aM-ie e-Touamaa of Approved For Release 2000/08/11 CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0400240002-6 1M ELVEL]PSY011010gY Volume 44 Number 4 December 1980 TRANSCONTINENTAL REMOTE VIEWING By MARILYN SCHLITZ AND ELMAR GRUBER ABSTRACT: Two experimenters carried out a long-distance remote-viewing experiment, with one of them, in Detroit, Michigan, acting as percipient and the other, in Rome, Italy, as the agent. From a pool of 40 geographical target locations in Rome, 10 were randomly chosen without replacement, and the agent visited them one at a time for 15 minutes on each of 10 consecutive days. The percipient, at the same time, recorded in words and sketches her impressions of the agent's location. Later, five independent judges received copies of these sketches, and the impressions translated into Italian. They visited the locations and judged the protocols with respect to their correspondence to the target sites. Analysis of the results by a direct-count-of-permutations method yielded ap of 4.7 x 1076 for judges' ratings and 5.8 x 10' for rankings. The authors point out that free-response remote viewing may be a psi-conducive procedure, but that the results may also have been influenced by exceptionally high motivation on the part of the two experimenters. INTRODUCTION Experimental parapsychology basically utilizes two forms of ESP testing: forced-choice, in which the range of target/responses is restricted, and free-response, which allows for a vast scope of target/response possibilities. The forced-choice paradigm has been highly influential in establishing parapsychology within the scientific framework. This is largely due to the ease with which statistical methods are applied to it. The early free-response work by such researchers as Thaw (1892), Sinclair (1930), and Warcollier (1938), however, provided great quantities of rich qualitative materials. Although these early studies are devoid of any true form of statistical assessment, the available protocols are provocative, to say the least. This paper is a modified version of one presented at the twenty-third annual convention of the Parapsychological Association at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik, August 13-16, 1980. The authors would like to thank Debra Weiner, K. Ramakrishna Rao, and Robert Morris for their useful suggestions at various stages in the preparation of the paper, and would like to give special thanks to James Kennedy for his invaluable help and encouragement throughout. Approved For Release 2000/08/11 CIA-RDP96-00792ROO0400240002-6 C*4 cD Q Q R* C*4 Q Q It Q Q cD W 04 Q Q (6 [L 0 105 < 00 Q Q Q Q C*4 (D U) M (D 77D 0 LL 'D > 0 L_ CL CL 306 TheJournal ofparapsychology -ee response, 1 n vest igators such as Recognizing the usefulness of fi Carington (1940), Stuart (1942), and Marsh (reported in Fisk, 1960) attempted to incorporate quantitative approaches within then- de- signs. Unfortunately, these initiativ es were limited by the cumber- some methods of evaluation available at that time. Today we are equipped with simpler, more refined methods of quantitative analy- sis, which allow us to go further in exploring the potential advantages of free response without sacrificing scientific rigor. From the authors' point of view, there are a number of possible advantages to the free-response method. One such advantage lies in the richness and complexity of the targets. Participants in free I impres- response studies are able to freely express a wide variety of by Carington. (1940), the sions, feelings, and hunches. As pointed out ore a difference between free response and forced choice becomes rn question of what, rather than which, for a given subject. . In this way, free response has strong ties with reported psi events in daily life, For one, spontaneous manifestations generally do not occur in a forced-choice, decision-making context, but result from a timuli. Child and Levi (1979) caution that general' broad range of s I iza- tions to most of everyday life from the classical forced-choice meth- ods, which restrict the. possibilities to a task so clear as guessing a card, is somewhat risky. As noted by Haight (1979), a gap has existed between spontaneous cases of psi and those which occur under controlled, quantitatively assessable conditions. The resurgence of interest in free response may well serve to bridge this gap. As stated by Burdick