Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 InternaVionall Tinter,..) November 1978 ),Z- t V I.S 6- STANDARD REMOTE -V IEWING...PR OTOCOL (LOCAL TARGETS) by Harold E. Puthoff and Russell Targ SRI international 333 Ravenswood Ave. 9 Menlo Park, CA 94025 o (415) 326-6200 - Cable: SRI INTL MNP TWX: 910-373-1246 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 STANDARD REMOTE-VIEWING PROTOCOL (LOCAL TARGETS) The basic outline of our standard remote-viewing protocol is as given in our tutorial paper, "A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research," H. Puthoff and R. Targ, Proc. IEEE, pp. 329-354, March 1976.1 The elements of the protocol, each of which is addressed below, consist of (1) target pool selection; (2) subject orientation; (3) outbound experimenter behavior; (4) inbound experimenter behavior; (5).p~- experiment feedback; (6) judging procedure. 1. Target Pool Selection To carry out an experimental series of, say, n trials with a subject, a list of targets >> n should be prepared in advance by an experimenter who will not interact with the subject after that. The targets should be chosen to be distinctive, but not necessarily distinct from each other; that isl rather than just a collection of nondescript street corners one should select bridges, towers, fountains, gardens, plazas, etc., so that a judge could in principle recognize targets on the basis of correct but sketchy descriptions. On the other hand, once having chosen a fountain-type target, there should be several fountain targets; for a bridge target, several bridge targets, etc., in order to avoid the possible subject strategy of "I had a bridge yesterday, so it can't be a bridge today." The subject should b".Qld explicitly that there are similar as well as different tvves of-targets. When the target list is made, each target location should be written on a card and placed in an envelope, the envelopes randomized and numbered. These should then be stored in a secure safe or similar container. With regard to whether a target is replaced in the pool after use, the preferable procedure, from a methodological standpoint, is to replace it. (A problem with actual replacement is that the subject, Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 - ~3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO130005000 upon becoming aware of a mental image of a previous target, might be 1,4' */-Q" biased to reject it as memory. An acceptable alternative is to replace a used target by a new one of similar type--e.g., one fountain by another.) 2. Subject Orientation Before the experiment, the subject should be shown some previous remote-viewing results with one goal in mind--to get across the idea that one should, as nearly as possible, report raw perception rather than analysis since the former tends to be correct and the latter is almost always wrong. A subject needs to understand that a rounded piece of blue metal is just that, and that he should not initially try to determine what it is. Remind the subject that imagination constitutes noise in the channelY and therefore the closer he can get to raw uninter- preted imagery, the better. To have success in the above, the best guideline we have found is to choose as subjects individuals who are self-confident, uninhibited,,..successful,, and not--afraid to_bewror~g. No psychological test we have investigated is as reliable as the above subjective assessment in choosing subjects. '--------)Experimenter Behavior 3. /,"Outbound At the start of an experimental session., the inbound and outbound experimenters and subject should rendevous for a relaxed informal dis- cussion in the laboratory a-etting. (The outbound experimenter or experimenters must not know the target at this time.) Together they agree on a time-for the subject description to sta t (e.g., 30 minutes hence--the length of time required to reach the furthest target in the pool; this time is then an invariant for all experiments.) The outbound experimenter then leaves the laboratory, uses a random-number generating procedure to obtain a number from 1 - n (number of targets in pool), Figures 3 and 4 in the IEEE paperl are good examples. In Figure 4 the subject had absolutely no concept of a pedestrian overpass, but simply saw a pattern of receding squares; in Figure 3 correctly-dimensioned pools of water were misinterpreted as purification plant pools rather than recreational swimming pools. 