A REMOTE ACTION EXPERIMENT WITH A PIEZOELECTRIC TRANSDUCER - FINAL REPORT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00787R000300300001-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 123
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 23, 2002
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: REPORT

proved For Release 2002/11/18 :.CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report- -0b%ective H, Tasks 3 and 3a December 1987
Covering the Period 1 October 1986 to 30 September 1987
SG1J
A REMOTE ACTION EXPERIMENT WITH
A PIEZOELECTRIC TRANSDUCER
By: G. SCOTT HUBBARD
PHILIP P. BENTLEY
PATRICE K. PASTUREL
DR. JULIAN ISAACS AND STAFF
John F. Kennedy Univeniry
CONTRACTING OFFICER'S TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE
MURRAY J. BARON, Director
Geoscience and Engineering Center
333 Ravenswood Avenue Menlo Park, California 94025 U.S.A.
Approved F~~IR~I~sfa2~002/~t~8 : ~flAaRld~96e~09T00~t1&38S1
 Approved For Release 2002/11/1.8 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report- -0bjective H, Tasks 3 and 3a December 1987
A REMOTE ACTION EXPERIMENT WITH
A PIEZC-ELECTRIC TRANSDUCER
By: G. SCOTT HUBBARD
PHILIP P. BENTLEY
PATRICE K. PASTUREL
DR. JULIAN ISAACS AND STAFF
John f. Kennedy University
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, California 94025 U.S.A.
[phone]
Cable: SRI INTL MPK
TWX: 910-373-2046
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
In FY 1986, a joint venture between SRI International and John F. Kennedy University
was begun to examine possible remote action (RA) effects on piezoelectric transducers.
Researchers from John F. Kennedy University recruited, evaluated, and trained participants.
SRI International developed an experimental RA system and prepared awell-characterized
environment for formal experimental sessions.
During the pilot experiment in FY 1986, transducer signals were observed under sufficiently
controlled conditions 'to warrant continued investigation. After significant improvements were
made to the protocol, system hardware -and software, and control environments, another
experiment was conducted in FY 1987. This report reviews the 1986 pilot study and details the
elaborate and necessary precautions undertaken during the 1987 study to eliminate or understand
the sources of artifacts. No evidence for RA was observed in the 198? experiment.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................ iii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................... v
I INTRODUCTION .................................. .............. 1
II THE 1986 PILOT RA EXPERIMENT ......... ........................ 3
A. Event Definition ...........:.................................. 3
B. Experimental Protocol ......................................... 3
C. Results ...................................................... 4
III THE 1987 RA EXPERIMENT ...................................... 6
A. Modifications to the 1986 Experiment. ............................ 6
B. Design and Construction of the Laboratory Apparatus ............... 9
C. Experimental Protocol ......................................... 10
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE 1987 EXPERIMENT ............ 12
A. Primary Data Analysis ......................................... 12
B. Environmental Exclusion ....................................... 12
C. Cumulative Data Record ....................................... 13
D. PZT Signal Analysis ........................................... 13
V CONCLUSIONS .................................................. 16
REFERENCES .............................................................. 17
APPENDIX A -JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY FINAL REPORT ............... A-1
APPENDIX B -PZT EXPERIMENT SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND TESTING ....... A-2
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
1. Potential Sources of Artifacts and Their Remedies ............................ 4
ILLUSTRATIONS
1.
Schematic of RA Experimental Area ....................................... 7
2.
Diagram of RA Apparatus ................................................ 9
3.
Cumulative Effort and Control Sessions ............................... ..... 14
4.
Typical PZT Voltage Distribution for a Session ............................... 15
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
I INTRODUCTION
For over one hundred years, the literature on parapsychology has contained reports
claiming human interactions with physical apparatus by mental means alone.'~~2~3 In FY 1986
and FY 1987, SRI International and John F. Kennedy University (JFK) conducted two
experiments to investigate these claims. This report reviews the findings of the 1986 pilot
experiment and documents the 1987 experiment.t
The most direct way to,examine this putative phenomenon was to attempt a replication of a
claimed effect. We began the process of selecting a candidate experiment by first reviewing
published laboratory research on remote action (RA)$, placing particular emphasis on recent
work that used modern instrumentation.
RA studies have traditionally been divided into two categories: statistical experiments
(sometimes called micro-RA experiments), in which small effects -are observed over many
thousands of samples; and macro-RA experiments, in which large effects are claimed, usually on
the basis of considerably fewer trials. Although the statistical experiments have generally been the
more rigorous in both protocol and hardware design, interpretation of the results is difficult. In
any study in which the test of the null hypothesis is statistical (e.g., p < 0.05), a causal
relationship is not easily determined. As a consequence, we surveyed the literature on
parapsychology for examples of nonstatistical effects in which the experimental protocol also
appeared sufficiently rigorous to justify further study.
From our review of the literature, the most promising experiment was work claiming an
interaction with a piezoelectric transducer (PZT).4 The basis for our selection was threefold: (1)
a nonstatistical effect was claimed (RA signal-to-noise (s/n] ratio of ... 5:1), (2) effects were
produced with the subject at a distance from the sensor (i.e., the subject did not touch the
sensor), and (3) a method of subject selection and training was claimed.
According to the published reports, a piezoelectric crystal had been suspended several
meters from the subject. The experimenter reported that several RA agents had, by mental
References are listed at the end of this paper.
t This report constitutes the deliverable for Objective H, Tasks 3 and 3a.
$ In the literature on parapsychology, such effects are usually associated with the term
psychokinesis. However, to be consistent and parallel with remote viewing, we have
adopted the term remote action.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96~00787R000300300001-7
means alone, consistently pa-od~ceci signals that had been at least five times the background noise
level. Oceastonally signals as great as 100 times background had been observed.
We formed a joint venture with JFK to replicate these claims. The principal investigator at
JFK, Dr. Julian Isaacs, and his staff agreed to screen, assess, and train promising RA subjects and
make them available to SRI. SRI International retained the task of designing and constructing all
experimental hardware for use both in screening and training at JFK and in trials at SRI.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
II THE 1986 PILOT RA EXPERIMENT
In considering the problem of validating (or invalidating) controversial claims for the
existence of RA, SRI recognized two distinct but related obstacles: (1) no single experiment, no
matter how impressive the results, can prove or disprove the existence of RA, and (2) no single
initial experiment can eliminate or control all possible sources of artifacts. For a pilot study,
therefore, we adopted a cost effective and realistic procedure that was technically sound but
somewhat incomplete. This section reviews the FY 1986 pilot experiment--including the event
definition, experimental protocol, and results. Details of the pilot study can be found in
Reference 5.
Other disciplines (e.g., nuclear physics) routinely require an s/n ratio of 6 to 8 standard
deviations (Q) in order to accept the existence of a real event. If we assume in our system Q was
approximately equal to the noise envelopes, then the s/n ratio for an RA event was 6:1.
Specifically, our event threshold was equal to a system output of 25 millivolts (mV), where the
system noise envelope was approximately 4 mV (full wave rectified) for a given sensor.
B. Experimental Protocol
Conceptually, the pilot experiment was as follows. Two PZTs (differentially connected)
were electrically, mechanically, and sonically isolated. A participant's task was to effect a change
in the differential signal; such a change was defined as an event. Control runs recorded the PZT
outputs in isolation (i.e., no human observers). We required that the hardware and protocols be
sufficiently rigorous such that the presence of any uncorrelated events would warrant continued
investigations. Our null hypothesis was that no uncorrelated events should be detected. Known
sources that could influence the PZT, resulting in artifacts, were minimized, controlled, or
monitored. Examples of such sources of artifacts and the method of control are shown in Table
1.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Table 1
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ARTIFACTS AND THEIR REMEDIES
SOURCE
REMEDY
AC-line transients
Battery power for critical
components, fiber-optic signal
links, shielded enclosures
Acoustic audible-frequencies
Sensor isolation in another room,
enclosed sensors, audio taping
of all sessions
Motor-frequency (30-hertz [hz])
Three types of vibration-damping
mechanical vibrations
mounts for isolation above 10 Hz
Radio-frequency transmissions
Sensor enclosures and windows
shielded from electromagnetic
interference
During September and October 1986 at SRI, five participants contributed a total of twenty
experimental sessions, each lasting about 90 minutes.5 The participants were recruited by the
staff at JFK. Each participant was asked to influence one of a pair of PZTs operating in
differential mode, so as to produce an event above a predetermined threshold. The last eight
sessions were conducted under the most rigorous condition, in which the sensor enclosure was
located in a locked laboratory adjacent to the room in which the participant was sitting. At that
point, the participant was approximately 3 meters from the sensor pair, although the sensor
enclosure was visible through adouble-pane window.
Under those conditions, one participant produced a total of eleven events above the
threshold, which were grouped in three series of four, four, and three events, respectively. Each
group of events lasted approximately 1 second and was distributed in three separate effort periods
over two sessions, with the sessions occurring on different days. The signals were not correlated
with any of the sources of artifact we considered. In approximately 30 hours of control trials that
were conducted under the same circumstances except for the absence of humans, no equivalent
uncorrelated events were recorded. If we take a conservative view that each event series
constituted a single event, then only three events occurred instead of eleven. If we further assume
a Poisson distribution for these events, the probability that no events would be observed in 30
hours of controls is p ~ 0.01. Many more hours of control with and without participants present
would be required to establish a meaningful baseline.
Approved. For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
As indicated above, known sources of artifacts were considered and controlled,
minimized, or monitored. However, some potential artifact sources such as cosmic rays,
low-frequency magnetic fields, and subaudible acoustic and mechanical resonances below 30
hertz (Hz) were excluded from consideration in this initial series of experiments.
Our conclusion at the end of the pilot study was that the data were sufficiently interesting to
warrant further investigation. .The preliminary nature of those pilot sessions cannot be suessed
too strongly, however, especially since all possible sources of artifact were not excluded. We shall
see in Appendix B that an unshielded vibrational resonance at 8 Hz was the most likely source of
the uncorrelated events found in the pilot study.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
III THE 1987 RA EXPERIMENT
Encouraged by the results of the pilot study, we improved the protocol in order to conduct
a definitive formal study during 1.987. This section describes-those improvements and details the
formal experiment.
As in the pilot study, JFK personnel were responsible for the choice of participants, the
means of enhancing and maintaining a minimum magnitude of functioning, and possible future
methods for using psychological profiles as a basis for selecting participants. Their methods and
results are reported in Appendix A.
A. Modifications to the 1986 Experiment
The 1986 pilot study was reviewed by the Scientific Oversight Committee (SOC) appointed
to examine the work of SRI's Cognitive Sciences Program. Based on the review, we developed
the protocol for the 1987 experiment by modifying the protocol for the 1986 experiment. These
modifications are described in the following paragraphs.
1. Separation Between Participants and PZTs
The SOC's most salient criticism of the experiment focused on the relative proximity
of participant to sensors and the opportunity thereby afforded for non-RA interactions. We
concluded that the most effective method of meeting this criticism was to conduct all 1987
experimental sessions with the participants and sensors well separated. In the formal trials
conducted at SRI International facilities, therefore;- the PZT enclosure was located in a locked,
sound-attenuating room approximately 15 meters from the participants' area, with two other
rooms in between. The arrangement of rooms, apparatus, and individuals is shown in Figure 1.
To further protect against conscious fraud, the participants were permitted only one
familiarization visit to the sensor room at SRI. At the time of the visit, no experimental sessions
had been scheduled, so the participants were deliberately uninformed of the timing of future
trials. During experimental sessions, the participants were never allowed to enter the sensor
room. Contact with the system was established through the feedback mechanisms described in
Appendix B.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
STORAGE ~ FIBER OPTIC LINK
ELEVATOR
LOBBY
rESENSOR
BOX
FEEDBACK
~' APPARATUS
FIGURE 1 SCHEMATIC OF RA EXPERIMENTAL AREA. THE JFK
EXPERIMENTER IS "J," THE PARTICIPANT IS "P,"
AND THE SRI EXPERIMENTER IS "S."
2. Task importance
Through discussions between JFK and SRI personnel, we recognized the role that task
importance plays in obtaining maximum effort from the participants. Therefore, we constructed a
sequence of steps in which participating in the SRI study was a goal to be sought by the successful
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
individuals. An analogy to reaching the finals in a sporting event might be appropriate. In
addition, visits and discussions with JFK staff sought to define the physical environment and
psychological conditions at SRI that might be most conducive to the participants' success.
3. The Artifact Boundary
In order to facilitate the design of the PZT system, we found it useful to formulate a
concept we term the "artifact boundary." In brief, the limits of the artifact boundary were
defined by the location or characteristics of the most sensitive device or data that we wanted to
protect. By examining each part of the PZT. signal transmission system and establishing the
artifact boundary for that component, we identified artifact-producing influences that had been
overlooked.
In particular, this exercise helped us to recognize that in the 1986 study, even though
the sensors were in a shielded enclosure 2 to 3 meters from the participant, the low-level (i.e.,
millivolt) PZT signals were being digitized very near the participant. Because the same signal line
was being used for both participant feedback and the RA data record (computer output) , the
possibility existed that apparent RA effects on the PZT could be produced through more normal
interactions with the digitizing and feedback apparatus. Our solution to this problem was to
introduce a parallel set of fiber-optic transmitters in the PZT enclosure. These duplicate signals
were sent directly to an instrumentation-grade tape recorder located in the same room as the
sensors, 15 meters from the participant. By creating a source of redundant data, we could more
easily verify that the proposed RA interaction actually occurred at the sensor location. Prior to
any data collection, all experimental staff at SRI and JFK agreed that the tape-recorded PZT
signals would be the only authoritative data for determining whether any anomalous events
occurred.
4. Physical Security
The sensor box was located in a Iocked, sound-attenuating room approximately 15
meters from the participants' area. This room was secured by both a combination and cipher lock
and was on SRI's general security system. Door sensors were installed such that the room could
not be opened without alerting a 24-hour SRI security guard. Also, a passive infrared detector
was placed in the room so that any unauthorized intrusion would be immediately detected.
Finally, the facility was examined for signs of tampering by a roving security guard following an
8-hour inspection schedule. The building in which the experiments were conducted has limited
access, requiring escort for any nonemployee.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
The final substantive modification to the pilot experimental protocol was the definition
of RA events. The digitized control trials were used to locate a critical voltage output (Vc) which
was defined as the maximum voltage observed in any control trial, excluding voltages correlated to
environmental events. After the effort tapes were digitized, a candidate RA event was one whose
output voltage was at least 1.5 Vc (again, excluding voltages correlated to environmental events) .
Provided the system output was well behaved, this definition corresponded to an s/n ratio of
approximately 5 to 6v--roughly equivalent to the signals reported in the parapsychological
literature and within the commonly accepted criteria for a real signal.
B. Design and Construction of the Laboratory Apparatus
This section generally describes the present RA system, although clearly several features
were first designed in 1986 and. subsequently modified. A schematic overview of the basic
laboratory RA apparatus is shown in Figure 2. For visual clarity, we have omitted the
environmental monitoring equipment.
The complete description of the hardware design and the artifact protection and system
testing can be found in Appendix B. For this report, it suffices to say that extensive artifact
detection and testing were employed in this experiment.
ARTIFACT BOUNDARY-Ir
CHART
RECORDER
C
EXPERIMENTER' S
KEYBOARD
CASSETTE
PLAYER
PZT SENSOR ~ ~ ANALOG TAPE
MICROPROCESSOR
CONTROL
UNIT
VISUAL
FEEDBACK
(Light Bars)
FIGURE 2 DIAGRAM OF RA APPARATUS
9
Approved For Release 2002/11/1.8 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
1. Hypotheses and Variables
We postulated that selected participants would, in the absence of environmental
interference, be able to modify the normal output of a PZT in a nonstatistical way. Assuming that
a system is well shielded and well characterized, environmental monitoring of the system's
susceptibilities can establish the source of some rare events (e.g., earthquakes, large AC-power
fluctuations, and the like). Other sources of rare events are not as easily determined. For
example, the fiber-optics transmission line is an electronic system containing components that
may spontaneously emit noise bursts. These bursts can result from such mechanisms as
microplasma discharge due to semiconductor defects, and minority carrier injection from
contacts. Without a way to predict such events, the only method to distinguish candidate RA
signals from noise bursts is through control trials. In the 1987 experiment, by collecting data
when no participants were attempting to influence the PZT (non-effort periods), the frequency of
occurrence and voltage amplitude of noise processes was established. Candidate RA events had
to occur during effort periods and be significantly greater in amplitude than the control trial noise
maximum.