and Kelly (1977): Many investigators have felt that something vital was lost in the transpor- tation of psi from its natural setting into the forced-choice paradigm and have sought ways of extending quantitative techniques back into situa- tions which more nearly resemble the conditions of spontaneous psi occurrences. (p. 109) Another feature of the free-response procedures is the great investment of time. Although this can be thought of as a disadvan- tage, it has several advantages as well. For instance, it requires a great deal of involvement on the part of the experimenters, which possibly serves to enhance the subject's feeling for the importance of individ- ual trials. Perhaps the most powerful asset of free-response methods lies in the subjective realm of personal evaluation. For many people, a strong qualitative "hit" is more impressive than a successful outcome based totally on statistical probability. There are also dangers in this Transcontinental Remote Viewing 307 approach, of course; for, as noted by Child (1980), one must use caut,on when"unip, I I J Ing to conclusions based on single selected cases: This error is paralleled in [the] Study of spontaneOUS cases by the danger of concluding merely from very obvious similarity between a person's imagery and a distant event that the coincidence must be an instanccwf psi. (p. 177) (24) We are now, however, in a position to explore the best of both stiQ wor0s with free response giving us rich qualitative 1 data as well as stati y quantitative evidence for psi. CC*D4 Although there are several free-response procedures in use tos, the present study was designed as an attempted replication of 6e I remote-viewing work developed by Puthoff and Targ (1975). W i this controlled laboratory design, the percipient is asked to desc o desc e the whereabouts of an outside experimenter (the agent) w11 location at the time is unknown to the percipient. Despite recent acceptance of the term remote v' * ' * Q iewing, it is interl& discussed iiqD'a ing to note that the implied phenomenon has beAes~fipointed outTy broad range of literature thr ughout the years. 0 Targ and Puthoff (1977): The basic phenomenon appears to cover a range of subjective experiepp variously referred to in the literature as astra I projection (occult); sin clairvoyance, traveling clairvoyance, or out-of-bod s I (parapsychological); exteriorization (psychological); or autoscopy (me'di- cal). (p. 5) Remote viewing was chosen then as a descriptive term, free of St prejudice and occult assumptions. It is often a matter of taste to faar a specific term and henceforth a slightly different concept. This'sage discussion may be applied to other areas of psi research as well; &r example, the distinction between precognition and backward cauM- tion. U) Conditions for remote viewing have been diverse. Altho studies have involved real-time situations, whereby the design quired simultaneous viewing of a target location by the agent descriptions by the percipient (Puthoff & Targ, 1975; Puthoff et 1979; ScIblitz & Deacon, 1980), some studies have also explored possibilities of precognition' (Dunne & Bisaha, 1978, 1979) as wel the effects of d' I(Ds Istance on the remote-viewing process (Puthoff & L_ Targ, 1976). CL ' in any discussion o CL f precognition, alternative explanations such as psychokin9c effects on the random number generator must be considered. 308 1 lie journal oJ J'arapsycnology In exploring the remote-viewing design, it was decided to attempt a replication of the long-distance work. Throughout the history of parapsychology, there has been evidence, although usually informal, that distance has no effect on the psi process. As stated by Warcollier co(1938): 04 We sought telepathically to transmit drawings from one room to another, 0 0 from one quarter of Paris to another, from one city to another, and from ,I. one country to another. Distance never seemed to affect the results. (p. 5) C14 0 In a different light, Rao (1966) noted: 0 Several of the spontaneous cases of psi experiences in which the subjects 0 and the ostensible target objects were widely separated by long distances 0 not only suggested the relative independence of psi and distance, but this W 0 04 bservation led to the strengthening of the conviction that psi is extrasen- CY) sory. (p. 63) PROCEDURE CY) a- In conducting the present experiment, carried out in November 1979, the