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 obtains the so-numbered envelope from the target pool, and leaves the premises. (We use a Texas Instruments SR-51 hand calculator, which has a random-number function.) After driving away from the laboratoryY he opens the envelope to determine the target., and then proceeds to that 00 location. He should arrangeto park and then come upon the target location at exactly the starting time so that his view of it is fresh at the beginning of the experiment. He then simply pays attention to the environment and does not let his mind wander (especially to another target). It does not appear to matter how many people comprise the out- bound team, provided they do not (1) pay attention only to each other, or (2) scatter about. At the end of the agreed-upon target viewing time (usually 15 minutes) they return to the lab. 4. C Inbound)Experimenter Behavior During the period that the outbound experimenters spend en route to the target, the inbound experimenter and subject have a period to relax and discuss the protocols. (Inbound it is best not to have ad.di- tional observers.) The goal of the inbound experimenter during this period is to make it "safe" for the subject to experience remote viewing. For the initial orientation of a new subject, this typically includes a low-key pep talk as to how remote viewing appears to be a_--natural, not abnormal function that many people appear to have done it successfully., even their first time., and always including the reminder to eschew ---------------- analysis and simply render raw impressions. Since we think that remote viewing is a difficult task, like per- ceiving a subliminal stimulus, we think it takes the full attentive powers of the subject. Therefore, the environment, procedures, etc., should be as natural and comfortable as possible to minimize the attention on anything other than the job at hand. No hypnosis., strobe lights, or sensory-deprivation procedures are ever usedY since in our view these (novel) environmental factors take away some of the subject's much-needed attention. We are in this sense proponents of a "naturalist school." If the subject feels more comfortable smokingY or drinking a cup of coffee, that is permitted. These should be arranged ahead of timeY however so that neither subject nor experimenter leame-the 3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 experimental ro waiting for the outbound experimenter to reach his target. The experimenter should have arranged ahead of time to have pen and paper available for drawing, and a tape recorder. lWen the experiment Tiz~e arrives, the inbou m-peirlm-en-te-e-r simply asks the subject to "describe what impressions come to mind with regard to where the outbound experimenter is." Most subjects prefer to close their eyes., but they should simply do what comes naturally. The room lighting is preferably subdued to prevent after-image highlights,, shadows on eyelids., etc. It is best that the inbound experimenter not pressure the subject to say a lot; he should act as if there is all the time in the world. Otherwise,, a subject may tend to embroider Ze_sc_r_ipt`ion_s~ust t-o-b-e-_~' saying something to please the experimenter. If the subject tends toward being analytical ("I see Macy's") the experimenter must gently lead the subject into description, not analysis. ("You don't have to tell me where it is, just describe what you see ") This is the most important and difficult task of the inbound experimenter. It is also useful for the inbound experimenter to "surprise" the subject with new viewpoints. ("Go above the scene and look down--what do you see? If you look to the left, what do you see?") The subject's viewpoint appears to shift rapidly with a question like this, and the data come through before the subject's defenses activate to block it out. The shifting of viewpoint also obviates the problem of the subject spending the entire time giving meticulous detail on a trivial item,, such as a flower, which, even if true, will be of no help to a judge. Once a subject feels he sees something, he tends to hang on to this perception rather than commit himself to a new viewpoint. The subject must be encouraged to sketch what he sees,, even over his objections that he is not an artist, can't sketch, etc. He may do so throughout, or wait until the last five minutes if intermittent drawing would distract his concentration. Since drawings tend to be more accurate than verbalizations., this is an extremely important factor for good results. 4 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 05. Post-Experiment Feedback When the outbound experimenter returns., the inbound and outbound experimenters and subject should proceed directly to the target for feedback. This helps to develop the subject's sense of which parts of his mental imaging are correct, versus incorrect. It completes the experiment for himY so that when he does a following experiment, his mind is not still involved with wondering how he did on the previous one. only a very experienced subject can function well time after time without feedback, so this must be done for each experiment to ensure success. 