The independent variable in this experiment was time. The dependent variable was
the overall measure of an RA effect, as determined from the differential electrical output of the
PZT. Although the participants were told to focus their attention on only one sensor, the
experimenters agreed before beginning the experiment to define the RA record as the differential
output. In principle, then, the sensor the participant actually affected would not be critical.
A formal data record was defined as a session in which the instrumentation tape
recorder was recording both PZT channels and all environmental monitors. RA trials at SRI were
conducted- from May 28, 1987, to July 30, 1987. There were three types of formal data
collection:
? Global Control Trials -Data collection for many hours when no one was
focusing RA attention on the target element. This technique established the
long-term performance of the system and determined the unperturbed artifact
production rate. In practice the global control trials were conducted on
alternate days from the effort sessions, at the same time of the day. That is, the
usual schedule was to conduct global control trials on Monday, Wednesday, and
Friday, and effort sessions on Tuesday and .Thursday. In this way the effort
trials were always bracketed by control trials.
? Local Control Trials -Data collection just before or just after an experimental
session, with no one focusing attention on the target element. These trials were
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
intended to confirm the proper operation of the system immediately before or
after an RA session. (Since both ordinary scientific experiments and RA
literature contain evidence for "relaxation" or "linger" effects that persist after
an interaction, local control trials are sometimes separated into pre- and
post-session control trials.&)
r Experimental Trials -Data collection during an RA session when a participant
focused on the target element. Periods of effort were interspersed with rest
periods. Periods of effort in RA sessions were from 5 to 20 minutes long,
ordinarily with no more than three effort periods in a session. The timing and
spacing of RA sessions depended on the participant. The total duration of an
RA session was always about 90 minutes.
Fifty-four formal, tape-recorded RA effort sessions and sixty-three equivalent control
sessions were conducted. Atypical experiment proceeded as follows. Before the participant
arrived, the SRI experimenter entered the feedback and sensor room area and checked all
equipment for proper operation. A local control trial was then conducted in order to record the
baseline performance of the system. About 90 minutes later, the JFK experimenter and
participant team arrived, and the experimental session was then carried out as previously
described. During the periods of effort, the participant's task was to interact mentally with the
PZT to produce an event above a preset feedback threshold. In practice, the participant's
attention was focused on the audible and visual feedback.
During the period of rest, the participant was asked to direct attention away from the
apparatus and engage in some other activity. Usually the participant and experimenters moved to
the outer part of room G-304 for the duration of the rest period. At this point in the
development of an RA protocol, .however; we could not predict with any confidence the degree of
control participants had over their RA ability. For example, some parapsychological literature
reports that "release of effort" or "unintentional" effects may occur immediately after a period of
effort. We reported all data produced during the entire 90-minute experimental session,
therefore, regardless. of whether it was termed "rest" or "effort." In examining the data we found
no evidence for the possible existence for such effects.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE 1987 EXPERIMENT
From May 28, 1987, to July 30, 1987, six JFK participants (two male and four female)
contributed fifty-four formal RA effort sessions at SRI.
As discussed earlier, the signal of interest was the digitized differential output of the PZTs.
The RA claim was that the signal of interest would be aloes-frequency transient in the range of 10
to 1,000 Hz. Nyquist's theorem states that in order to correctly sample atime-varying waveform,
the sampling rate must be at least two times the highest frequency of interest. To meet this
criterion and provide a margin of safety, we selected a 5-kilohertz (kHz) sampling rate. At a
5-kHz rate, digitizing over 100 hours of data presents substantial memory problems (1.8 x 109
data points). Fortunately, our RA event definition was concerned only with comparing the
maximum control and effort voltages (Vc and Ve). Inspection of typical tape data showed that
most of the signal was small amplitude noise (~ few millivolts). We set a lower level
discriminator, therefore, to reject the bulk of the data points and store only the larger pulses.
Three environmental variables (magnetic field, sonic intensity, and mechanical acceleration) were
recorded as analog signals on a chart recorder. The PZT differential signal was recorded as an
analog signal and digitized.
Any tape that exhibited a PZT output clearly above typical baseline response was set aside
for careful examination. That tape was not included in the cumulative digital record at the time of
internal inspection. Nine control session tapes and six effort session tapes were set aside.
The chart recorder was used to initially correlate the PZT signal on the fifteen tapes with
the output of the environmental detectors. In four cases a PZT event was clearly correlated with
an environmental detector output. Those environmental events could be separated into two
categories. The first category was a PZT signal that occurred after a long (~ 10-20 seconds}
low-frequency audio event. Our acoustic shielding fell away rapidly below -~ 500 Hz. And, as we
note in the susceptibility testing section in Appendix B, a long low-frequency signal could most
easily excite the PZT sensors. We hypothesize that a jet plane passing overhead could easily have
generated such an artifact. The second type of environmental artifact was clearly electromagnetic
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
in origin since it affected all sensors simultaneously. The artifact probably resulted from
low-frequency radiation that coupled into all sensors or perhaps all inputs at the recorder.
As environmental artifacts were identified, the tape in question .was added to the
cumulative record. We elected to exclude the artifact, plus 1 minute of data record before and
after the artifact to be certain that no spurious signals were digitized. Remarkably, out of 138
hours of recorded data, only four events were .excluded due to environmental anifact. Since the
duration of each event was less than one second, the actual artifact rate was only about 10 G per
second.
Those PZT events that were not clearly related to an environmental artifact using the
processed signal and chart recorder were further reviewed using the precision signal analyzer
(Scientific-Atlanta SD-3802) employed in susceptibility testing. Each PZT event was then
carefully compared to each. environmental monitor output, using both time and frequency
domains. Only PZT events displaying no correlation with artifact signals were included in the final
record. I`To new exclusions were found with this added level of analysis.
After exclusion of all environmentally related. events, the final voltage histogram was
prepared. The comparison of all effort and all control sessions can be seen in Figure 3. We have
shown only the extreme tail of the distribution in order to conserve space. Since Vc is defined by
the maximum absolute voltage signal in the control sessions, the balance of the histogram can be
ignored. We note that the shape of the two curves is essentially identical.
Figure 4 shows a typical session voltage distribution with the discriminator set at "0." In
other words, all PZT signals were stored, including the electronic noise background. From
inspection it appears that the total system noise was approximately normally distributed.
From the cumulative plot one can see that although the maximum voltage appeared in the
RA effort data record, it did not substantially exceed Vc. The ratio of channel numbers
(1652/1525) is 1.083, much lower than our criterion of 1.5.
D. PZT Signal Analysis
During digitization of the final tapes that contained the large amplitude PZT events, we
noticed that the maximum channel number varied by a few percent when the digitizing
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
2s I
1s2s
o'
500 Channel Number 1700
2s I
Cumulative Effort Sessions
16152
1
0
S00 Channel Number 1700
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
106 ~ .... ... .. .. .. ,
process was repeated. Our interpretation of this effect was that the signal contained frequency
components that approached our sampling rate, thereby yielding some variation in the measured
channel number due to aliasing.
In order to be completely objective in comparing Vc and Ve, we identified the largest
control and effort events and compared their amplitude using the Scientific-Atlanta (SA) signal
...analyzer. That instrument can digitize signals up to 20 kHz. It is also possible that the signal
processing we used in collecting the cumulative voltage histogram introduced some distortion into
these large transients. Therefore, we used the unprocessed PZT signals in the SA analysis.
The largest RA event amplitude in the SA instrumental configuration was about 3.5 volts.
The largest control event was 2.8 V using the same setup. This corresponds to a ratio of Ve/Vc =
1.25, still below our definition of a candidate RA event. As further evidence of artifact, the effort
event and the control event had similar frequency characteristics.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-.RDP96-007878000300300001-7
We believe that this joint effort has produced the most elaborate and exhaustive R-~
experiment ever conducted with PZTs. By whatever measure we apply, Ve did not equal 1.5 Vc.
The SA spectral ana]ysis indicated the nearest approach was 1.25 Vc.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
1. Stanford, R. G., "Experimental Psychokinesis: A Review From Diverse Perspectives,"
Handbook of Parapsychology (Wolman, Ed.), p. 335, Van Nostrand, 1`'ew York (1977).
2. Radin, D. I., May, E. C., and Thomson, M. J., "Psi Experiments with Random Number
Generators: Meta-Analysis Part I," Proceedings of the 28th Annual Convention of the
Parapsychological Association, pp. 199-234, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts
(August 1985).
3. Crookes, W., "Experimental Investigation of a h'ew Force," Quarterly Journal of
Science, Vol. 8, pp. 339-349 (July 1871).
4. Isaacs, J., "A Twelve Session Study of Micro-PKMB Training," Research In
Parapsychology, pp. 31-34 (1982).
5. Hubbard, G. S., and Isaacs, J. I., "An Experiment to Examine the Possible Existence of
Remote Action Effects in Piezoelectric Strain Gauges," Final Technical Report, Project
1291, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (December 1986).
6. May, E. C., Radin, D. I., Hubbard G. S., Humphrey B. S. and Utts, J., "Psi
Experiments with Random Number Generators: An Informational Model," Proceedings
of the 28th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association, pp. 237-266, Tufts
University, Medford, Massachusetts (August 1985).
7. Wells, R. A., and Watkins, G. K., "Linger Effects in Several PK Experiments,"
Research in Parapsychology, pp. 143-147, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, Iv'ew Jersey
(1974).
8. May, E. C., Humphrey, B. S., and Hubbard, G. S., "Electronic System Perturbation
Techniques," Final Technical Report, Project 8585, SRI International, Menlo Park,
California (September 1980).
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release. 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY FINAL REPORT
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
F[NAL REPORT
1987 REMOTE ACTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
AT JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
By: Julian Isaacs Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
With: Ruthann Corwin Ph.D.
Martha M. Mikova M.S.
Diane Moore B.A. Jo-Ann Jones B. S.
GRADUATE SCHOOL FOR THE STUDY OF HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
A-2
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 .
I NTRODUCT I ON
1
2.
TRAINEE SELECTION AND RECRUITMENT
2
3.
JFKU-BASED PIEZO-RA INSTRUMENTATION
(i) Modifications for 1987 Research
6
(ii) Artifact Sources: Electricity Supply Transients ~.
7
(iii) Artifact Sources: Acoustic Noise and Vibration
8
4.
CONTROL RUNS
(i) Control Runs: Introduction
9
(ii) System [ Control Runs
10
(iii) System I! Control Runs .
li
(i) Preliminary Orientation of Participants
(ii) The Participant Evaluation Session 12
(iii) Mental Skills Training 13
( i v ) Use of "Confidants" 14
(v) Piezo-RA Training SCssions
(a) Introduction .. 15
(b) inhibitory Factors Early in Training 16
(c) Adjustment to Remote RA Target System 18
(vi) Results
(a) Brief Review of Individual Results 20
Cb) Overall Training Results 22
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
6. SRI EVALUATION SESSIONS
(i) Motivational and Inhibitory Factors 23
(ii) instrumerita! Considerations 24
APPENDIX 1: CONTROL RUN DATA 30
APPENDIX II: TRAINING SESSION DATA 32
APPENDIX 1fI: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM (PIF) 44
APPENDIX (V: PARTICIPANT PRELIMINARY ORIENTATION WORKBOOK 48
APPENDIX V: MENTAL SKILLS ACQUISITION WORKBOOKS 56
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
FINAL REPORT
JFKU 1987 REMOTE ACTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
i. INTRODUCTION
? Following the SRI-based Piezo Remote Action (Piezo-RA) pilot
study performed in 1986, the tasks set for activities at Jahn F.
Kennedy University (JFKU) in 1987 were to recruit and train a
number of potential Piezo-RA agents- in preparation for a fully
formal Piezo-RA evaluation study to be performed at SRI. The
best Piezo-RA agents originating from the JFKU-based training
phase were to be made avai.able for participation in the SRI-
based evaluation study. The instrumentation at SRI and JFKU was
to be developed.f-urther, with the SRI instrumentation being
brought to the level required to eliminate or monitor all 'down
causes of effects. A new protocol was to be utilized which .~auld
effectively preclude accidental ar fraudulent interference with
the instrumentation by subjects, both at SRI and JFKU. !n order
to accomplish this task, trainee selection procedures and Piezo-
RA training sessions were to be performed at JFKU. Consulting
support for the modification of the instrumentation for the SRI-
based evaluation study was also to be provided to SRI.
In 1987, as in 1986, the highest priority was assigned to
the maximization of results at SRI, since the evaluation study
was being performed at SRI. It was agreed in advance that in
order to maximize the resources which could be applied to the
SRI-based system within the operating budgetary contraints, the
two systems at JFKU would not be instrumented to the degree
necessary for a proof-of-principle study. The instrumentation at
SRI was equipped to detect evironmentally occurring potential
causes of artifactual response by the Piezo strain-gauge sensor
system, being equipped for the detection of low level acoustic
noise, vibration, magnetic field fluctuations, ionizing radiation
etc. and was located on a vibration attenuating support within an
acoustically shielded room. By contrast, the JFKU-based
instruments were not equipped with environmental monitoring
systems, and the two JFKU-based instruments differed in their
noise characteristics quite substantially, as is described in
section 4 and Appendix I detailing the control run results. It
was therefore understood in advance that the results from the
JFKU systems would not be equivalent to the results obtained with
the SRI-based system, in terms of their evidentiality.
Given this constraint on the JFKU-based systems, and given
that the highest priority goal was the supply of Piezo-RA agents
to SRI, it was decided that the JFKU-based training phase would
operate on the principle of maximizing the Piezo-RA performance
of trainees.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
This made it impossible to run the training phase as a formal
study, for several considerations, three primary reasons being
outlined below.
(i> The formalization of the training phase at JFKU would- have
prevented the development of the most promising trainees'
performance to the highest level possible. In a formal
study, equal machine time and trainer attention would have
had to .e given to all trainees.
(ii) Since it was impossible to predict in advance whether any
given trainee would suddenly improve or temporarily
decline fn performance, it appeared to be prudent not to
deselect trainees whose performance was at a lower level
.than the best trainees', just in case their performance
improved greatly, and in order to provide a second cohort
of "backup" participants if any members of the leading
group should drop out or decline temporarily fn
performance. This prohibited the option of spliting the
participant group into continuing and deselected groups at
an arbitrary point.
(iii) Since the noise characteristics of the two JFKU-based
Piezo-RA detection systems differed, generating a
difference in feedback properties and hence perceived
lability, and participants were scheduled according to the
availability of the systems, trainees performed differing
numbers of training sessions with each instrument. It
could therefore be expected that between-subjects
differences in performance would be generated from this
source too.
The training phase activities should therefore be viewed as being
non-formal in character, and as being directed to the
maximization of trainees' performance, rather than a.s being a
formal study. Nevertheless, several psychological features
emerged which suggest possibly useful hypotheses to be tested in
formal training studies of Piezo-RA performance.
2. TRAINEE SELECTION AND RECRUITMENT
It was originally intended that participants in the 1987 research
activities would be recruited from two sources, one being from
the small group of the three most successful participants in
1986, the other being via a recruitment drive targeted on the
individuals obtaining the best ostensible RA results and highest
P1F scores in the 1986 screenings (isaacs 1986a>. As events
transpired, trainees for the 1987 research were recruited from
four sources.. Two (42 & 43) were retained from the 1986 trainee
group (the third member relocated away from the Bay Area). One
(41) was recruited from the only screening (Isaacs 1981)
performed in this research cycle. Two (45 & 49) were recruited
through the recruitment drive based on the screening results of the
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Fina! Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
1986 research cycle. The remaining trainees (44, 46, 47, 48, 50)
were recruited by contacts.
The selection of individuals identified by screening had
been performed by first ranking the screenees on the basis of two
measures: their ostensible RA performance during the screening
they attended, and their PIF scores. During the screening, each
screenee had been given a brief (30 seconds to 2 minutes) trial
on a strain-gauge based screening device (Isaacs 1986a) and had
been given an informal test of ostensible paranormal metal-
bending ability. The experimental personnel present at the
screenings had monitored the strain gauge device and had
witnessed most of the metal-bending, and had annotated the scores
from the screening device and comments about the metal-bending
onto the screenees's PIFs. If screenees had either produced an
.effect likely to_be over the noise level of the screening device,
-o~r had bent metal, their PIF was then evaluated for its total
score and put into the group to be ranked. It should be noted
that the screening procedure is not claimed as in any way
producing definitive evaluations of RA ability (lssacs 1981), the
presumption being only that some subset of the gro ._ at the
screening actually possessing RA ability will be present in the
group showing ostensible success at one or the other or both of
the screening tasks.