percipient, El (M. S_), remained in Detroit, Michigan, while < the agent, E2 (E. R. G.), visited the target sites in Rome, Italy. The experimenters acted as percipient and agent in order to provide the opportunity of observing a remote-viewing experience first-hand. It was felt that this might lead to greater insights which could be of some C* help in the design of future studies of the remote-viewing type. 0 0 CD Target Pool and Target Selection 0 04 (D E2, together with a colleague in Italy, A. M. Turi, selected 40 target U) sites in Rome. The target pool was carefully constructed to contain C9 several targets of given types (i.e., fountains, churches, parks.. etc.). It was furthermore decided to include indoor as well as outdoor targets within the pool. Indoor targets included rooms, churches, sports 0 halls, museum exhibits, and so on. LL On each experimental day at 2:00 p,m. central European time 'a (D (CET) corresponding to 8:00 A.M. eastern standard time (EST), the > tar-get for the day was randomly selected from the pool, without 2 replacement, by means of a random number generator. No attempt CL a was made to avoid similar targets within the pool. it was or ginally < decided to perform 12 trials on 12 consecutive days (November 3-14). However, due to external problems on the part of the subject, only 10 Transcontinental Remote Viewing 309 Protocols were generated and 10 trials completed. The 10 target sites finally cho'sen were: the view from the roof of St. Peter's cathedral; the Spanish Steps; the interior ofan apartment in the Via Vittoria; a room in the Academia Tiberina; view from a hill outside the Rome International Airport; the ruins of the Caracalla baths; the park of the Villa Borghese; a room filled with paintings the Vatic* 04 museum; and an overlook from the Sports Palace in Rome-Eur. Outbound Experimenter Behavior 10, 04 E2 arrived at the target location by 5: 00 P. M. (CET), 11: 00 A. 0 Detroit time. At the target site, E2 was free to walk around or sl observing the surroundings. He carried a tape recorder with him aig recorded thoughts, impressions of the scene, or specific street sce ce~ and situations at the site. This was done for a period of 15 min.Y1,6` visited all target locations alone except the flat in Via"Vittot (November 6). 0 Following the experimental period, E2 sent the fin-Al target ordQ6 as well as transcripts of his impressions, to two colleagues, both whom were blind to the nature of the experiment. Inbound Experimenter Behavior At 11:00 A.M. (EST) on each of 10 consecutive days, El sat in -2r dimly lit room and attempted to describe the whereabouts of t42 distant agent. Although she was in a calm state throughout the seria no formal relaxation procedure was utilized. When making a Q sponse, M. S. made an effort to think constantly abouf',.,tI8 target/agent-trying not to allow other thoughts, such as thocD concerning daily activities, to intrude. The impressions were recorde on paper, with both sketches and thoughts being written out as tl-FA protocol for a given trial. C9 4) Following completion of the 10 trials, E, prepared two photocoz ies of the protocols. One set was sent to E. R. G., wh c, was then M Austria, for judging preparation, and the other to Hans Bender Germany for safekeeping. No trial-by-trial feedback was given in tILE study, and, in fact, no feedback was available to the percipient ft (D several months following the series. > 2 judging Preparation CL CL < After receiving the transcripts from E1, E. R. G, and another C? C*4 0 o ICD 11 C*4 0 0 11, 0 C14 0) I- CL a W 1 oo 0 0 0 0 C*4 (1) U) CO W 0 LL > 2 CL CL 310 TheJournal oj'Parap,~TcholoQ, person, blind to the correct targets, translated the transcripts into Italian. The translators then checked the transcripts for phrases froill which one might infer temporal order of' the transcript target sequence (see criticisms by Marks & Kammann, 1978; discussion by Puthoff, Targ, & May, 1979), although no editing was found to be necessary. The lack of trial-by-trial feedback to the percipient and agent also served to control for such a criticism. As E. R. G. was not blind to the correct target sites while aiding in the translation of the transcripts into Italian, the translation was reexamined for accuracy by a professional translator, P. Glovetti, in Modena, Italy. During th Is time, she was blind to the correct target sites. In the course of her