6 Judging Procedure In a sensel the most critical part of the remote-viewing procedure is the judging. Any single experiment in remote viewing, even if per- fect, can in principle be dismissed as possibly coincidence. Further,, any result less than perfect can be dismissed as a generalized "grass is green, sky is blue" transcript that fits every target. Only blind differential discrimination across a series of targets can put these interpretations to rest. To prepare the transcripts for judging, an experimenter not involved in judging must read the transcripts and delete from them any reference tes or Dr _4~~tar to da -eviotLs-Ily bets,, so that a judge could not order the transcripts chronologically or otherwise obtain a_-Priori information useful in matching. Two judging procedures can then be used: Direct Matching, and Rank Ordering. Both procedures assume that n experiments have been carried out and n responses obtained. The judge must then try to determine which of the n responses goes with which of the n targets. a. Direct-Matching Procedure The n responses (transcripts with associated drawings) are numbered in random order and given to the judge along with the list of n targets,- also in a (different) random order. The key is known by an experimenterl but not the judge. The judge then visits the target sites and constructs a one-to-one correspondence list between targets and responses without replacement; that is', no target or response is used twice. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : -tlA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 300050001-3 With the correspondence list and the aid of the key, the experimenter then consults the statistical table for Direct Matching (Table 1) to determine whether the result is statistically significant. For example, if there were 5 correct matches out of 9 responses, the table indicates that the probability of obtaining such a result by chance is p = 0.003125, or roughly 3 times out of a thousand. Since the accepted standard in behavioral research is that a result can be considered signi- ficant if one obtains the value p i-. 0.05, such a result would be considered significant--that is, indicative of a nonchance correspondence. The Direct Matching procedure is the simplest to carry out, but will give no credit for a fairly good description if a judge has difficulty in choosing between two possibilities and chooses the wrong one. This procedure is thus overly conservative. The more difficult Rank Ordering procedure., described next, gives partial credit in such a case,, and is therefore a more precise statistical tool for analysis of medium-grade results. Q3b . Rank-Ordering Procedure In the use of the Rank-Ordering procedure, the experimenter randomizes the targets and transcripts as before. Now, however, each of n judges is given a set of the n transcripts but only one of the target sites to investigate. Each judge's task is to visit his assigned target siteY read through all the transcripts, and order them best-to-worst match (I through 5. say,, if there are five targets and five transcripts). With the aid of the key, the experimenter then adds up the rank-ordering numbers assigned to each target's associated transcript. For example, if the actual response to a target was given a first place when a judge was looking at the target, then it gets a 1. If the actual response to a target was given a third place match when a judge was looking at that target, then it gets a 3, etc. The addition of these numbers I + 3 + ... then yields a number called the sum of ranks. one then consults the rank-ordering table (Table 2) for the statistic of interest. For example, if there were 5 experiments (5 targets and 5 transcripts) and the sum of ranks was 9, the table for 5 x 5 gives a 6 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table I DIRECT MATCHING THE PROBABILITIES OF M CORRECT MATCHES OUT OF N TARGETS M 3 6 7 a 9 10 11 p 0 see eSO00 o3750.366b70368n6 .36?66.367882036?879*367879 3678794.367094 *3333 1 10000 0 *3333.3?500e 3666?---.3680-6--*361857367092.36109 *S000 05000 000 *2SOU.166151e16750 *16333*184028e163929e163941 .1839396iA393q? 3 91667 **a e08333*05SS6 *06250906111190613439061310 *0613137.0613i3i 4 90417 002003 *01389.015625*0jS2T8eOIS-33690153274tjiS32-84 I T 5 000 see *90417eOO2?78*003125*003096 o0030671q.3 SIGNIFICANT 33 003%%% AT p < 0.05 6 (4 or more 000139 Go* o0006949000463e000SPI .0005093iiGSii2 out of any arbitrary N) - -- 04 e-00-669-4---aW66 . 