For the purposes of a comparative analysis, the PIF scores
of the 1987 trainee group were merged with those of the 189 PIFs
derived from the 1986 screening activities (Isaacs 1986a) and a
ranking of PIF scores for the total group (1986 screenees and
1987 trainees) was derived. The analysis of the rankings
obtained by the 1987 trainee group within the total group of PIFs
clearly must be regarded with caution because of the small number
of individuals involved.
Two results. emerge from this analysis. One is relatively
unsurprising. The individuals recruited by contact (by
experimental personnel blind to PIF, but not, of course, blind to
the potential particip-ants' informal verbal reports of
spontaneous psi functioning) scored high on PIF. PIF scores for
the individuals recruited by contact strongly resemble those of
the screened individuals who would be targeted for recruitment,
based on their ostensible RA performance at the screenings and
high P!F scares.
Second, somewhat unexpectedly, the scores of the 1987
trainee group on PIF strongly suggest the presence of two rather
different groups among the recruited trainees.. The possible
discovery of two seemingly distinct trainee populations is an
interesting finding, since it has direct relevance to the further
development of strategies far trainee recruitment and selection.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
To contextualise the second finding, it is necessary to describe
the P[F and the ~.+ay it has been used for trainee selection. The
criteria used fir the selection of prospective Piezo-RA trainees
from the PIF data recovered from the 1986 screenings were based
on three measures which were used in a convergent fashion. These
were described in more detail in the 1986 Final Report (lsaacs
1986). The first was the screenee's responses on the PIF. The
second was their performance at an instrumented RA task, and the
third was their macroscopic metal-bending performance.
The PIF is an inventory of ostensible psi-related
experiences which has been formulated sl_acifically to focus on
spontaneous psi experiences thought to involve elements of
spontaneous Remote Action effects. The first seventeen questions
of PIF are directed to eliciting information about spontaneous
psi experiences. Responses are categorised into four types, "no"
indicates that the screenee has never had the experience cited in
the question, "i" indicates that the experience has occurred
once, "2" indicates "more than once, several times", and "3"
indicates "often, frequently". Eight of the seventeen psi
experience (Psi - "P") questions are RA-specific (questions 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 14).
Question 18 is intended to sample the respondent's general
belief in the reality of Remote Action (Belief 1 - "Bi").
Question 18 asks "Do you think it's possible to affect physical
objects without touching them ?". Question 19 is intended to
sample the res~.~:ident's specific belief about whether they
themselves could produce RA effects (Belief 2 - "B2"). Question
19 asks "Do you think that you can affect physical objects
without touching them ?". Question 20 (Mental Skills - "S")
requests information about the screenee's prior practice of
mental skills of various sorts (eg. meditation, visualisation
etc.) .
The analysis: of the PIF questionnaire data used for targeting
individuals for recruitment was organised around three concepts.
The first was the measure of frequency of various spontaneous
ostensibly psi-related experiences. This measure was taken by
summing the scores for the P questions on the PIF (the first 17
questions). If the respondent replied "no" to any of the
questions, for those answers they scored zero. If they checked
the "1" answer they scored 1, if "2" they scored 2 and if "3",
they scored 3. The summed score for-the 17 psi experience
questions constitutes their "P" score. The responses to
questions 18 (B1) and 19 (B2) are listed separately. The two;
belief questions offer a scale of 1 to 5 to be checked, value 1
being "definitely no", value 5 being "definitely yes". The
scores for these questions were the raw score responses checked
by the respondents.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities .at John F. Kennedy University 1987
For question 20, the number of separate mental skills for which
practice was claimed constituted their "S" scc^e, thus if the
respondent checked three skills they obtained a score of 3. The
tota-t score was computed by summing the ?, B1, B2 and S scores.
Table 1 shows the participants' PiF scores, ranked by-their
totals.
Trainee
I.D No.
47
45
PIF
Rank
1
2
PIF
Score
64
61
P
45
41
B1
5
5
B2
4
5
S
10
10
49
3
59
41
5
5
8
42
5
53
39
5
5
4
46
7
51
33
5
5
8
43
9
47
31
5
5
6
41
10
44
26
5
5
10
48
13
42
22
5
5
10
50
45
28
14
5
5
4
44
48+
22
10
5
5
2
The trainees appear to split into two groups. The majority have
high P scores and high S scores, representing a high frequency
and wide range of reported spontaneous ostensible psi experiences
and a wide experience of mental disciplines. All but one~of this
group of eight are professional or semi-professional psi
practitioners of various sorts. The PIF rankings. of this
subgroup are, as can be seen, consistently high. The eight
members of this group are distributed in only the top thirteen
P[F scores. It will be remembered that these are the highest
scores from the complete set of 189 PIFs collected during the
1986 and 1987 screenings. This group could ue described as
having a "psi practitionerTM profile.
In contrast to this group, trainees 50 and 44 have much
lower rankings, 45 and 55 respectively, in the PIF scores,
representing lower P and much lower S scores. These scores do,
however, seem likely to be above the norm for the unselected
general population.
Participant 50 was recruited because she had contacted JFKU
for assistance regarding the ostensible recurrent spontaneous
psychokinesis (RSPK> events which she reported. These events
were reported as involving the occurrence of ostensibly
paranormal knocking sounds and movements of objects. In
parapsychological terminology, participant 50 is a poltergeist
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-9
 Ap~roved For~elease 2h002/1 ~/18 ; CAA-RDP96-00787R00~00300~01
Final Re Pp rt: RA esearc Ac ivities at John enne y niversity 1987
focus, and reports RSPK events as still occurring in her home.
Participant 44 was recruited because she was originally the
"confidant" of participant 49 and asked for a trial on one of the
Piezo-RA detection systems, when she produced an event of
magnitude 17. Participant 44 claims to have caused spontaneous
and deliberate RA events of RSPK type during her childhood.
Participants 44 and 50 do not appear to have experienced the very
wide range of ostensible psi experiences reported by the
practitioner group, and apparently have not practised the mental
skills of the practitioner group.
The principal characteristic leading to 44 and 50 being
recruited were their claims of the occurrence of spontaneous RA
events in their presence. They could be described as having
"RSPK" profiles, rather than practitioner PIF profiles. However,
of the eight practitioner trainees, only two appeared to cause
events above the noise threshold on the SRI-based
instrumentation, whereas both of the two RSPK profile
participants appeared to cause events above the noise threshold
on the SRI-based instrumentation. Although the sample sizes are
far too small to justify more than a very tentative hypothesis to
be formulated, these results are certainly not inconsistent with
the hypothesis that RSPK profile individuals may be especially
worth training in hopes of producing an RA capacity for
experimental purposes.
3.(i) INSTRUMENTATION: MODIFICATIONS FOR 1987 RESEARCH
The 1986 final report outlined a number of improvements which
were suggested should be made to the JFKU-based computerized
Piezo-RA instrumentation. The modification of the software, in
particular the removal of fixed periods of feedback and later in
this research period, the increase of gain programmed into the
audio feedback function, greatly improved the performance of-the
JFKU-based devices, making them psychologically more suitable for
RA training purposes. All scoring units referred to below and
elsewhere in this report are quoted in units of the analog to
digital converter counts used in the Piezo-RA detection systems,
which were 410 to the volt, making each unit (= 1 count)
equivalent to about 2.5 mV.
As in 1986 (Isaacs 1986a), the two RA detection systems
produced immediate audio and visual feedback. Events above a
=_oftware selectable lower threshold were recorded by means of a
printer. A software selectable upper threshold defined the range
of magnitude between which the audio and visual feedback systems
operated, except for the lowest range audio feedback which
operated from below the lower threshold (putatively from the
system noise floor) up to the lower threshold. Recording of
above-threshold events was performed by means of a printer which
recorded the outputs of both Piezo strain sensitive elements. In
addition, in training sessions, but not during control runs, two
channel chart recorders were used to continuously record the
output of both Piezo elements.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18A C11Q-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
The two Piezo-RA detection systems used at JFKU differed
substantially in their instrinsic noise level, as can be seen in
the control run responses of the two systems. System i is
substantially quieter than system 2. This created a definite
difference in psychological conditions for trainees using the two
different systems.
To compensate for the difference in noise level, which was
not immediately apparent in the earliest phase of training
because of the high threshold level used (20 units, see section
5.(v)(a), the software selectable lower threshold levels at which
scores were recorded which came to be used were generally much
lower for system 1 than for system 2. Even when the system 1
lower threshold was at the minimum level possible for that
system, it was markedly less labile (i.e. spontaneously active in
producing purely noise-driven printed score outputs via .the _da_ta_
recording system) even at the lower threshold than was system 2.
This feature had the effect.of making the two systems seem
rather different from each other to the trainees, who had little
comprehension of technical matters and therefore wondered how it
could be that it appeared to be easy to get scores of 5 or 6 from
system 2, yet it appeared to be much more difficult to get scores
of 2 or 3 from system 1. This situation clearly demonstrated the
desirability, for psychological reasons, of making all the RA
systems closely comparable in sensitivity, noise level, and hence
feedback properties.
3.(ii) ARTIFACT SOURCES: ELECTRICITY SUPPLY TRANSIENTS
The shielding of the Piezo-RA transducers and their associated
signal conditioning and preamplifier units within electromagnetic
interference (EMI) attenuating enclosures and the electrical
isolation of this instrumentation by the use of battery power and
electrically non-conducting fiber optic data output leads
presumably is effective in preventing the ingress of EMI to that
part of the Piezo-RA detection instrumentation enclosed in the
attenuating enclosures. The fiber optic leads convey the output
signal from the front-end instrumentation to the feedback and
data recording units.
Tests at JFKU disclosed that despite the EMI filters on the
AC electricity supply to the computerized Piezo-RA feedback and
recording equipment (STD box, computer terminal and printer)
transients on the electricity supply could trigger large (>1000
units) artifactual responses from the system. A readily
performable test to demonstrate this was to pull the .plug of a
functioning piece of mains-powered equipment (e. g. a cassette
player/radio) out of an electricity supply socket in the same
room in which the Piezo-RA equipment was functioning. It was
-.nown in advance that this was a possible source of artifactual
signals for the JFKU-based systems. This source of artifact
should have been eliminated from the SRI-based system because
data recording was performed not by the computerized feedback
system, but by means of an FM tape recorder. However,-since the
JFKU-based systems showed a clear susceptibility to this form of
artifact, this generates a concern as to whether the FM tape
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-11
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
recorder used SRI for data recording was indeed adequately
protected from the ingress of electricity supply transients (see
section 6.(ii) for a brief discussion of this source of
artifact).
Naturally, trainees were prohibited from switching mains-
powered equipment during RA training sessions. However, the JFKU
laboratory suite is located in a building, parts of which are
used as a high school, and the possibility that switching of
mains powered equipment in the school section could create
artifactual signals must be born in mind. Despite this, it
appears from tests performed at the laboratory site that the RA
system is not affected by transients created more than about 5
metres distance from the RA detection equipment. Nevertheless,
the results of one of the control runs for system 1 suggest that
on rare occasions EMI may have penetrated the feedback and data
recording systems (see sections 4.(i) and 4.(ii)).
3.(iii) ARTIFACT SOURCES: ACOUSTIC NOISE AND VIBRATION
The RA sensor enclosures of two JFKU-based RA detection systems
were placed in separate rooms located some 20 metres from each
other. Both rooms were in the rear section of the laboratory
suite, which is separated by a small hallway and passages from
the front section of the laboratory. The two feedback and
recording systems of the instruments were located in separate
rooms in the front section of the laboratory. During RA training
sessions, trainers and trainees would be located in the rooms in
which the feedback and recording apparatus was located, and no
personnel- would be present in the rear part of the laboratory
suite.
The two enviro~,nents in which the RA target systems were
located were not wholly free from acoustic noise and vibration.
The rear section of the laboratory is separated by a single wall
from a set of rooms in the building which is used as a high
school. The teenagers attending. the high school were noisy and
sometimes films would. be shown at quite loud sound levels in the
high school section of the building. With both systems, the
slamming of doors in the nearest rooms to the RA equipment within
the section of the building used as a high school produced small
outputs, not above the two thresholds (1 for system 1, 5 for
system 2), but definitely visible as deflections in the pen trace
of the chart recorded output from the systems. Slamming the
doors of the rooms in the laboratory suite next to the room in
which the system 1 sensor assembly was located was definitely
capable of generating artifactual above threshold (of magnitude
1) signals. This was found out by testing. Control runs 3, 4, 5
and 6 for system 1 had to be discarded because of activity during
the control runs in the room next to it (see section 4.(ii)).
Except for a few sessions (see section -.(ii) below) RA
training sessions were held while the laboratory was empty of
other personnel than those involved in the RA sessions. Quite
often both RA systems would be in use simultaneously, but once
the systems were running, no personnel would be present in rooms
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
!~ -12
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 198-
immediately adjacent to them. During set-up periods when the
experimenters were switching on and preparing equipment, their
movements were quiet, and no artifactual effects from the
activities of experimental personnel wer~_ recorded.
4.(i) CONTROL RUNS: INTRODUCTION
It should be born in mind from the comments made in the
introduction and in sections 3.(ii) and 3.(iii) above, that:
(a) no artifact monitoring systems were installed in the
instrumentation supplied to JFKU and,
(b) artifactual events due to EMI ingress had definitely been
established as possible with system 1 (section 3.(ii)) and,
(c) probably, particularly loud noises originating from the high
school suite could contribute to the noise level intrinsic to
system 2 by additive summation with the electronic noise.
These factors taken together mean that the control run data does
not represent just the intrinsic noise of the two detection
.systems, but includes also signals above the noise level due to
the two possible sources of artifact already described.
Control rums were of variable length and the majority were
run during the daytime when the high school was in operation. It
was decided to yet the thresholds of the two systems as low as
possible during control runs, consistent with the collection of
manageable amounts of data. The threshold referred to is that
which defines tt,~~ operation of the recording of signals at the
occurrence of signals of magnitude one unit above the threshold
level. Setting the threshold level at 5 would cause the systems
?o record all events of 6 or greater magnitude; setting a
threshold level of 1 would cause the recording of all events of
magnitude 2 or greater. The use of the lowest possible threshold
in control runs ensured that the noise floor was accesssible to
inspection. The two thresholds used for control runs were lower
than, or the same as, those in use for experimental runs.
During the most intensive training phase it proved very
difficult to gather large amounts of control run data because of
the extensive use of the systems during the daytime for training
purposes. At this period too, the use of replacement batteries
had not been put into operation, so that after use for
experimental purposes, the systems were generally put on charge
sometimes during the day and usually during night in preparation
for the next training session. The majority of those control
runs performed after the period of intensive training were done
~ when the high school was in operation during the day and would
therefore sample the normal daytime noise levels.
The control run data for both systems is present in appendix
Approved For Release 2002/11/18A C~~-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-00787.8000300300001-7
Final Report:. RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
4.(ii) SYSTEM ONE CONTROL, RUNS
System 1 was, as will be seen by comparision of the twenty
control runs for this system with those of system 2, much less
noisy than system 2. A higher threshold (5 units) was used for
the first eight control runs and for the tenth control run (3
units being assigned by mistake for control run 9) than for all
of the subsequent control runs, 11 through 24, which were set at
a threshold of i.
Control runs 3, 4, 5 and 6 had to be discarded because of
artifacts deriving from door slamming in the room next to the
system 1 sensor system. A JFKU student was performing some
experimentation during this period which was conducted
exclusively in the evening (when training sessions using system 1
were NOT held). Despite requests to move around quietly, this _
student persisted in slamming the door of the room immediately -~
next to the system i RA sensor unit. Signals were generated in
these control periods which were very much larger than the signal
levels characteristic of normal control runs. Rather than
attempt to partition out those signals in these runs which were
due to the student's actfvity from those which were not, it was
decided to discard this data from the control run dataset and
perform more control runs to bring the total to twenty. The
distance between system i and system 2 sensor units provided
adequate protection of the system 2 sensor unit from artifactual
outputs due to activities in the vicinity of system 1 sensor
unit.