double-checking, several small changes were made, although nothing of major significance. The Italian transcripts were typed, each on a separate she6t. E2 then cut out photocopies of the sketches and attached them to the respective transcripts. The translated transcripts, together with the drawings, were finally photocopied and given to a set of judges. As a follow-up of a previous work (Schlitz & Deacon, 1980), it was decided to use several judges. For this study, each of five judges scored all protocols against all target sites visited during the experi- mental period. In this way, the free-response procedure adopted a forced-choice judging process where all the target possibilities were known to the judges. In so doing, judges were asked to rank each transcript to each target site on a scale of 1 to 10. In addition, judges rated the degree of correspondence between protocol and site by making a slash along a line, with one end designating zero correspon- dence and the other end representing total correspondence. Proto- cols were presented to each judge in random order, this order being different for each judge. This was done to avoid any potential stacking effect. judges visited the target locations independently and in the order of their choice. For each target site, judges were also provided with the impressions E2, the agent, had recorded while visiting the target sites during the control period. After receiving the judges' responses, E,, sent the materials to E, at the FRNM for statistical evaluation. QUAWITATIvE ASSESSMFNT After receiving theJudges' responses, E, prepared the ratings and rankings for analysis. To do this, she first measured the lines for ratings and then summed the ratings for alljudges for each transcript target. The same procedure of summing the judges' responses was Y'ransconlinental Remote Viewing 311 used for rankings, with both sets of scores being double-checked by two Independent assistants. Following this, E, arrange(l the scores into two 10 x 10 matrices, one for ratings and one for rankings. In this way all of the five Judges' responses were added together to represent one score in the matrix (see Table 1). 04 0 0 Table 1 0 COMBINED 10, JUD(;I,.S~ RANKINGS AM) R,,\ I IN(;S OF 1)1~() C-4 R~mkhigs 0 0 (42)(32 56 88 42 24 66 8 o Mi 34 (30) 61 67 81 66 50 58 , cyp5 70 67 54 (10)36 69 69 32 69 , 4Vj- 77 68 65 27 (20) 70 82 42 ~1 62 0 A7 81 51 64 62 (10)43 93 f 52 C 0-08 24 77 81 77 CL 46 (34) 91 34 40 a 74 44 30 34 76 76 (12)78 71 A~2 54 60 64 80 62 28 70 (36)50 68 76 81 66 42 54 68 22 (44) 36 78 68 68 64 56 76 58 32 06) P 5.8x CO I 0--li Ratings 0 Cl 0 (288)192 181 68 260367 164 174 2 29* 69 398 (343)182 162 96 174 258 195 157 2g cis, 148 262 (498)35,5 135153 368 1-13 16 3 136 171 373 (426)12561 304 134 157 2U 84 203 162 179 (500)277 3 19()1(3() 7 378 105 M 92 26-1(317)40 3 293 _ 19 156 248 LL: 380 333 92 13G (458)112 132 9& 242 141 152 89 147,1 140 008)223 2 (3 g ~) 166 118 110 161 298227 192 369 (290)Q 313 87 141 119 149213 86 184 352 (4f~ CL p 4.7x ICK I 0-1i to C~ a Q Q It C*4 a Q It CD Q Q 04 a) I- Q Q V_ V_ 00 Q Q CD Q (D U) 77D W L_ 0 LL > 0 L_ CL CL < 312 1'hejournat of Parapsychology statistical evaluation for this "closed In deriving an appropriate deck" series, we assumed nonindependence of target protocols (Kennedy, 1979a). We then utilized the direct-count-of-permutations method to assess the statistical significance of the given matrices (Burdick & 1972). This statistic computed Kelly, 1977; Puthoff et al., 1979; Scott, an exact p by scoring and counting all possible permutations of targets s method while keeping the response matrix fixed. The permutation 2 yielded a P of 5.8 X 10-6 for rankings and 4.7 x 10' for ratings. In addition to the combined judging, we also looked at each judge's scoring separately. This was done in an attempt to observe the . Since four out of five judges degree of consistency within judges showed significant scoring based on the permutations method for both rankings and ratings, we must conclude that there appears to be a general consistency between judges (see Table 2). it Is interesting to note, however, that one judge produced nonsignificant results over- all, indicating the importance of multiple judges. Table 2 RFsui:rs 'J'AKEN INDIVIM \1-1-N Ranking Rafiug judge 1 9.4 x i o' X I Wi 1()-4 1.8 x 10-:' judge 2 1.2 X - 1.8 X lo-li judge 3 5.4 X 10- judge 4 .22 .83 1.7 x 10-:' 1.7 x 10-:' judge 5 DISCUSSION In view of the highly successful results of the present study, we might again stress the value of free-response remote viewing as a 2 While the permutations of rankings and ratings were the planned method of analysis, we also looked at the number of direct matches on the diagonal (see Puthoff et al., 1979). it is interesting to note that this method was, as expected, less sensitive than the permutations method, although it was still significant, with 6 direct hits out of 10, yielding a P of 6 x 10-4. 