mishlove, J. (1986). PsIonics: the practical application of
          psi. In B.Shapin and L.Coly (Eds.) Current trends- in psi
          research (pp.130-136). Parapsychology Foundation: New York.
          CsIs, K. (1984). The application of ESP to criminal
          investigations, locating missing persons, and cases of
          airplane disasters. In the Proceedings of a Symposium on
          Applications of Anomalous Phenomena (pp.241-274).
          Psychophysical Research Laboratories (1984). 1983 Annual
          Report. Princeton, NJ: Psychophysical Research Laboratories.
          Reiser, M., Ludwig, L., Saxe, S. & Wigner, C. (1979). An
          evaluation of the use of psychics In the Investigation of
          Approved For Release 2000/08/15 : CIA-IR-O-U'2P96-00792ROO0701060001-3

          
Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3
MaJor crimes. Journal of Poi ice science and
7, IB-25.
Sergent, J. (1984). An Investigation into component and
configural processes underlying face Perception. British
Journal of Psychology, 75, 221-242.
VarvoglIs, M. (1989). A "Psychic contest" using a computer-
RNG task In a non-laboratory setting". In L.Henkel and
R.Berger (Eds) Research in Parapsychology 1988 (pp.10-15).
Scarecrow Press: Metuchen, NJ.
K
1w
-)f
An
Of
  343
Approved For Release 2000108115: CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0701060001-3