It will be seen that in general, system 1 has a well bounded
noise distribution,- with the cutoff being at 4 units. Two
unusual events are recorded however, one being an event of
magnitude 6, occurring at 3.07 pm in control run 18 (9/8/'87),
and one of magnitude 9 at 3.06 am (7/21/'87)- in control run 16.
These two events ma,y simply be characteristic of the distribution
of the noise, but the fact that there are no events atoll of
intermediate magnitudes (ie of magnitudes 5, 7, or 8) recorded in
any of the control runs suggests that perhaps these two events
may be due to rare electrical transients caused by the switching
of automatic equipment. It is difficult to imagine loud
percussive r: ~ses occurring at 3 am at the JFKU laboratory site,
unless some the high school students broke in to their school,
or unless there was an earthquake. An earthquake would be more
likely to produce a series of signals (because of the rocking of
the RA detection systems on their passive air suspension
systems?, and would presumably produce signals on both systems.
System 2 shows no signal recorded during a period from 1 hour 18
minutes before the system i event of 9 units to 49 minutes after
the event. For the system 1 event of magnitude 6, there is an
event of magnitude 8 units at 3.05 pm on system 2. Given the
fact that timing was performed by software clocks this may
correspond to the event on syster:~ 1 at system 1's recorded time
of 3.07 pm, but in the absence of environmental monitoring of
bot`: systems, further hypothesising regarding the causes of these
two unusally large magnitude events in the system 1 control run
data would be unfruitful.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-14
 F i na I R e~ptd~'~et# ~oR ~~@@ f~0~d~~.1/~~ t-R~P9,?~8~ROQ~~~~Q,00~1 r~i v e r s i t y 198 7
4.tiii) SYSTEM TWO CONTROL RUNS
Sys~~m 2 shows very much more spontaneous activity than system 1.
Howe.er, the noise distribution seems quite well bounded,, no
events being recorded above 9 units magnitude in any of the
control runs. The threshold used was 5 units for all control
runs except for control run 12 which was discarded because the
?threshold had been set at 6 for this control run by mistake. It
will be seen (appendix 1) that system 2's event count in control
runs is somewhat variable, presumably representing the effect of
the high school as a nearby source of vibration. System 2's
variable noise performance was puzzling because it did not seem
to reflect ambient acoustic noise Levels as peceived by the
experimental personnel.
5.(i) TRAINING SESSIONS: PRELIMINARY ORIENTATION OF PARTICIPANTS
A total of some twenty-five individuals were invited to each
participate in one of two separate day-long orientation sessions
which were described to participants as being RA training
preliminary "workshops". Invitees to the workshops were selected
by the methods outlined in section 2, above.
The individuals invited to the first workshops had been
found from three of the four sources mentioned in section 2
above, viz. retained participants from 19$6, individuals found by
contacts and individuals selected from the PIF records generated
by the 1986 screenings. The screenees selected by the procedure
described in section 2, above, were then contacted by telephone,
starting from the first ranking, and going down the list until
sufficient willing individuals were invited (16).
The "wort-the thresholds were reduced to 5, and
some weeks later the system 1 threshold was usually set below 5.
The system 2 threshold was held at 5 because of its greater noise
characteristic. It must be stressed that just as in athletics
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-19
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
training, where thz degree of difficulty and chal.:ige of the
task must be carefully matched to the individual athlete
(Williams 1986) in RA training it appears that to obtain maximum
performance, the trainees must be treated as individuals, with
the feedback characteristics of the RA system being adjusted for
each trainee. The imposition of a totally uniform threshold
setting would have restricted this option.
5.(v)(b)INHIBITORY FACTORS EARLY IN TRAINING
Three major inhibitory factors created by the experimental
protocol were encountered in the early part of the RA training
phase. The first factor was generated from the somewhat
overconfident assumption by the JFKU-research team that the
threshold of the RA detection systems could be set at 20 units
for beginning trainees. It will be recalled that the evaluation
session and first two or so subsequent training sessions were run
with this threshold level in operation. This decision was later
suspected to have created significant inhibition, since it
presented beginning trainees with an apparently non-responsive RA
detection system.
Batcheldor's theory of RA facilitation (Batcheldor 1984) and
the principles of operant conditioning (Gambrill 1977, Isaacs
1986b> clearly state that in order for responses which it is
desired to condition not to be extinguished, from the very
earliest occurrence of the responses, reinforcement is necessary.
In the RA training context this implies that RA responses of very
small magnitude must be reinforced, for the shaping of the
response towards the production of larger RA effects to be
successful (Gambrill 1977). In practice, this means that the RA
detection system noise floor must be sensorially discrimminable
and that the system should provide some form of apparently
positive response to the trainee to suggest that they are
succeeding from the very start of the training process.
Setting the threshold of the RA instrumentation at 20 units
created a situation where unless the potential trainee created
rather large effects (more than twice the largest noise signals
(9 units) occurring in the control runs), they would essentially
receive the impression from the RA detection system that they
could not produce RA effects. If beginning trainees could only
produce signals near noise level and well below the 20 unit
threshold, which is likely for novice trainees, this meant that
for the sessions run with this threshold in operation an
extinction paradigm was being operated, which could be expected
to negatively affect the potential trainees' RA responses.
This effect would have been reinforced by the fact that the
audio feedback system was at first not sufficiently sensitive to
very small signals to track the noise floor of the RA detection
system. Some 6 or so sessions into the training phase, a
sensitive supplementary audio feedback device was added to each
RA detection system which provided good audibility of the noise
floor by means of a voltage controlled oscillator which produced
a changing frequency of output in response to the noise floor.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-20
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
[n addition, a final software modification made the computer
generated audio feedback sufficiently sensitive at low levels of
signal to track the noise floor :ith moderate sensitivity.
However, the problems of the high threshold's effects and
the insufficiently sensitive audio feedback were not fully
appreciated during the earliest stage of the training process.
The instrumentation had been returned to SRI for modification
during the interim period before the renewed recruitment of
participants for the 1987 cycle. It-had been returned from its
modification a month later than planned. Since there was a
danger of the training phase falling behind schedule, the RA
detection systems were put into service immediately, before the
JFKU experimental team had sufficient familiarity with the newly
modified systems to have fully assessed them. Careful assessment
would probably have led to the decision to use a threshold just
above most of the noise floor from the start of training, and to
use a supplementary, sufficiently sensitive audio feedback device
from the beginning.
This .situation provides an important, if obvious, lesson,
which is that in exposing participants to RA instrumentation, it
is essential to first carefully evaluate the instrumentation
before exposing them to it, because the initial setback created
by unsuitable feedback properties may damage the prospects of RA
trainees. Unfortunately, since a formal study using independent
groups would be necessary to prove this point, this strong
suspicion remains as yet an hypothesis, but the literature of the
conditioned reflex would certainly underpin this hypothesis
(Gambrill 1977). To somewhat substantiate the hypothesis that
apparently non-labile feedback properties of RA target systems
inhibit RA, the events during the SRI sessions provide an
instructive although unintentional example. The first 11
sessions of the evaluation series held at SRI were run under
similar conditions of non-labile feedback, with null results.
Changing the feedback characteristics of the SRI system appeared
to dramatically facilitate the production of RA events. The
hypothesis that this factor is real was supported at least
informally by this unintentional use of an inhibitory condition
at SR1 followed by its being made less inhibitory by the
introduction of apparent lability. Although no controlled study
of the effect of discouraging feedback has been performed to date
with the Piezo-RA effect, it is this author's strongly -held view
that in both instances this condition (non-labile feedback)
severely reduced the RA performance which was obtained and
reduced the yield of data recovered from the SRI-based evaluation
study.
What is doubly frustrating in retrospect is that the JFKU
experimental group strongly believes that this condition is
inhibitory of RA performance, yet allowed the two incidents to
occur. In both cases there seemed to be good reasons to pursue
the policy followed at the time. In the case of the over-high
threshold used at JFKU early in the training phase, it was the
group's over-optimistic belief that trainees would succeed in
producing events of magnitude 20 early in their training process
which was responsible for the initial use of this threshold
level. The provision of appropriate supplementary audio feedback
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-21
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
devices by Dr. Isaacs was done only -when it had become clearly
apparent that the computerized audio feedback was not sensi'ive
enough, and when it was recalled that some equipment brough_ from
England could be modified to serve as supplementary feedback
units.
5.(v)(c)ADJUSTMENT TO REMOTE RA TARGET SYSTEM
The third inhibitory factor is of considerable relevance
to the future of RA studies and deserves investigation in its own
right. It was decided early in the protocol design stage that
JFKU participants and experimenters would nat be allowed into the
room'at SRI in which the Piezo-RA equipment was located once the
study had been started. This would provide security against the
possible charge by critics of subject or experimenter fraud on
the part of JFKU personnel. This condition was an essential
feature of the protocol because it protected against fraud and
allegations of fraud. In addition, the isolation of the Piezo-RA
sensor system from the acoustic noise and vibration and passible
local electrostatic and other fields which may exist in the
vicinity of personnel was also clearly essential.
However, the distancing of the Piezo-RA target system from
the individuals attempting to cause perturbations of the sensor
system is probably strongly inhibitory of effects. Within the
parapsychological literature, distancing the RA agent from the
system to be affected, especially if the target system is placed
outside the room in which the putative RA agent is located, has
been notoriously inhibitory of RA performance (Batcheldor 1984).
Batcheldor (1981) asserts that the mechanism of this inhibitory
effect is via the negative impact that distance from the RA
target has on the belief of the putative RA agent. Since for
methodological reasons, the putative RA agent must be separated
from the target system., the optimization of RA agent performance
under this condition deserves investigation.
The choice faced by the JFKU investigators was between three
alternative means of adapting trainees to the remote location of
the RA target system. Each method of dealing with the inhibitory
effects of distance on RA is associated with risk of inhibition.
One solution would be to start with the target system at a
distance, located outside the trainee's room, so that the
participant has to deal with the most inhibitory condition from
the start. This approach runs the risk that the conditions of
training might be so inhibitory as to constitute an extinction
paradigm. The extinction paradigm is a conditioning situation
where responses are never reinforced, so that the responses in
question decline in frequency to zero (Gambrill 1977). 1f the
initial conditions are so inhibitory that no RA responses are
ever generated, no opportunity for reinforcement is produced, so
that after a period under these conditions, the likelyhood of an
RA response drops to zero. On the other hand, if trainees do
manage to produce effects under this condition, the dividend is
obtained that no subsequent major change of distance is
necessary.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-22
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-0~787~OOr~3003~~1U7ni vets i ty 1987
Final Report: RA Research Activities at Jo n enn
The second option would be to start the training with the RA
target system in the same room as the trainee. This minimizes
inhibition, but at the cost of making results less certain,
because of the possibi.ity of artifactual outputs being created
by the activities of the trainer and trainee. It also only
defers the possible inhibition created by the removal of the
target system to a .location outside the room. However, the
rationale for this approach is that initial inhibition is
minimized and the trainee's belief in their RA ability is
established by experience (assuming that they are successful in
the "close" condition) prior to the distancing of the target
system.
The third option is a variant of the second option. It
would be somehow to phase the removal of the RA target system,
taking it away from the RA trainee in stages, so as to retain the
occurrence of RA effects at each step,-thus maintaining a -
positive expectation. Batcheldor hypothesizes (1984) that this
incremental grading of the difficulty of an RA task is maximally
effective in promoting RA performance. Practical difficulties
involved .in this process, and the continuing temptation of the RA
trainee/trainer pair to regress back towards a closer condition
would have made this option very difficult to execute.
The only way in which the decision regarding the imposition
of the distant-target condition could be satisfactorily motivated
would be by data derived from experimental studies investigating
the outcomes of training independent groups where the distancing
of the RA target system was performed in the three ways described
above. In the absence of these results, the decision had to be
taken on purely pragmatic grounds, and the first option, of
starting in the distant condition, was chosen. One factor
motivating t}-~is clr.cision was that since the trainees would have to
adapt to working in a different environment (SRI) from that in
which they trai~,~d, the imposition of yet another change in
conditions due t~~ removal of the target system at JFKU would have
been adding to tf;e changes in conditions. The 1986 research
cycle amply demonstrated the negative impact of frequent changes
in conditions and equipment on the performance of RA trainees.
!n retrospect it is of course easy to provide reasons to doubt
that this decision was the best one, but.in the absence of hard
data it was necessary to take it on ,the best available
information.
A possible further inhibitory condition may have been the
introduction of MSA training early on in the training process.
It is a reflection of the early stage of research in this area
that so many decisions in training procedure are unconstrained by
experimental data, and in this situation decisions have to be
taken o~z the best available information.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
n-23
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F.
5.(vi)(a)BR1EF REVIEW OF lND1VIDUAL RESULTS
Kennedy University 1987
Since the performance of trainees w~~s highly individual, the
training process of each of the participants will be briefly
reviewed. It will be recalled that the training results of each
participant are included in Appendix I1.
P_articiuant 41
This participant was the only one recruited by the 1987
screening. He started producing signals clearly outside the
noise floor in session 5 and in sessions li and 13 produced a
total of 8 signals uutside the noise l~fel. As a rethetfirstwas
then submitted to 5 sessions at SRI. Unfortunately
of this group of SRI sessions were performed prior to the
modification of the SRI RA detection system's feedback
characteristics, so that the SRI system showed no lability.
Participant 41 produced no over-threshold effects. at SRI. Since
he was observed to suffer from considerable shyness, it might be
hypothesinadtheanonhlabile1characteristics1ofotheuSR[osystem
shyness a
affected his performance.
Participant 42
This participant was retained from the 1986 research cycle, where
she had performed quite well. She had not maintained her.
practice of RA training between the 1986 roduce8clearlysove0nly
in training session 10 did she start to p roduced quite large
noise effects, and in sessions 11, 13 and 15 p erformed 4
numbers of over-noise events. She subsequently p
sessions at SR1, without producing clearly over-noise events.
Unfortunately this participant had commenced a form of employment
during the period when the SRI sessions were run which occupied
her time so much and fatigued her so severely that hzr RA
performance drastically declined and she was dropped from further
training in the 1987 cycle.
Participant 43
This participant was retained from the 1986 research cycle, where
he had produced the majority of effects recorded. On resuming RA
practice, it took until the 6th session for him to produce a
clearly over-noise event. He produced a single further over-
noise event in session 12, in the context of a rather
disappointing overall training performance. It seems likely that
this resulted from this participant's clearly stated preference
for working at SRI where the "real" experiment was conducted.
The problem of this motivational aspect of the JFKU training
phase is reviewed briefly in section 6.(i). At SRI, 43 performed
17 sessions, 11 of them conducted under the extinction paradigm
condition created by the non-labile feedback characteristics
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-24
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
which the SRI system displayed at that time. It is remarkable
that 43 then succeeded in producing some ostensibly over-noise
effects at SRI, despite the discouraging regime of null results
for 12 or so previous sessions.
Participant 44
This participant was recruited late in the course of the
experimentation. She had been the confidant of one of the
already-recruited participants and while attending one of her
trainee's training sessions, requested a short trial on the RA
instrument?'ion, to experience the training situation. She
produced :-. event well over the noise level of the system and was
immediately recruited into training where her overall performance
was dfsapppointing, since she produced no further over-noise
events. She performed 3 sessions at SRI and produced at least
one ostensibly over-noise event.
Participant 45
This participant started producing over-noise events in session 5
and produced further such events in sessions 7, 12 and 14.
Starting at session 15 she performed it sessions at SRI and was
the best performer there, in-terms of the magnitude and numbers
of her effects. She is an experienced psi practitioner and has
much experience of informal self-regulation disciplines.
Participant 46
Participant 46 claimed to have created macro-RA effects
previously and had a high PIF score. In training his performance
was almost uniformly disappointing, except for a period from
session 15 through 20. He was not selected for SRI sessions and
it was not understood why he did not achieve his apparent RA
potential.
Participant 47
Participant 47 was another trainee who had high PIF scores (she
was in fact the highest scoring PIF respondent) but did not
produce any putative RA events which were clearly above the noise
level.
Participant 48
This participant too, did not produce any clearly over-noise
events except for two very large events in her first session (of
magnitude 112 'and 113 units). She was retained in training
because of her initial performance. Her training performance has
some interest because at session 16 she was transferred to a
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-25
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
different trainer because of her poor progress. She then greatly
improved in event number production until session 24 when she and
her trainer had a severe conflict. This negatively impacted her
scaring, from which it recovered only slightly in session 30.