1,t,aot~ I kcX,1~8 1J ~ I psi-conducive procedure, which is seemingly unaffected by distance. However, since both experimenters have obtained significant results in pre i riments (Gruber, 1979; Schlitz & Deacon, 1980), vious psi expe it may well be that the results are not necessarily due to a psi- conducive procedure but to the subjects/experimenters themselves, who, moreover, are the most highly motivated persons to wa& a positive outcome from the experiment. This is in line with obsc4a- tions made by Puthoff et al. (1979) where they stre ss that8he seriousness of purpose on the part of the subjects may be one F4%or serving to enhance success in remote viewing. C*4 Another issue which is in question with relation to the pr grit study is the importance of immediate trial-by-trial feedback, Vice Q delayed feedback seemed in no way to impair the psi process. 1%3vas even noted (Morris, Robblee, Neville, & Bailey, 1978) that tri trial feedback, both positive and negative, had a detrimental effet4on the participants. Work by Puthoff et al. (1979), however,,st`eg to t"f, show no such apparent problem. Therefore we sugges hat a dOect comparison be made to gain greater insight into the role of feed§ck in the experimental setting. A potential area of cofttroversy should also be pointed o in regard to the present study. This involves the inclusion ofthe ag t's subjective impressions in theJudges' descriptions of the target S31es. While the authors feel that any criticism based on this I is ill-founded in the present work, the argument goes as followY A certain amount of shared experience can be expected betweerj;~Wo persons with similar interests. This would therefore allow fkT a potential non-psi factor to contribute to the results. Such a crit' in UP might be especially applicable if reference to weather or news eN~Pts were included. However, given the great distances in the 'pr(ant study and- the .fact that neither experimenter was noting weathcmor news events in the distant location, the. number of contribu)ftry factors would seem to have been greatly reduced. U) It was the authors' feeling that elimination of the agent's im *_S_ sions from the information received by thejudges narrows the r -4 of telepathy in the experimental design. If the agent is important, thLn it would make sense that his impressions of the site, as well as acti es I going on at the location during the trial period, would influenc, he impressions gained by the distant percipient. It is for this reason at the agent's impressions were included. However, since the issueb>an be seen as potentially controversial, we are now planning to hav he transcripts rejudged without inclusion of the agent's resl TS our firm conviction that the correspondences between the percipifCit's 314 DieJournal oJ Parapsychology protocols and the geographical target sites is clear enough that the results will not be influenced to any noticeable degree. In the future, the authors would like to see a greater concern in experimental reporting for the "method of response." Perhaps we to should take stock of the earlier work in free response, in which we are able to observe such an interest. Upton Sinclair (1930), for instance, devoted an entire chapter to describing the ways in which Mrs. CD CD Sinclair formulated her impressions about an ESP target. Carlson (see 11, C4 White, 1964) reported her impressions in the following way: qq1 At first ... very dark shadowy lines could be perceived which, when the CD drawing was opened, proved to be fragments of the drawing-and, later CD CD on, the complete drawing. The lines were often very faint and there was a certain strain experienced in trying to see. (p. 38) C*4 Icy) Thaw (1892) reported quite differently: CD sensation as a v CD For myself, I cannot describe mN isualization of any kind. Q~ It seemed rather to be by some wholly subjective process