060WO-7-4i--.0 0 o26 0-0 7-2 U- 900002SS** *000012 *0000083OOOnO93 e000003so* 60000014.0000009 - --- 6- 10 ------ ..00000 9e6 1 11 - '0000000 12 .0000000 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 RANK-ORDERING TABLE Number of Targets - 4; Number of Transcripts 4 SUM OF RANKS 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 P_VALUE * 0*39063E-02 0*19531E-01 0958594E-01 0913672F 00 Ow25781E cc Ce41406E 00 0958594E 00 0*74219F 00 0*86328F 00 0*94141F 00 0*98047F 00 0099609E 00 001000OF 01 Number of Targets 5; Number of Transcripts 5 SUM OF RANKS 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 P-VALUE 0932DOOE-03 0*1920CE-02 Oo6720CE-02 0-1792DE-01 0&40320F-01 0*7904OF-01 0*13824E 00 0*21984E 00 0*32224F 00 Do43904E 00 Co56096E 00 Oo67776C 00 0*78016F 00 0,86176r 00 Ce92096F 00 0095968F Go 0998208E 00 0099328F cc 0*9980SE 00 Oe99968F 00 001000OF 01 The notation E,02 is to be understood as 10- 2; E 01 as 101 etc. 8 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 (Continued) Number of Targets - 6; Number of Transcripts6 SUM OF RANKS 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 P-VALUE 0*21433E-04 0&15003E-03 0*60014E-03 0*18004F-02 0&4501CE-02 0*99023E-02 Ool9676E-01 0*358BOE-01 ow60764F-01 0*96472E-01 Oe14463E 00 0*20585E 00 0*27939F 00 0*36310E cc 0*45357F 00 0954642F 00 oo63689E cc 0972061E 00 0*79415E 00 0*85537E 00 Oo9O353[ 00 0993923E 00 Oo96412E 00 De98032E 00 Oo99010E 00 Oo99550E 00 0*99820C 00 0*99940F 00 0*99985E 00 0099998E 00 0*10000E 01 9 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 (Continued) Number of Targets - 7; Number of Transcripts7 SUM OF RANKS 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 .38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 P-VALUE 0*12143E-05 0997141E-05 Oo43714E-04 0914571E-03 0*40071E-03 0*9617DE-03 0*20837E-02 0&41589E-02 0*7745SE-02 0&13585E-01 Oo22595E-01 0*3583BE-01 0*54453E-01 0979544E-01 0*11205E 00 0*15259E 00 0*20137E 00 0*25802E 00 0*32161E 00 0*39065E 00 0*46315E 00 0*53685F 00 0*60935E 00 0*67839C 00 0&74198F 00 De79863F 00 0*84741E 00 Oo88795E 00 0*92045E 00 0*94555F 00 0*96416E 00 0*97740E 00 0*98641E 00 0999225F 00 0999584E 00 0*99791E 00 0*99903r co 0*99958F 00 0*99984E 00 0*99995E 00 009999BE 00 0099999E 00 091000CE 01 10 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 (Continued) Number of Targets - 8; Number of Transcripts8 SUM OF RANKS a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 P-VALUE 0*59605E-07 0*53644E-06 0*26822F-05 Co9834SE-05 0*29504E-04 0.767ilr-04 Ool7899E-03 0*38356E-03 0*76663E-03 Co14447E-02 0*25867E-02 0*44264E-02 0972724E-02 0911515E-01 0*17628F-01 0926157F-01 0*37702E-01 0*5289DE-01 0*7232SE-01 Do96562E-01 Oo12602E 00 0916095E 00 De20139E 00 0024714E 00 0*29772E 00 0*35237F 00 0*41012E 00 De46982E 00 0*53018E 00 0*5898SE 00 0*64763F 00 0*70228F 00 005286E 00 0*79860E 00 0*83905E 00 0*8739BE 00 Oe90344E 00 0*92767E 00 0994711E 00 0*96229F 00 Oo97384E 00 Oo98237E 00 0*98849E 00 Oe99273E 00 0*99557E Go 0*99741E 00 11 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 (Continued) Number of Targets - 9; Number of Transcripts9 I SUM OF RANKS 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 P-VALUE 0*25812E-08 0*25812E-07 DoI4196E-06 0*56786E-06 Ce18455E-05 Ge51675E-05 0912919F-04 0&29529E-04 Oo6274BE-04 0*1254TE-03 0*23821E-03 0*43226E-03 0*75357E-03 0*12673E-02 Oe20628E-02 0&32586E-02 Oe50075E-02 0*75003E-02 0*10968E-01 0*15683E-01 0*21954E-01 0*30122E-01 0*4054SE-01 0*53601E-01 Oo69639E-01 Dv8a989E-01 0*11192F 00 0*13864E 00 De16924E 00 0*2037CE 00 0*24189E 00 0*28353E 00 0932821E 00 De37540E 00 De42447E 00 0*47469E 00 0*52531E 00 0*57553F 00 Oo62460E 00 0*67179E Do 0*71647E 00 0*75811E 00 0*79630E 00 0*83076F 00 0*86136E 00 0*88807E 00 12 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Table 2 (Concluded) Number of Targets - 10; Number of Transcripts 10 SUM OF RANKS 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 P-VALUE 0*200DOE-09 DollooOE-08 Co6600CE-08 Oe286CCE-07 OolOOlOE-06 0,30030E-06 008008DE-06 0919448E-05 Oo43758E-05 0*92378F-05 Oel8475E-04 0*35261E-04 0,64559F-04 Do11412E-03 Cel9512E-03 Oo32387F-03 Co52317E-03 0*82418E-03 0*12686E-02 Do19106F-02 Oo28197E-02 De40825F-02 0*58049F-02 0*81133E-02 Oo11156F-01 0915103F-01 Oo20143F-01 Oo26484E-01 Oo34347F-01 0943960F-01 0*55552E-01 0*69345E-01 Do85541E-01 0*10432F 00 0*12581E 00 Co15011E 00 0*17725E 00 Oo2O721F 00 Oo23987F 00 0*27506F 00 Ce31255E 00 0935202E 00 0*39311F 00 0*4353BE 00 Co47838E 00 13 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 4 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 probability of obtaining such a rank ordering result by chance of 0.0403.... which is significant. A more complete set of tables is given 2 in Solfvin et al. 14 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3 REFERENCES 1. H.E. Puthoff and R. Targ, "A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research.." Proc. IEEE,, Vol. 64, pp. 329-354 (March 1976). 2. G. Solfvin et al... "Some New Methods of Analysis for Preferential- Ranking Data," J. Am. Soc. for Psychical Research, Vol. 72, No. 2 (April 1978). 15 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1300050001-3