The difference in scoring between session 23, the last of the run
of improving scores, and session 24 and later sessions could be
hypothesised as illustrative of the effects of interpersonal
dynamics on RA production.
Participant 49
Participant 49 did not achieve the promise implied by her PIF
scores. She .~oduced no clearly over-noise events in training
and during the training period suffered various stressful
personal events in-her private life.
Participant 50
Participant SO was one of the three individuals to achieve an
over threshold event (magnitude 23) in her first RA session.
She reported the occurrence of RSPK events in her home to the
Graduate Parapsychology Program at JFKU and was consequently
recruited by contact. .She took until session 14 to start
producing event numbers which seem to exceed the noise
characteristics of the RA system. He performance improved
irregularly from then on and after her 20th JFKU-based training
session she performed 7 sessions at SRI where she produced
several ostensibly over-noise events.
5.(vi)(b)OVERALL TRAINING RESULTS
The overall results of the JFKU RA training phase, despite the
presumptively inhibitory effects of the early training
conditions, compare very favourably with the English RA training
studies. In the two formal longitudinal training studies
employing multiple subjects performed in England (Isaacs 1984) a
much lower proportion of subjects achieved an even relatively
consistent RA performance. In the first study, only one of the
five subjects achieved a satisfactory performance, and in the
second study only one of nine subjects performed similarly. [n
the currently reported work, six of the ten participants achieved
over-noise effects at JFKU and of these six, four produced
ostensible over noise events at SRI. This improvement over the
previous results may be due to the use of a larger population
from which the trainees were drawn, the elaborate multi-stage
selection procedure employed, and possible consequent superiority
of the individuals selected for training. Quite possibly the
improvements in training skills of the research personnel also
contributed to the outcome. The basic learning hypothesis - that
RA performance in selected subjects improves with practice also
seems to have been confirmed once again.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-26
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
6.(i) SRl EVALUATION SESSIONS: MOTIVATIONAL AND INHIBITORY FACTORS
The design of participant orientation Bessie.. by the
experimental group included elements specifically intended to
positively motivate participants towards the SRI sessions,
performance of which was presented as the goal of the training
phase. This treatment appeared to be very successful, since all
trainees expressed a strong desire to be selected for
participation in the SRI-based evaluation sessions. To some
extent, this motivation towards the performance of sessions at
SRI may possibly have been detrimental to maximizing performance
at JFKU. This certainly appeared to be possible for trainee 43.
Certai? inhibitory dynamics also operated with regard to the
SRI sessions. First, having to perform at a different, rather
Second, .. ._
non-familiar site could be expected t.o be infiib-itory.
for RA performance, the theoretician Batchefdor holds that
"crucial test" conditions are maximally inhibitory,- because they
minimize belief and maximize doubt and "resistance" to RA
(Batcheldor 1984). These factors may be mediated by their
effects on mood (Isaacs 1987a). Participants reported that they
felt somewhat intimidated by the alien and rather impersonal
characteristics of a professional research institute, despite the
efforts of Mr. Hubbard to provide a friendly reception.
Third, and. crucially, the SRI RA detection system's feedback
properties were such, for the first eleven sessions, that the
system showed no apparent lability, its output not seeming to
fluctuate atoll. This was interpreted by participants as the
system being "dead", rather than "alive" and responsive to their
attention, and "resistant", rather than "compliant" to their
intention to affect it. As has been described before, in the
behavioral shaping of conditioned responses, if no reinforcement
of initial responses is given, the response will be extinguished,
rather than increased in frequency (Gambril] 1977). Exposing
participants to an RA detection system which provides
insufficiently sensitive feedback to enable sensory monitoring of
the noise floor to be performed prohibits the sensory detection
of small RA responses and provides no take-off points for a
positive belief and expectation of further success.
Eleven days of experimentation were performed under this
extinction paradigm. This clearly impacted the participants who
were run under this condition, and the rest of the JFKU group of
participants and experimenters as the news of the absence of
results spread through the group. The SRI RA detection system's
feedback properties were then modified by increasing the gai;~ of
the feedback channel, making it appear labile. This was followed
by the occurrence of over-threshold events in sessions, in
increasing numbers and magnitudes. It is this author's opinion
that had the feedback properties been of the higher gain from the
start of the SR! sessions, very many more RA events would have
been recorded in the study, and their magnitude would have
increased beyond the levels produced. It was extremely
unfortunate that the SRI system's feedback properties were
incorrectly perceived as being unalterable and non-negotiable by
the JFKU personnel, as was much else of the protocol (for good
reason). This was an unfortunate communication failure which
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA P.esearch Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
probably lost the study a substantial amount of~results.
The effects of the first eleven sessions' null results were
compounded by the funding situation of the JFKU-based group,
which was dependent on success in the SRI study for it_ future
funding. This situation was highly motivating for the group, but
was conducive to stress and anxiety, particularly on the part of
the principal investigator, who, not being a US citizen, was
dependent for continued residence in the US on the flow of
research funding. Since psi-mediated experimenter effects appear
to strongly impact psychoenergetic research (White 1977, 1978>,
it seems quite likely that this situation may also have added to
the inhibitory factors at work during the SRI-based sessions. In
addition it was suspected that it must have been difficult for
the principal technical monitor of the SRI psychoenergetics
group, Mr. G. Scott Hubbard, to maintain a positive attitude,
both. because of the well known doubt of the existence of RA
present in the SRI group, and because of the period of eleven
days of running participants prior to the obtaining of results
and consequent recording of fewer events than were expected.
This too could have produced an experimenter effect of reducing
the numbers and magnitude of putative RA events recorded.
What is remarkable is that so many of the participants who
performed at SRI during the non-labile period of the RA detection
system's feedback still managed to achieve over-threshold results
on the device in sessions after the eleventh. The occurrence of
the first over-threshold event significantly affected the
participants, en~:~ouraging a belief that it-was possible to
succeed at the task, a belief which Batchel.dor takes to be
crucial to the occurrence of RA in experimental settings
(Batchelder 1984.
6.(ii) 1NSTRUMc.NTAL CONSIDERATfONS
In the evaluation of the results of the control runs performed at
SRI, there is a concern which arises as a result of the
inspection of JFKU control run data for system 1. The concern is
that since all of the data from the SRI sessions, including
control runs, was collected by means of an FM tape recorder, it
is crucial that the tape recorder's rejection of electrical
transients occurring in the electricity mains should be good.
The algorithm which will be used in the evaluation of the
results will be that the largest magnitude noise signal occurring
in the control runs in the absence of above-noise signals
occurring in any of the environmental monitoring channels will be
taken as a criterion level. Putative RA events occurring in
experimental sessions will be compared to a magnitude equivalent
to 1.5 times the criterion level. RA events occurring in the
experimental sessions with a magnitude of 1.5 times the criterion
level and above, in the absence of above-noise signals in any of
the environmental monitoring channels, will be considered as
genuine events. The occurrence of four or more such events will
be considered as good evidence for the Piezo-RA effect.
The FM tape recorder's immunity from mains-born electrical
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: C,IA-RDP9~-0~787~200~30030~00 7 .
Final Report: RA Research Activities at o n enne y niversity 1987
interference is clearly crucial to the proper conduct of this
experiment. If a single, extremely rare occurrence of electrical
interference should create a singly- large signal in one of the
control runs, under the algorithm used for evaluation of the
results, this could cause the RA results in the experimental
sessions, which may not be comparable in size, to be considered
null. The relative length of the control runs compared to the
experimental sessions may render the occurrence of such an event
as more probable in a control run than in an experimental
session, so that the interference rejection characteristics of
the FM tape recorder are of crucial important to the results, it
is to be hoped that this feature of the tape recorder's
performance will have been carefully checked.
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the results of the 1987 training phase, the selection
process appeared to function quite well, implying that the
components of the selection process are effective. The selection
process could be improved further, possibly by the addition of
more psychometric measures, especially of neuroticism and
extraversion, since these appear to affect ESP performance
significantly and this effect may carry over far RA training
(Palmer 1978).
There were slight but definite indications that two trainee
populations may exist; one having a "psychic practitioner"
profile, the otr having a "RSPK" profile. This has several
implications, or'.. being that individuals reporting RSPK events
should be recruited as RA trainees for evaluation, another being
that some form or extra sorting procedure for splitting a
population having the "practitioner" profile into RA-capable and
non-capable groups could usefully be developed. In this
connection it is interesting to observe that all of the
participants who were successful at producing over-threshold
events at SRI had earlier produced over-noise events within six
training sessions or fewer at JFKU, suggesting that it may be
useful to utilize evaluation series of sessions of some six
sessions length and then deselect participants who show no over-
noise events by the sixth session, replacing them with fresh
trainees.
Several factors were encountered which are strongly
suspected of being inhibitory. These may have considerably
impacted trainees' RA performance by introducing inhibition in
the early stages of training. The first was the initial use at
JFKU of a feedback .threshold for registering events which was too
far above the system noise level to provide the encouraging
recording of events which are in fact driven by noise, or in
which the noise which has been slightly incremented by RA. This
is the feedback-lability requirement for the successful "shaping"
of RA responses, referred to earlier in .section S(v>(b). The
second is the use of audio feedback which did not at first, but
should, make the noise floor accessible to sensory
discrimination. The third is the problem of the distancing of
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 _~IA -RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
the RA target from the putative RA agent, unavoi~able for
methodological reasons, but which should be investigated so as to
constrain training decisions regarding target system placement on
the basis of experimental evidence. The fourth was `_he probably
inad~~isable timing of mental skills training, which was seemingly
admi:;istered at the wrong stage of training, although the
decision as to when these skills should be taught in the process
of RA training is a difficult one to constrain in the absence of
the p? per studies. Finally, the SRI RA detection system's
feedb::..k was insufficiently labile for the first eleven sessions,
as described above in section 6.(i).
Nevertheless, the RA training hypothesis appears to have,
been confirmed again, since the scores of trainees who produced
over-noise events were concentrated in the latter portions of
their training process. Apparently showing a reversal of this
trend, however, three individuals produced events of over-noise
magnitude in their first session. One participant produced no
further over-noise RA events after the two she produced in her
first training session. Perhaps the "first time" motivation
factor is an important datum indicating that novelty and high
motivation are possibly important elements in RA performance.
This implies that motivational techniques may have fruitful
application in RA training.
The stress of working in a "reward by results" research
environment was felt by all members of the JFKU research team and
may have negatively impacted results, because of the anxiety it
produced. It was :ade clear that refunding for the 19$7/88
research cycle depended on the results from the present cycle.
The experimenter and participant group showed striking resilience
and good morale in the context of this uncertain and stressful
research environment, and achieved over-threshold and ostensibly
over-noise results under very tightly control-led conditions at
SR1.
The subsequent cut in .funding of the SRI psychoenergetics
group has made certain the non-refunding of RA training research
from this source. The study of psychoenergetics needs to be put
onto an assured, stable basis, since no long term research of
magnitude can be based on unstable funding resources. It should
be pointed out that the SRI psychoenergetics group has an
excellent standing within their peer group of professional
researchers in psychoenergetics, and a reduction in their funding
must be very impactful to their efforts. Psychoenergetics
research could lead to important discoveries in physics,
particularly from RA inquiry, and the current instability of
funding will slow the development of better RA target systems,
training procedures and development of possible applications.
Although the identity of the funding source for the SRI
RA psychoenergetics research is not publicly known, it is obvious
that public domain research of this kind must be subject to
monitoring. by the defence community. It is a somewhat bleak
consolation to the JFKU research team to think that the cessation
of this line of research at SRI will probably delay the
development of RA training for destructive military purposes,
since the JFKU team is-the only group known to be currently in
existence which is pursuing the kind of RA investigations which
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-30
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Final Report: RA Research Activities at John F. Kennedy University 1987
may possibly lead to applications of RA for non-monitorable
signaling, systems control and other purposes.,
.~~anks are due to. the members of the John F. Kennedy
University Remote Action Project research team, Dr. Ruthann
Corwin, Martha Mikava M.S., Diane Moore and Jo-Ann Jones. The
research team performed a demanding and difficult job in
connection with the activities reported here, and did so with
great skill, dedication, professionalism and understanding.
Finally, (unsolicited) tribute must be paid to Mr. Hubbard,
technical project monitor, who performed a difficult and complex
function in collaboration with the JFKU group of researchers.
Nis professionalism, thoroughness and competence, as well as his
positive personal qualities were extremely valuable and greatly
appreciated in the research which is reported here.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
REFERENCES
Batcheldor, K., J.(1981). Personal Communication, Exeter, Great
Britain.
Batcheldor, K., J.(1984). Contributions to the Theory of PK
Induction from Sittter-Group Work. Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research, 78, 2, 105
- 122.
Gambrill, E.D.(1977_). Behavior Modification: Handbook of
Assessment, Intervention, and Evaluation. Jossey-
Bass, San Francisco & Washington.
Isaacs, J.(1981). A Mass Screening Technique for Locating PKMB
Agents. Psychoenergetic Systems, 4, 125 - 158.
Isaacs, J.(1984). Some Aspects of Performance at a Psychokinetic
Task, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Aston in Birmingham, Birmingham, England.
Isaacs, J.(1986a). Final Report: JFKU Remote Action Research
Activities 1986. Report submitted to SRI
International.
Isaacs, J.(1986b>. Directly Detectable Psychokinetic Effects: A New
Category of Psychokinesis. Paper presented at 1986
Parapsychological Foundation Conference,
Parapsychology and Human Nature, i~- Press.
Isaacs, J.(1987a). Clinical Issues in the Parapsychology
Laboratory. Paper presented at 1987 Parapsychology
Foundation Conference, Spontaneous Psi, Depth
Psychology and Parapsychology, Berkeley, California.
Isaacs, J.(1987b). 1987 Proposed Remote Action Project Research
Activities: Project Description. Submitted to the
Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects, John
F. Kennedy University.
Palmer, J.(1978>. Extrasensory Perception: Research Findings. in
Advances in Parapsychological Research, (Ed.)
Stanley Krippner, New York: plenum Press, 59 - 243.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-32
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
REFERENCES (CONTINUED)
Straub, W.F.(1980). !d.) Sport Psychology: An Analysis of
Athlete Behavior. Ithaca, New York: Mouvement
Publications.
White, R. A.(1976). The Limits of Experimenter influence of Psi
Test Results: Can Any Be Set ? Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research, 70, 333 -
369.
White, R. A.(1977). The Influence of Experimenter Motivation,
Attitudes, and Methods of Handling Subjects on Psi
Test Results. In Handbook of Parapsychology, (Ed.)
B. Wolman, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Williams, J.M.(1986>. (Ed.) Applied Sport Psychology. Palo Alto,
California: Mayfield Publishing Co.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-33
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
APPENDIX I
SYSTEM ONE CONTROL RUNS
RUN
THRESH
DURATION
EVENT MAGNITUDES
N0.
2
3
4 5 6 7 8 9
1
5/300
14h Om
2
5/300
19h 16m
7
5/300
23h SOm
_8
5/300
14h.36m
?._
9
3/300
15h Om
10
5/300
15h Om
li
1/300
14h 17m
12
1/300
5h ZSm 4
1
13
1/300
7h 21m
14
1/300
4h 14m
15
1/300
8h 26m
16
1/300
23h 33m
1
1 ]
17
1/300
20h 11m 1
1
18
1/300
10h 29m 1
1 1
19
1/300
30h
lm
3
20
1/300
24h
Sm
3
21
1/300
28h
7m
4
1
22
1/300
19h 40m 3
2
23
1/300?
26h
17m
2
24
1/300
23h 22m
2
Each control run occupies one row. Figures listed under the
event magnitude figures heading the columns are the numbers of
events of the integral magnitudes recorded in each control run.
Durations are given in hours (h) and minutes (m). An explanation
of the threshold figures is given at the beginning of Appendix
11.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-34'
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Each control run occupies one row. Figures listed under the
event magnitude figures heading the columns are the numbers of
events of the integral magnitudes recorded in each control run.
C~~rations are given in hours (h) and minutes (m). An explanation
of the threshold figures is given at the beginning of Appendix
I1.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-35
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
RA TRAINING SESSION-DATA
The results are given separately, one page or more for each
trainee. The scores achieved in the RA training sessions are
tabulated in rows. Each session occupies one row. Session data
is scored with respect to two parameters, magnitude and event
number.