that I knew what CY) the agents were looking at. (p. 430) IL X By subjective, we would assume that he was referring to an intuitive sort of reasoning when making his responses. Although no formal attempt to describe such an area was under- taken within the present study, a brief discussion will be given to El's method of response throughout the session. It should be noted that 11:00 A.M. was usually not a good time for El and she would often sit 00 down for the session at the very last minute, taking no time to induce 0 o any form of relaxation. In some ways, M. S. has noted that her strategy was very similar to that of Mrs. Sinclair, who used a focal C4 image of a rose to begin e .ach session. In the present case, E, used the face of E. R. G. as a starting point with which to focus her attention. U) C9 She would then use a game-type strategy, asking oveY and over in her mind: "Where is he?". It should be noted that this effort may be considered as something of a state-altering procedure although the L_ remote esign does not require a formal manipulation of -viewing d I 0 LL one's state of consciousness. eveloped in several ways. Often it was as Carlson impressions d described her impressions-the appearance of faint lines frequently > followed by a more complete picture. On several occasions, impres- 2 - - r red a distinct memory, which was then recounted as the .L sions trigge CL response. It was tempting, in such cases, to avoid an analytical response to the impressions, as the images appeared to be too complete. This was in line with Targ and Puthoff's (1977) warning to Transcontinental Remote Viewing 315 avoid an analysis of information. As an example, we have included the verbal description of the transcript from November 8, 1979, which reads as follows: Flight path? Red lights. Strong depth of field. Elmar seems detac~fid, cold. A hole in the ground. A cand-le-shaped thing, Flower-mayb ot A real. Maybe painted. Outdoors. See sky dark. Windy arid cold. Scoe- thing shooting upward. 0 qql After the 15-minute period, the percipient expanded further*n her impressions: 0 0 q1T [For some reason a boat comes to mind.] The impressions that I had i0re of outdoors and Elmar was at some type of-I don't know if institutis. is the right word-but some place. Not a private home or anythingC&e that-something-a public facility, He was standing aw Iay frQmC*e main structure, although he could see it. He might havi~ h6e'n CY) K a parking lot or field connected to the structure that identiWs the plaQ. I want to say an airport but thatjust seems too specific. There was acufty and people but no one real close to Elmar. 0) 0- In this example, M. S. obtairi.ed a clear picture of an airport dravag she had seen several months earlier. In fact, the target site wasO:be Rome International Airport, where the outbound experimenter Jkd been standing on a little hill aside from the structure. Near theaill were holes in the ground, where clandestine diggers searched -for Roman coins. Although this is a striking protocol, many of qThe transcripts contained equally provoking content, as is eflected inFjie 1 r statistical analysis, In order to further our investigation into individual metbodC~of response, we suggest that a phenomenological approach might"pF,4,Jve useful. A possible means of incorporating this approach intoc'the experimental design would be an inventory, aimed at an understa ing of how the experience of each participant (whether percipi agent, or experimenter) is organized. That is, it should attemp establish a foundation for describin the basic structures of 9 sciousness involved in the remote-viewing experience. A final point should be made in relation to the pr 0 -esent wuLk. Although the protocols from this series indicate strong evidence-&r ESP, we cannot neglect the hypothesis that PK may have played a j~le in the experimental outcome. As pointed out by Stanford (1981) n experimenter influence on the RNG used to generate the targetsmp each experimental day cannot be eliminated from consideration. -rm_s would be especially true if psi is, in fact, goal-oriented--do 'AS it were, from the complexity of the task (Kennedy, 1978, 1979b). 316 The journal of Parapsychology Therefore, any conclusion about the fruitfulness ofthe frce- res po rise remote-viewing procedure must take this factor into account. In conclusion: the study provides further evidence for the exis- (0 tence of psi. The results are strong and certainly warrant further 4 1 0 investigations into the remote-viewing procedure. Perhaps this design 0 may offer a productive avenue into more process-oriented investiga- 0 Irt tions. The authors are therefore looking forward to a follow-up of the C*4 0 present ideas. 0 V REFERENCES 04 0) BURDICK, D- S., & KELLY, E. F. Statistical methods in parapsychological research *In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of parapsychology. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1977. C.6 CY) CARINGTON, W. W. Experiments on the paranormal cognition of drawings. iL journal of Parapsychology, 1940, 4, 1-129. CHILD, 1. L. The use of judges' ratings to test hypotheses about psi processes. journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1980, 74, 17 1 - 18 1. < CHILD, 1. L., & LEVI, A, Psirmissing in free-response settings. journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1979, 73, 273-289. DUNNE, B. J., & BISAHA, J. P. Multiple channels in precognitive remote viewing. In W. G. Roll (Ed.), Research in parapsychology, 1977. Metuchen, N. Scarecrow Press, 1978. co DUNNE, B. J., & BISAHA, J. P. Precognitive viewing in the Chicago area: A replication of the Stanford experiment. journal of Parapsychology, 1979, 43, 17-30. 04 FISK, G. W. Review of M. C. Marsh "The Rhodes Experiment: Linkage in W Extrasensory Perception." journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 1960, U) 40, 219-239. CU W GRUBER, E. R, Conformance behavior involving animal and human subjects. European journal of Parapsychology, 1979, 3, 167-175. HAIGHT, J. M. Spontaneous psi cases: A survey and preliminary study of ESP, attitude, and personality relationships. journal of Parapsychology, 1979, 43, 0 LL 179-204. KENNEDY, J. E. The role of psi complexity in PK: A review. Journal of 'a W Parapsychology, 1978, 42, 89-122. > KENNEDY, J. E. Methodological problems in free-response ESP experiments. 2 journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1979, 73, 1-15. (a) CL CL KENNEDY, J. E. Redundancy in psi information. journal of Parapsychology, 1979, 43, 290-314, (b) MARKS, D., & KAmMANN, R. Information transmission in remote viewing experiments. Nature, August 17, 1978, pp. 680-681. MORRIS, R, L.; RoBBLEE, P.; NEVILLE, R.; & BAILFY, K. Free-response ESP Transcontinental Remote Viewing training with feedback to agent and receiver. In W. G. Roll (Ed.), Researl in parapsychology, 1977. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1~)78. PUTHOFF, H. E., & TARG, R. Remote viewing of natural targets. InJ. D. Morri W. G. Roll, & R. L. Morris (Eds.), Research in parapsychology, 197. Metuchen, N. J.: Scarecrow Press, 1975. PUTHOFF, H. E., & TARG, R. A perceptual channel for informationCbansft over kilometer distances: Historical perspective and recent rr-44searci Proceedings of the IEEE, 1976, 64 (3), 329-354. 0 PUTHOFF, H. E., TARC, R,, & MAY, E. C. Experimental psi research:(%nplic; tions for physics. Menlo Park, Cal.: SRI International, 1979. nt RAO, K. R. Experimental parapsychology. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. goma 1966. SCHLITZ, M., & DEACON, S. Remote viewing: A conceptual replicatiolgf Tai and Puthoff. In W. G. Roll (Ed.). Research in parapsycholoAD 197, Metuchen, N. J.: Scarecrow Press, 1980. ~5 SCOTT, C. On the evaluation of verbal material in parapsycholow-AAWussic of Dr. Pratt's monograph. Journal of the American ~xi~6 for-C sy ~' chic Research, 1972, 46, 79-90, SINCLAIR, U. Mental radio. Monrovia, Cal.: Upton §inclair, 1930. 9 STANFORD, R. G. Are we 94amans or scientists?journal of the Ameyicawcietyj Psychical Research, 1981 ' 75, 61-70. IL STUART, C. E. An ESP test with drawings. Journal of Parapsycholog0942, 20-43. W TARG, R., & PUTHOFF, H. E. Mind, reach. New York: Delacorte PreciElean; Friede, 1977. 0 THAw, A. B. Some experiments in thought transference, Proceedings of i Society for Psychical Research, 1892, 8, 422-435. WARCOLLIER, R. Experimental telepathy. Boston: Boston Society foZI)sychil Research, 1938. 00 0 WHITE, R. A comparison of old and new methods of response to,tar&sin E' experiments, Journal of the American Socielyfir Psychical Resear'chg964, 21-56. C4 W Institute for Parapsychology Institut flir Grenzge&Ate der College Station Psychologie und chohy, Durham, North Carolina 27708 D-7800 Freiburg I.-ar. Eichhalde 12, Westr4ermav L_ 0 LL > 2 CL CL