The first parameter, magnitude, represents the peak signal
of each event detected by the RA detection system. Magnitude
scores are expressed in integer units (counts of the analog to
digital (A/D) converter). One count is equivalent to
approximately 2.5 mV (410 A/D counts per volt). For scares of
magnitude 3 through 10,-for each magnitude integer specified at
the top of a column, the number of events of that magnitude
occurring in the session are entered into the appropriate column.
Session scores of zero occurrences of events of any particL:lar
magnitude are represented by spaces in the column where the
number of events of that magnitude would be entered. Null
sessions therefore have no associated scores. Scores in the
"over 10" section are given individually in parentheses, thus, (i
x 12), with the number of events of each magnitude given first,
e. g. (1 x 29) being the occurrence of one event of magnitude 29
units, (3 x 14) would represent 3 events each of magnitude 14.
The legend "Bess. No." is the session number. "RA Syst." is
the identity of the RA detection system used (systems 1 or 2).
"Thr. Set." are the values of the two feedback threshold settings.
The instrumentation incorporated two software selectable
thresholds. The lower threshold was the criterion for entry of
data into the printed record generated by the RA detection
system. The upper threshold defined the signal level which
activated the highest discrete feedback state, leading to
generation of the highest pitched feedback tone and activation of
the highest value feedback light. The first figure of the two
figures under "-Thr. Set." represents the lower threshold, the
second figure is the higher threshold, i.e. figures of 5/300
would represent a lower threshold of 5 and an upper threshold of
300. Scores were recorded by the system for all signals 1 or
more units above the lower threshold setting, i. e. a threshold
setting of 5 would permit scores of 6 or more to be recorded.
Due to the difference in system noise characteristics
b=tween RA detection system 1 and 2, the threshold settings were
generally set at different levels on system.i from system 2. It
should be noted from the control run data (APPENDIX I) that
system 1 noise signals seldom exceeded 2 units,- whereas system 2
frequently produced noise signals of 6 units. The largest noise
signal recorded on either device in control runs was 9 units.
Sessions attended at SRI are labelled "SRI SESSION" and
sores are not given for these sessions.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-36
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Sess. RA Thr. Scores tin A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 ? 8 9 10 Scores Over 10
1 1 20/.300
2 2 5/50
3 2 5/50
4 1 5/50
5 1 5/100
6 1 5/100
7 2 5/12
8 1 5/12
9 1 5/12
10 1 5/12
11 1 5/12
12 1 5/12
13 1 5/12
14 SRI SESSION
15 1 3/12 9 4 1 4 9
16 SRI SESSION
17 1 3/12
18 SRI SESSION
19 SRI SESSION
20 SRI SESSION
21 1 1/7
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: G~A3~DP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Suss. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Scores Over 10
1
1
20/300
2
1
20/300
3
2
20/300
4
2
20/300
5
2 .
20/300
-
6
2
6/40
3
1
7
1
5/20
8
2
4/2a
2
9
2
5/20
4
3
10
2
5/20
11
4
5
2 1
11
1
3/14
10
1
4
1
12
2
3/14.
3
4
1
13
1
3/64
7
2
1
14
2
5/64
2
4
15
1
3/64
3
3
2
1
16
2
5/20
17
- 20 SR1
SESSIONS
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA8RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
RA TRAINEE SES310N DATA
Approved For Release 2002/11/18.AC~i~-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
PARTICIPANT: 44
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 Scores Over 10
0 2 5/10
1 2 5/300
2 2 5/300
3 2 5/300
4 2 5/300
5 2 5/300
6 2 5/300
7 2 5/10
8 2 5/10
9 2 3/10 +~* 23 4
10 2 3/10 *~ 6
11 - 13 SRI SESSIONS
* 44 was a "guest" in a session run for trainee #49 when she obtained this
score
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :~~-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Se t_. 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 Scores Over 10
1
1
20/300
2
1
10/30
3
2
5/15
4
1
5/50
5
1
5/100
6
2
5/100
~
1
5/12
8
2
5/12
9
2
5/12
10
1
S/12
11
2
5/12
12
1
5/12
13
1
5/12
14
1
5/12
15
SRI
SESSION
15
1
5/12
17
SRI
SESSION
18
1
5/12
19
SRI
SESSION
20
2
5/12
21
SRI
SESSION
22
SR1
SESSION
23
- 28
SR1 SESSIONS
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 : ~Ti~~RDP96-00787800030030000.1-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 SO Scores Over 10
1 2 20/300
2 2 5/11 4 2
3 2 6/11
4 2 5/11
5 2 5/11 4 1
6 2 5/11 4 8
7 2 5/11 1
8 2 SJil 10 6
9 2 3/11 108 29
10 2 5/11 2 6
li 2 5/11 3 1
12 2 5/11
13 2 4/11 30 S
14 1 3/11
15 1 3/11 6 3
16 1 3/11 5 2
17 1 3/11 1
18 1 2/11 3
19 1 2/11 ': 4 1
20 1 3/11 14 4
21 1 3/11
22 1 3/ii
23 1 3/11-
24 1 3/11
A-42
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 : CIA~2D~96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
A-44
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
RA TRAINEE SESSION DATA
PARTICIPANT: 48 (Continued)
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Scores Over 1C
25 2 5/300 7 3
26 2 5/300 6 4
27 2 5/300 4 6 1
28 2 5/300 4 3
29 2 5/300 3 2
30 2 5/300 11 2
31 2 5/10 4 4
33 1 5/10
A-45
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 . Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-00787R00030030U001-7
RA TRAINEE SESSION DATA
PARTICIPANT: 49
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts) 10 Scores Over iC
No. Syst Set, 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 1 20/300
2 2 5/300 11 4 1
3 2 6/15
4 2 5/15 8 1
5 2 S/20 i
6 2 5/10 2 1
7 2 x/20 3 2
8 2 5/20
9 1 5/20
SO 2 5/12 3 8
it 2 5/14 8 6
12 2 5/20 6 2 .
13 2 5/12 1 1
14 2 5/13 14 6 1
15 2 5/12 11 1? 2
!6 2 5/15 10 4
17 1 2/10 19 5
16 2 5/12 21 7 3
i9 2 5/12 3 4 i
20 2 5/12 17 9 .
21 2 3/20 6
22 2 4/12 10
23 1 2/16
24 1 1/10
A-46
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
RA TRAINEE SESSION DATA
Sess. RA Thr. Scores (in A/D counts)
No. Syst Set. 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 Scores Over 10
1 2 20/300
2 2 5/11 2 3
3 2 5/11
4 2 5/il 1
5 2 5/11
6 2 5/11 1 3
7 2 5/11 3 1
8 2 5/11 1 1
0 2 5/11 8 6 1
10 2 5/11 4 3
?1 :! 5/11
1~ 2 5/11 3 3
13 2 5/11 3 1
la 2 5/11 7 8
15 1 3/11 8 3
16 1 3/11 7 3 1
17 1 3/11
18 1 2/11 1300 134 11
19 1 2/11
20 1 2/11
'~1 - 29 SRI SESSIONS
(1 x 23)
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
APPENDIX 1I1: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM
Thank you very much for aiding our study ! Please answer all the questions
on the top half of this page and on the other pages now. Your answers are
strictly voluntary and will be kept confidential - no information you have
given will be released without your written permission. If you have any
questions, please feel free to ask.
Phone Number(s)
31. If you are unsure whether to answer the question below "yes", please
answer this question after you have heard the presentation, and
participated in the remote actien session. Please don't forget to answer.
May we have your permission to contact you regarding participation
in the Remote Action Project or other parapsychology studies
at John F. Kennedy University? YES _ ,,NO
Please Indicate your Availability
NOW TURN OVER THE PAGE AND PLEASE CONTINUE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS
-------------------------------------------------
ANSWER THIS SECTION AFTER THE METAL-BENDING AND REMOTE ACTION SESSIONS
Please check the appropriate answers.
NO YES
Did you bend any cutlery ? ,-..
If yes, how much physical force did you have to use to make it bend ?
Great Moderate Little None
Did you experience any of the following while bending ?
Metal getting hot ? Suddeness of bend ? Metal going soft ? _
Feelings of bodily heat ? Tingling in hands or body ?
Was your attention on the metal when it happened ? On Off
What was your mental state when the bending occurred ?
? Distracted ? Concentrating ? Dther
Laughing
--------------TO BE FILLED ?0 UT BY THE EXPERIMENTER-------------------'----
Screening: Screener: Referral/Other:
Machine No. Macro Events
Machine Results
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Intuitive Hit/Impressians:
HAVE YOU EVER. EXPERIENCED ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PHENOMENA ?
If "NO", place a check mark on the line under "no":
if "YES", please circle how often:
1 equals 'once',
2 equals 'more than once, several times', or
3 equals 'often, frequently'.
1. Have you ever tried to do anything physical with the power
of your mind?
2. Have you ever had raps, bangs, footsteps, or other unusual
noises occur ?
3. Have you had doors or windows open or close, or lights
turn on or off without physical cause ?
4. Have ,vou ever had objects disappear or appear in new
places when you were certain of their location or have you
ever felt that they moved without physical cause?
5. Does normally functioning equipment occasionally fail to
operate for you or does malfunctioning equipment work
unexpected., for you ? .
6. Have clocks or watches stopped or changed speed,or have
metal objects bent without physical force in your
presence ?
f It that ou had received information about
7. Have you ever e Y
a person or event from touching an object ? 1 2 3
8. Have you ever had an unusual strength experience ? 1 2 3
9. Have you ever had any of the following experiences while
awake: The feeling or thought that an unexpected event a)
had happened, b) was happening, or c) was going to happen
- and later learned that you were right ?
10. Have you ever felt that you received information about
something which happened before, during, or after a dream
which you did not know about or did not expect at the time
of the dream ? (veridical dream, symbolic dream)
il. Have you ever had an experience while awake in which you
felt you were located outside of or away from your
p~:ys i ca l body ?
12. Have you ever felt you f~ave seen a location or event at a
distance ?
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
13. Have you ever had, while awake, a vivid impression of
seeing or being touched by another being, or a sensation
of cold, which you felt was not due to any external
physical or natural cause ?
4 H ver racticed or felt that you have benefitted~
u e
p
1 ave yo
from spiritual or psychic healing ? 1 2 3
15. Have you had an experience when you were thought to be
dead and them came back to life, and had memories of
experiences such as voices,-light, other beings ?
16. Have you ever experienced unusual ectasy,"oneness with
nature", or the phenomenon of ^unity" ?
17. Have you had any other unusual experiences you feel might
be of interest to us ? Please briefly mention the type:
Please circle the numbers on the scale, from 1 equals 'Definitely No' to 5
equals 'Definitely Yes', that best represents your answers to the two
questions:
Definitely Definitely
No Yes
18. Do you think its possible to affect 1 2 3 4 5
physical objects without 'touching them ?
19. Do you think that you can affect 1 2 3 4 5
physical objects without touching them?
20. Please check the mental techniques which you have used, if any:
affirmations concentration meditation biofeedback
relaxation visualization hypnosis or self-hypnosis
yoga bodywork therapy psychotherapy or counseling
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
21. In what sport, dance, or martial art do you actively participate,
if any:
22. To which religion do you feel closest?
23. Date of Birth (Month, Day, Year) 24. Sex M
25. Place of Birth
26. Native language if not English
27. Occupation 28. Education
29. Marital Status-
30. Have you ever been involved as a participant or experimenter in a
research project? No Yes. Please briefly mention the type:
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP IN TELLING US ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCES !
P1F1 Version 3, 7/10/8h
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
APPENDIX IV: PRELIMINARY ORIENTATION WORKSHOP
REMOTE ACTION INTROilUCTORY WORKSHOP
RECORDS AND NOTES
FEBRUARY 20TH & 21ST 1987
NAME:
THE REMOTE ACTION PROJECT
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
REMOTE ACTION PROJECT INTRODUCTORY WORKSHOP
Fridav 7:30PM'- IOPM
I. Introduction to the Remote Action Project
a. Meet the research team
b. Introduction to the RA project (Julian Isaacs)
I1. Sharing of Psychic Experiences (Ruth Corwin)
a. Self-introduction by participants and sharing of PK/psi
experiences.
b. Sharing goals about the Remote Action Pro3ect (RAP>.
III. Self-evaluation questionnaire. (Martha Mikova)
' Break
IV. Dyad I
a. Explanation and role modeling
b. Dyad Exchange
c. Participants to take notes on key issues
d. Discussion of dyad
Saturday 9:30AM - 4PM
1. Opening (Chris Rossi>
]I. Manifestation discussion (Julian Isaacs)
III. Introducing the Strain Gauge Equipment
(Diane Moore, Jo Ann Jones>
a. Introduction
b. Strategies
c. 5 minute Practice Sessions & Break
(total 20 minutes for practice session)
d. Group Discussion
IV. Dyad II
a. D,vad
b. Participants to list key issues regarding Dyad
c. Discussion / Whole Group
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
V. Piezo Equipment (?Julian Isaacs)
a. Practice Sessions I:1 (Jo Ann Jones)
6. Strategies / Open Discussion
(Martha Mikova, Ruth Corwin, and Diane Moore)
VI. Dyad III/Co-Counselling Exercises: Challenges & Strengths
a. Dyad: Challenges
b. Participants pate key issues.
c. Explanation of co-counseling (Julian Isaacs)
d. Co-counselling Session: Strengths
e. Discussion of above exercises
VII. Closing
VIII. Evaluation Comments:
PK RESEARCH GROUP: MISSION STATEMENT
The PK Research Group's mission is to:
(i) Promote the spiritual, psychological, psychic,
intellectual, and financial, growth and wellbeing of its
members, and of the individuals who participate in the
group's research.
(ii) Pursue a deeper understanding of reality.
(iii) Promote high quality, imaginative, spiritually informed,
and pioneering, research into psychic functioning, by the
group and its individual members, with an emphasis on the
study of mind/matter interactions.
(iv)
Promote the understanding and acceptance of, psychic
functioning, within the academic community and generally
within Western culture.
(v)
Promote the beneficial and fulfilling development of
the
psychokinetic abilities of individuals participating
the group's researches.
in
(vi)
Promote the development of applications of psychokinetic
ability which meet real needs and which are positive and
life-enhancing.
F1RST DYAD: PERSONAL PSYCHOKINESIS GOALS
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
NOTES DN RESPONSES EVOKED BY DYAD:
DREAM SETUP: DREAM GOALS
SHARING DREAM EXPERIENCES: NOTES ON DREAM EXPERIENCE AND
INTERPRETATION DYAD
PRACTICE SESSION ONE
Before the Practice Session
How confident do you feel right now that you can affect the
instrumentation ?
Low Nigh
HOW DO t FEEL ABOUT THE PRACTICE SESSION ~
After the Practice Session
SCORE:
COMMENTS:
Approved For Release 2002/11/1.8: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
DYAD TWO: ATTITUDES TOWARDS MANIFESTING PSYCHOKINESIS
NOTES ON RESPONSES EVOKED BY DYAD: KEY ISSUES
PIEZO EQUIPMENT PRACTICE SESSION
PLEASE CHECK ONE RESPONSE
How confident do you feel right now that you can affect the
instrumentation ?
Low High
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
WHAT DID ! LEARN FROM THE SESSION ?
THIRD DYAD: CHALLENGES IN MANIFESTING PSYCHOKINESIS
TELL ME WHAT CHALLENGES YOU ARE LIKELY TO ENCOUNTER
IN MANIFESTING PSYCHOKINESIS
NOTES ON RESPONSES TO THIRD DYAD
FOURTH DYAD: STRENGTHS I BRING TO MANIFESTING PSYCHOKINESIS
TELL ME WHAT STRENGTHS YOU BRING TO THE MANIFESTATION OF
NOTES ON RESPONSES TO FOURTH DYAD
A=57
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
WORKSHOP EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
1. How well did you meet your personal psychokinesis goal(s) ?
2. How do you feel about what you have learned of
your psychokinesis ability ?
3. Evaluation of some of the components of the workshop:
Please circle 1, 2 or 3 where 1 represents "of high
value to
me
personally in helping me develop my PK ability", 2,
"of moderate
value..." 3, "of low value.." for each of the items below:
Meeting & Sharing Experiences
1
2
3
Dyad One
1
2
3
Dream Setup and Recall
1
2
~
Dyad Two
1
2
3
Dyad Three
1
2
3
Talk: Approaches to Manifesting Remote Action
1
2
3
5. Please give some comments about the instrumentation and how
you related to the machine(s).
6. Please suggest any improvements which could be made to the
introduction to the machines or to the practice sessions.
7. Please note any comments on the psychic experiences
questionnaire, the belief questions or this booklet as a
whole.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
S What personal strategies did you find most effective for
obtaining PK ?
9. Please share any comments on the workshop components listed
in Question 3, or any other general comments regarding
the workshop.
10. Please give any comments on the workshop leaders which you
would like to share
Workshop Booklet 2. 2-20-87.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
APPENDIX V: MENTAL SKILLS ACQUISITION WORKBOOK
****~***
PSYCHOKINESIS SKILLS WORKBOOK I
**~****~
BASED ON APPROACHES USED IN
THE REMOTE ACTION TRAINING PROJECT
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF DR. JULIAN ISAACS
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
ORINDA, CALIFORNIA
WRITTEN BY DR. RUTHANN CORWIN
WITH DR. JULIAN ISAACS, MARTHA M. MIKOVA,
DIANNE MOORS, AND JOANN JONES
REMOTE ACTION PROJECT
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES, JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
A-6U
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
WORKBOOK FOR MENTAL SKILLS ACQUISITION SESSIONS
SESSION ONE
Participant Consent Form Signed
Participant:
Trainer/Experimeter:
Date:
Beginning Self-Evaluation Questionnaire completed
I. Discussion of Motivation, Goals, and Rewards (about half an hour)
A. Discussion of personal goals:
1. What are your major life goals?
2. How does participation in the Remote Action Project
and exploring your psychokinesis abilities fit into
your major life values?
B. Review of experimental goals
1. General experimental goals:
a. Physicist demonstrations
b. Proof of PK learning
c. Methodological exploration
d. Piloting mental skills techniques
2. Session experimental goals for each individual:
PK performance learning and improvement over sessions
1) Threshold concept in DDPK sensors
(Directly Detectable PK)
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
2) Session performance goals:
a) Building number of effects over
threshold per session - note that Julian's
participants in England went from 1 event/
session...2..3...10...20!!
b) Increasing the magnitude of your
largest effect - 10...20...100...1000
...2000! (Max)
3) Formal project goals:
a) One event over 10 in the first three
sessions
b) Three events per session of 20 or over (or
the equivalent) to go to SRI...
c> At SRI....go for it!
4) Informal project goals:
Twenty events per session or magnitudes in
the 1000's by the 20th session......
3.What will be your personal goals for how you are
going to surpass the formal goals of the experiment?
What goals specific to the project do you want to set
for yourself?
4. ]ndicate your first decisions about goals per session
on this outline of the project calendar...
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
C. Discuss your kinds of rewards.
1. Questions to think about:
a. What forms of achievement are really rewarding
for you?
b. Are thefrom achievement experiences
for you that can be applied to PK production?
c. What symbolic rewards do you like? (ie certificates,
medallions. etc.)
d. What social rewards do you like?
e. What material rewards do you currently give
yourself?
f. What do you consider as luxury items? as enjoyable
activities?
g. What do you use for yourself as statements that
express self-satisfaction?.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
2. Please check these suggestions from discussions so far
Intrinsic rewards
Meeting personal goai_., pride of achievement
Improved personal control over or better
relationship with your psychic functioning
Personal growth and development, self-exploration
Self-management, self-regulatory ability
Improving performance ability
Improving coping skills for daily life situations
and for specific task demands
Service, benefit to others
Increased knowledge
Opportunity for group activities, lectures, etc.
Sharing with confidante, others in group
Meeting others with like interests
Others (please specify)
Extrinsic rewards
'eedback from equipment that you're succeeding
Positive feedback and regard from training group
Confidante support
X10 success rewards from project for achieving
each of the two formal project goals - you can
take as lunch with your confidante, a book, etc.
Payment for sessions at SRI
Others (please specify)
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
11. Releasing Problems or Clearing - Introduction and Practice.
(about half an hour)
A. Why bringing up and letting go of problems is important.
1. Discussion of changing state to do PK work.
2. Amount depends on your individual needs, methods.
3. Releasing or clearing lets go of present state,
other strategies allow-you to go into PK-producing
state ("eliciting strategies", more later)
4. Relation to coping strategies - more later.
5. Selecting techniques of clearing,~coping, or rehearsal
to use during first half hour of each session.
6. Role of experimenter as trainer to aid and support
in this process.
Notes on your initial feelings about what you might need:
B. Use of State Self-Evaluation Questionnaire, (optional Shealy
life stress evaluation).
C. Methods to discuss and try (after each, space is left for your
reactions to these approaches, and which you use or would like
to try.)
1. Talking techniques with your trainer:
a. Informal review - talk aver state questionnaire
responses, talking about how you are doing,
what's happening in your lift, important events or
changes, or any problems happening for you.
Notes on current issues:
b. Problem-solving approach, coming up with solutions
1) Identifying problems, accepting them as norma
2) Generating alternatives, strategies
3) Evaluating strategies
4) Generating and deciding on specific tactics
Continue problem-solving after the session:
5) Acting and assessing effectiveness of action.
(assessment can be done next session).
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
c. Using the speaker-witness dyad approach to an
issue framed as a question. This approach
involves one person in 'higher self' as neutral
witness repeating the question, the other repl; :g
No touching or reply is involved, ;just listening.
Each thanks the other and switches roles for
several repetitions, trying to come closer to what
is important for them in the question each time.
Possible dyad questions:
d. Co-counseling on problems.. 1n co-counselinortive
listener role is not neutral, but very supp
and affirming. The approach is cathartic, I~croking
for discharging emotion locked into neurotic or
compulsive behavior. 'What would you like to work
with today?' is the initial question. Each indi-
vidual is responsible for his own direction; the
counselor aids in the discharge by asking such
things as 'How do you feel about...? some aspect
that the client appears to be blocked on, and by
having the client repeat affirmations around such
emotions or situations.
Notes on topics to work on:
2. Practice in letting go of mental or emotional
problems or physical discomforts:
a. Accepting, acknowledging problems as having
something to teach us.
b. Affirmations, positive thoughts about self and
ability to cope.
c. Seeing or defining yourself as separate from your
problems.
d. Setting problems aside, making a separate time and
space for this PK work.
e. Redirecting your attention, focusing on alternativ
activities, tasks.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
3. Relaxation techniques
a. Goal of relaxation with alertness
b. Relaxing body parts in stages
c. Relaxation with breath
d. Self-hypnosis, self-suggestion
ie Cindy Seigal's tapes
e. Listening to music
f. Active relaxation techniques such as
physical or mental activities, refocusing energy
1) Frisbee, boomerang, ping-pong
2) PK-related toys or games
3) Exercise, stretching, Tai Chi movements, etc.
4. Meditation techniques
a. Focusing on breath/pause between breaths
b. Observing thoughts without following them
c. Focusing on the space between thoughts
d. Concentration (one-pointed) upon:
i) an object - real or imagined
2) physical sensations in-your body
3) mantra or affirmation
e. Mindfulness - non-specific awareness
f. Other...
5. Visualization techniques
a. Using nine breaths, inhaling five colors of light,
exhale greyish smoke of negativities
(Tibetan, from Ruth)
b. Creative Visualization color breathing (Wendy)
c. Guided imagery such as "Cleaning the Rooms of
Perception" (Houston)
d. Purification prayers
e. Other
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
6. Shamanic techniques to find clearing methods
that work for you (also for PK eliciting methods)
a. Going on a seeking journey
b. Contacting your inner guide/wi dom
c. Asking for clearing technique, or method of
requesting permission or opening session
that will be effective for you
d. Dreaming answer - hold question in mind .before
falling asleep and seeing if a dream brings
an answer
Reading suggestions:
Herbert Benson The Relaxation Response
Shakti Gawaine Creative Visualization
Jean Houston The Possible Human
Michael Harner The Way of the Shaman
Larry LeShan How to Meditate
Mike and Nancy Samuels Seeing with the Mind's Eye
Many others:
Second Self-Evaluation Questionnaire completed
III. Practice PK session
A. Second Self-Evaluation Questionaire completed
B. PK Session (15 minute maximum>.
C. Comments on results, what happened for you:
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
' IV. Coping Strategies - Introduction (fifteen minutes).
A. Importance for performance anxiety and fear of success.
1. Awareness of responses to anxiety
a. Body responses
b. Mind responses
2. General anxiety or fear issues.
3. Situation-dependent anxiety or fear issues.
B. Discussion of importance of these for you.
1. Your feelings about:
a. Performance anxiety
b. Fear of success
c. Fears around use of PK
d. Other personal anxieties that might affect
PK performance, effectiveness.
2.~Use of anxiety hierarchy or quQStionnaire
for more definition.
Notes (which to focus on for next session):
C. Review list of strategies trainer can help you with:
1. Talking it out
2. New information
3. Desensitization
4. Breathing and deep relaxation techniques
5. Physical exercise, movement
6. Modelling and self-modelling, rehearsal
7. Speaker-witness dyad or co-counseling exchange
8. Stress inoculation and self-management
handout - review for next session.
Notes (which interested in working with next session?):
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
~*~***~~
PSYCHOKINESIS SKILLS WORKBOOK 11
~****~~~
BASED ON APPROACHES USED IN
THE REMOTE ACTION TRAINING PROJECT
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF DR. JULIAN ISAACS
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
ORINDA, CALIFORNIA
WRITTEN BY DR. RUTHANN CORWIN
WITH DR. JULIAN ISAACS, MARTHA M. MIKOVA,
DIANNE MOORS, AND JOANN JONES
REMOTE ACTION PROJECT
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES, JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
A- 70
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
WORKBOOK FOR MENTAL SKILLS ACQUISITION SESSIONS
SESSION TWO
Participant:
Trainer/Experimeter:
Date:
Beginning Self-Evaluation Questionnaire completed
Depending on what you feel you need or could use, and what your trainer-
experimenter suggests, split the time between coping strategies and
eliciting strategies, and a 15 minute PK trial (with second self-evaluation
questionnaire completed).
1. Coping Strategies - Review and Practice.
A. Review Julian's lists of helpful and non-helpful factors
in PK production.
1. Helpful factors:
a. Feeling good, having money in the bank or
a good -,job, having good events in your life,
a general lack of anxiety.
b. Confidence, expecting to be successful, belief.
c. Motivation, connection of PK with meaning in
your life, PK task mattering at a fundamental
level for you.
d. Rested, feeling well.
e. Relaxation (not low arousal) with alertness.
f. Supportive strategies for eliciting PK.
i) Those which suggest PK to the sub-
conscious,
2) which suggest power,
3) and/or which suggest support, as a
guide, channel for energy, earth
energy, unconscious or higher mind.
4) Release on the egocentric level,
intention and surrender: you must
really want it to happen and you don't
'try' at all.
Notes on your strengths:
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
2. Non--:elpful factors:
a. Fatigue, illness.
b. Severe life impacts - death in family,
legal case, loss of job, etc.
c. Lack of committment and motivation.
d. Fear of effects, of success, of things that
go bump in the night.
e. Depressed mood from daily events, menstrual
cycle for women, diet.
f. Doubt about task passibility from cultural
negativity:
1) officially debarred
2) not taught in schools, no training
3) associated with madness
g.' Trying too hard!
Notes on what might be problems for you:
B. Discussion of moving through states.
1. Wanting a smooth series of successful sessions
for test training reinforcement.
2. Cancelling sessions if negative factors really over-
whelming.
3. Nat cancelling sessions if you can change and move
out of non-he 1 pf u 1 state.
4. Using clearing/meditation/problem-solving techniques
to have successful sessions.
5. Using stress inoculation and rehearsal so you can work
successfully here and with the scientific establishment
C. keview physiological and cognitive aspects of stress
i. What does stress feel like for you?
2. How have you dealt with fears in the past?
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
D. Review panic reaction compared to a phased approach:
1. Preparing for the stress
2. Confronting and coping with it
3. Dealing with temporary difficulties in coping
4. Assessing one's performance
5. Reinforcing oneself for successful coping
Notes:
E. Learn or practice deep relaxation, breathing, affirmations,
or other strategies from list.
After
Assessment of possible effectiveness for you:
]l. Eliciting Strategies - Introduction and Practice.
A. Roles of direct strategies
i. Using your established methods, existing preferences
2. Adding or trying possibilities.
3. Role of your trainer.
4. Discuss idea of state changing, clearing and beyond.
5. Discuss idea of 'not trying', intention and release.
B. Establishing opening routines, personal ritual
1. Asking permission
2. Use of artifacts: crystal(s), bell, smoke, etc.
3. Poetry (e.g. Chris R's poem), music
4. Other
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
C. Discussing, selecting eliciting strategies. These are not
mutually exclusive categories, but ways of describing various
methods people have successfully used. Please add others...
i. Shifting state of awareness
2. Affirmations
3. Energizing, feeling energy flow
4. Imposing an action from self - energy in, energy out
5. Physical motion
6. Relaxing, opening
7. Concentrating, focusing
8. Letting go
9. Sensory imagining
a. visualizations - energy shower, glow;
dancing with crystal, playing with it;
relating in a personal way to the crystal to
evoke a response
b. auditory - hearing the tones, a tune, etc.
c. tactile, feeling, whole body sensations, etc.
10. Guided imagery
11. Suggestion, autosuggestions, hypnosis
12. Energy channeling, sending
13. Contact with guides, power animals, spirits...
14. Reading, listening to key passages, poems
15. Songs, music
16. Connecting - Universal Mind, Oneness, fusion with
the crystal, enclosing it within own body or
larger reality
17. Specific rituals
18. Other mental practices
19. Other
Selections (for now>, questions:
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
D. At-home practice
1. At home PK devices
a. small container to roll
b. cork in water
c. cigarette paper under glass
3. Tapes, readings, etc.
E. Practice session at modelling success - hearing, seeing, etc.
external feedback, feeling internal sensations, as a result of
using ane of the above strategies.
Notes after modelling visualization:
A. Second Self-Evaluation Questionaire completed
C. Comments on results, what happened for you:
"THE GAME IS WITH YOU, NOT WITH THE MACHINE"
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
~~*~~~~*
PSYCHOKINESIS SKILLS WORKBOOK II[
~*~~*~*
BASED ON APPROACHES USED IN
THE REMOTE ACTION TRAINING PROJECT
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF DR. JULIAN iSAACS
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
ORINDA, CALIFORNIA
WRITTEN BY DR. RUTHANN CORWIN
WITH DR. JULIAN 1SAACS, MARTHA M. MIKOVA,
DIANNE MOORS, AND JOANN JONES
REMOTE ACTION PROJECT
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES, JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
Approved For Release 2002~,11fj'~ :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
WORKBOOK FOR MENTAL SKILLS ACQUISITION SESSIONS
SESSION THREE
Participant:
Trainer/Experimeter:
Date:
Beginning Self-Evaluation Questionnaire completed
I. Review session process and set goals for upcoming sessions
(25-30 minutes):
A.
Discuss
sequence of session events:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Self-evaluation questionnaire
25 minutes of clearing, reaffirming goals for session,
letting go, etc.
Second self-evaluation questionnaire
One hour PK feedback session
B.
Consider
this suggested process from Julian's notes:
-
1.
Acknowledge secular concerns, use talking out, problem
salving, dyad or co-counseling to gain insight, other
techniques .to let go of concerns.
2.
Frepare for task - do opening, ask permission,
select state.
3.
Do PK task.
4.
Use coping strategy if you don't get immediate success:
relax your body, assure yourself that it's all right,
flow into your intuitive side, practice letting go.
5.
Go back into strategy.
6.
Encourage yourself, acknowledge yourself in coping.
7.
Close - change state, thank or acknowledge yourself
or the power working for you, close down.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
C. Review your preliminary goal/reward plan from session one.
Set specific goals for first session or first three sessions
D. Thoughts about how you want to review goals at beginning of
session:
E. Establish how you want to use the opening 25 minutes
in the first full hour PK session.
II. Review and practice stress inoculation or coping strategies
that you want to use in your first full session (20-25 minutes).
III. Review and practice modelling or rehearsing eliciting strategies
(20-25 minutes).
' A-78
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
IV. Practice PK session
A. Second Self-Evaluation Questionaire completed
B. PK Session (15 minute maximum).
C. Comments on results, what happened for you:
V. Note any changes in the above about how to proceed for next session,
preparation at home, etc.:
A-79
Approved For Release 2002/11/18: CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
PZT EXPERIMENT SYSTEA'I DESCRIPTION AND TESTING
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/'18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
PZT EXPERIMENT SYSTEM DESCRIPTION- AND TESTING
The following is a complete description of the PZT hardware and system testing.
A. Design and Construction of the Laboratory Apparatus
1. Sensor Pair and Shielded Enclosure ~ --
Because it was impossible to anticipate every source of artifacts, we initially elected to
use an anti-coincidence sensor design commonly used in experimental physics. We used two
PZTs with differential signal processing, where the output signal was the absolute value of the
difference between the two sensor voltages. An event of interest was then defined by a
differential signal that exceeded. a predetermined voltage threshold. The original intent of this
approach was to assist in rejecting any large-area, unshielded transients (e.g., low-frequency
magnetic fields or building movement) that might influence the sensors in a manner nearly
equivalent to RA events.
Since we were unable to guarantee complete differential balance for all possible
artifacts, we were unable to rely on common-mode rejection as the sole means of artifact
suppression. Although the operating characteristics (charge-to-voltage conversion, etc.) of one
sensor were balanced to within 10 to 15% of the other sensor's characteristics, alocalized source
of excitation (e.g., acoustic energy) would obviously induce a larger response in the nearer sensor.
Therefore, our characterization and shielding effort focused on the response of the individual
sensor. Since a candidate RA event also had to exceed the differential threshold, this worst-case
approach was the more conservative.
The sensors were a version of a standard commercial piezoelectric ceramic element
offered by several manufacturers in a variety of shapes, sizes, and configurations for applications
ranging from high-voltage generators to low-level sound pickups. Typically these devices are
composed of lead, zirconium, and titanium oxides fired into a ceramic at very high temperatures.
The piezoelectric quality is induced by applying a polarizing field to the element at its Curie
temperature. For this application, we selected Piezoelectric Product R101S, having dimensions of
1 x 0.125 x O.OOS inches. Its construction is that of a bimorph--essentially a sandwich of two
ceramic slabs and a brass divider, separated by insulating epoxy. This particular PZT is designed
to produce an electric charge when it is flexed laterally.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
The sensor has natural fundamental and harmonic resonance frequencies that can be
calculated if the physical dimensions are known. Using the dimensions from the preceding
paragraph, the fundamental nodal-support frequency is about 85 kHz. However, it is of no
importance to this application because the expected duration of an RA event ranges from a few
milliseconds to a few tens of milliseconds. Thus, the sensor appears as a virtual flat-amplitude
charge generator with respect to the frequency bands of interest (10 Hz to 1 kHz).
Because the sensor was a charge generator having essentially a pure capacitive source
impedance (well below resonance), the most appropriate signal amplifier was an operational
amplifier configured as a charge amplifier. In addition, use of a high-gain, charge-sensitive
preamplifier eliminated the necessity to transmit very low-level signals over an appreciable
distance, thereby eliminating another potential source of artifacts. The feedback elements in the
charge amplifier were chosen to produce both the low- and high-pass filter corner frequencies of
1 kHz. and 10 Hz, respectively. Because the charge quantities involved were very small, the
amplifier input bias and noise currents were minimized. From the fundamental operating
characteristics of the circuit elements, we calculate that the minimum detectable charge was 2.50
x 10-76 coulombs. Because the flexure-mode element had a mechano-electrical transfer
constant of about 4 microcoulombs per millimeter, the equivalent motion for a minimum
detectable signal was about 6 x 10-12 centimeters.
Each of the two piezoelectric crystals was suspended from a housing that contained the
charge-sensitive preamplifier that drove afiber-optic link. The initial sensor physical mount
employed a spherical lead mass suspended by a coil spring, with the PZT attached to the bottom
of the sphere. This mount was very sensitive to rotational oscillation (wobble) at a frequency of
about 8 Hz. The configuration was changed, therefore, to the cage mount shown in Figure B-1.
In the cage mount, the RA sensor was at the center of gravity of the mass, reducing greatly the
sensitivity to wobble. However, this configuration was the one most easily excited by any lateral
shock applied to the enclosure box.
The mount provided several levels of .mechanical isolation. The first level of
mechanical isolation was asensor-enclosure shock mounting of four commercial elastomeric
support pads. Our enclosure weighed about 75 pounds, including the internal batteries. The
weight of the mount, its resonant frequency, spring rate, static deflection, and isolation efficiency
entered into the selection. The resulting combined enclosure/mount resonance frequency was no
more than 10 Hz to assure reasonable isolation from any nearby machinery components rotating
at 30 Hz.
The next level of isolation was the sensor suspension system, which was aspring-mass
type with a much lower resonance frequency than the enclosure. As shown, the sensor was
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
attached to a mount that was suspended from the top of the enclosure on a spring. The weight
was about 2 pounds; the spring rate was selected to provide a resonance frequency of about 2 Hz.
This provided an additional isolation factor of 12 decibels (dB) (6 dB/octave) at the
enclosure/mount resonance frequency of about 10 Hz. Above 10 Hz, the overall isolation was the
sum of the two.
Considerable isolation from low-frequency vibrations (such as those induced by
footsteps and vehicle road "rumble") was provided by a commercial vibration isolation table.
FIGURE B-1 PIEZOELECTRIC ELEMENT, MOUNT, AND SUSPENSION.
THE BARE CERAMIC IS COVERED BY A SILICONE LAYER
AND CONDUCTIVE SILVER PAINT.
Because the entire sensor system was electronic, it required shielding from
electromagnetic interference (EMI). The basic sensor enclosure was a standard industry NEMA
12 steel, EMI-shielded box (Figure B-2) having dimensions of 20 x 16 x 6 inches. According to
the manufacturer's specifications, this box provides up to 95 dB of magnetic-field shielding from
14 kHz to 1 megahertz (MHz) and over 100 dB of electric field shielding from 14 kHz to at least
450 MHz. Performance is degraded, however, if any openings are made in the steel case. The
only hole through the shell is a 1/4-inch opening for the fiber-optic cables; a straightforward
calculation can demonstrate that signals must be greater than about 10 gigahertz (GHz) to
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
propagate through this opening. The enclosure housed two PZTs with preamplifiers and drivers.
Th,e PZTs were coated with a silicone insulator to provide electrical insulation and conductive
silver paint to shield against EMI. All PZT instrumentation within the shielded enclosure was
powered by rechargeable batteries. The primary danger from stray fields (field-to-cable coupling
outside the shielded enclosure) was eliminated entirely by using fiber-optic cables to carry the
signal to the external hardware. Two more fiber-optic modems were added before data collection
to transmit duplicate signals to the tape recorder.
FIGURE B-2 INTERIOR OF THE SHIELDED ENCLOSURE SHOWING
BOTH SENSOR MOUNTS, RECHARGEABLE BATTERIES
AND FIBER-OPTIC TRANSMITTERS. NOTE THE
CLAMPS USED FOR SEALING THE DOOR.
Because all interconnect wires in the enclosure were shielded coaxial or
multiconductor cables, they were relatively immune to extraneous fields. A single-point common
ground was used to minimize ground loop currents and the associated signal-noise voltages.
As discussed in Section B, "Transducer Susceptibilities," our basic shielded enclosure
(with the door tightly clamped) also provided about 40 dB of acoustic attenuation and protected
the sensors against visible light and infrared environmental transients.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
2. Signal Transmission and Processing
A microprocessor controller programmed in BASIC provided the operator
interface, feedback control, and transmission of data to both the printer and the experimenter's
keyboard and display (TRS model 102 computer). The data consisted of time of event, voltage
from sensor one (V~), voltage from sensor two (V2), and the absolute value of the difference
between V~ and Vz. Only data above a set differential threshold were printed. This threshold was
adjustable for each participant's personal characteristics. These data were fed to two serial ports
on the back of the controller: one was connected to the printer, and the other to the TR5 model
102 computer. The controller also provided chart recorder output for each of the two sensors.
The signals from the piezoelectric sensor preamplifier were transmitted to the
microprocessor controller via voltage-to-frequency converters, optic transmitters, and two
20-meter fiber-optic cables. This effectively isolated the battery-powered sensor and its circuitry
from the line-powered controller circuitry. The fiber-optic link was aone-way transmission line;
no components could reverse the process and send spurious signals back to the sensor enclosure.
The controller converted these signals back into voltages using afiber-optic receiver followed by a
frequency-to-voltage converter. All signals were then filtered and full wave rectified. The
high-pass filter time constant was selected using software to be either 100 or 30, while the
low-pass filter bandwidth was fixed at i kHz.
The RA system was designed to detect signals having a duration on the order of
milliseconds. Such a signal is obviously too fast for any meaningful feedback to a participant. To
accommodate a typical human perception threshold, therefore, the signals were fed to fast-attack
slow-decay circuits that had a decay time constant of 1.5 seconds. This decay was slow enough to
allow the participant to observe the sensor output via the feedback that was derived directly from
the stretched signals. The chart recorder outputs were derived from the pulse stretchers as well.
Peak voltages detected by the two channels were digitized and the remainder of
the processing was done using software. A high speed, analog-to-digital converter (ADC)
sampled a channel every 50 microseconds. In addition, two monitor circuits continuously
examined the fiber-optic links and sensor battery voltages. These circuits were polled each time a
data sample was obtained. If either circuit detected a deviation from preset limits, data collection
was interrupted by an error message that invalidated all values. This check of the link and
voltages could also be initiated manually from the operator's keyboard.
Figure B-3 shows the typical output of the two PZTs, as recorded after
transmission through the 20-meter fiber-optic lines. As can be determined From the strip-chart
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
record, the peak to peak signal was < 1 millivolt (mV) for both channels. This value represents a
factor-of-four decrease from the typical system noise in the 1986 experiment.
-
-
~ _
=~ -- ~--
-
-
- .~ i
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
_
_
-
.-
~
_
-
- 3
~{
_ __i= ~ -
~~ - _
_
_
_
~
_
=-
I ~ -
- =
-
-
LEFT SENSOR ~~
c
_ i
- - -
-
~
_
-
_
-
-
_
-~--i= _ __
- y_.. - -.y.
- -~
_ -3 .
- _
-
-
I
~ I
.I
_
3- _ - 1_
~ ';
~
~
-
- =
-
RIGHT SENSOR ~ -~~~- 3
_
_
'
I
1
_,
?1 ..~ - -3. 1 1
1 ~ ~ I ~ _ a _ ~---; .~
~
; _.~. '
i i
FIGURE B-3 TYPICAL OUTPUT OF THE PZT SEI`TSORS AS MEASURED
FROM THE FIBER-OPTIC TRANSMISSION LINE
b. Data Storage
In the main body of the report, we point out the necessity for an authoritative
data record, collected inside the artifact boundary. This goal was met by installing a second pair
of fiber-optic modems in the shielded enclosure. These modems transmitted the raw PZT signals
approximately 2 meters to a custom-built interface containing the fiber-optic receivers and a
band-pass amplifier having gains of approximately 50 and 3 dB, respectively, and corner
frequencies of about 10 Hz and 1 kHz. The amplified PZT signals were then transmitted to a
seven-track instrumentation tape recorder by a shoe (0.5-meter) section of coaxial cable. The
power supply for the interface was heavily filtered and connected to AC supply via a noise and
power-surge suppression unit.
Six of the seven tracks of the Ampex FR1300 analog tape recorder were used
for data storage. In addition to the two PZT channels, four environmental monitoring de~~ce
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
outputs were also simultaneously recorded. Included were two audio channels, one magnetic field
antenna, and one accelerometer (for vibration detection).
During the entire experiment we used Consolidated Electrodynamics
Corporation recording tape (0.5 inch x 4,600 feet). Each tape was new, still sealed in the original
manufacturer's packaging. Before each data recording session, the recorder heads were cleaned
in accordance with the maintenance manual. The Ampex recorder was thoroughly serviced, and
all record and playback amplifiers were calibrated. We selected a tape speed of 7.5 inches per
second, providing approximately 90 minutes of recording time, the length of a typical RA session.
At that speed, our dynamic range was 43 dB in the critical range of de to 5 kHz. The gain of SO
in our PZT signal interface was selected to guarantee that the PZT noise signal would be clearly
detectable above the recorder noise. Data playback was performed using the same recorder in
exactly the same configuration as that used during recording. All data tapes were stored in the
locked and guarded sensor room, inside the artifact boundary.
Power for the tape recorder was supplied from a TOPAZ power conditioner,
which is designed to filter common-mode and differential-mode noise and to regulate surges in
line voltage.
3. Participant Feedback
Although the physics and engineering of the piezoelectric sensor systems were the
primary responsibility of SRI, an area of considerable overlap with the JFK staff was structuring
the audible and visual feedback to satisfy both psychological and technical criteria. Previous
experience had shown that the participant needed to receive real-time feedback of the activity of
the sensor noise output in order to establish contact.' This requirement follows directly from the
JFK staff claim that operant conditioning and bio-feedback are key elements to training RA
ability.
In addition to the active feedback equipment shown in Figure B-4, full color
photographs of both sensors and the enclosure were made. Enlargements of these pictures were
posted in the participant's area as additional aids in making contact.
There are three modes of operation for the feedback: channel A, channel B, or
differential. Channel A used only the signal from sensor A to drive the feedback. Channel B
selected the signal from sensor B for feedback. Differential mode drove the feedback using the
absolute value of the difference between the two sensor signals (~A - B~). During all experimental
Isaacs, J., "Directly Detectable Psychokinetic Effects: A New Category of Psychokineses,"
Parapsychology and Numan Nature, Proceedings of an International Conference of the
Parapsychology Foundation, Washington, D.C. (October 1986), in press.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
trials, only the differential mode was used. Regardless of the feedback mode selected, the data
output to the printer and TRS model 102 computer was as described earlier.
FIGURE B-4 IN ADDITION TO THE FEEDBACK AND CONTROL
EQUIPMENT, THE COMPUTER PRINTOUT AND CHART
RECORDER. ARE SHOWN.
Far feedback, two thresholds were chosen: To and T~, where T~ was greater than To.
These threshold values were selected and served to divide the signal amplitude (s) into three
categories: s < Ta, To < s < Ty, ands > T~. For signal values below To, an audible "click" was
.generated, the Frequency of which was determined by variations in the system output amplitude.
The visual display was not active below To. For signals between To and T~, both the audible and
visual feedback became active. The audible feedback was selected from the eight tones of the
major chromatic scale (beginning with middle C and going up an octave). The eight colored Lucite
bars of the visual display were illuminated in step with their respective tones. The update rate for
the feedback was such that the decaying signal could be clearly seen and heard as a series of tones
decreasing in pitch. Signals having an amplitude above Ty caused a cassette tape recorder to turn
on and to play a tape selected by th`e participant. The cassette remained on for a period set by
the experimenter, during which time all signals from the sensors were ignored.
During 1987, a substantial effort at SRI was directed toward characterizing the transducer
susceptibilities, environmental monitoring, physical security, and shielding of the sensor
environment. We tested the RA system response in accordance with the expected RA signals. In
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
discussion with the JFK staff, we adopted as the goal. for the FY 1987 study a signal amplitude of
' S0-mV output from the feedback apparatus. This value was used in all subsequent susceptibility
testing as a reference point only. The only authoritative test of the RA hypothesis was a
comparison of the maximum control trial voltage (Vc) with the effort period maximum (Ve). A
brief summary of the scope 'of this effort follows.
1.
Electric and Magnetic Fields
In this and all following susceptibility measurements, both the test stimulus voltage and
the
RA
sensor response voltage were digitized by a low-frequency signal analyzer
(Scientific-Atlanta model SD-3802) and the complex (amplitude and phase) transfer function
was calculated. A transfer function is a ratio of the input voltage to output voltage as a function of
frequency. It demonstrates the sensitivity of a system to external influences. The amplitude-time
waveforms, the corresponding spectra, and the calculated transfer function were all printed on
hard copy for storage in the archives.
Electric field susceptibility was measured by inserting the piezoelectric element
between the, plates of a parallel-plate field antenna driven by a low-impedance arbitrary
waveform generator. Test voltages (pulse and sine wave) of up to 20 V peak-to-peak amplitude
were applied with a resultant interior field strength of 3,150 V/cm. No RA system signals could be
seen using the electric field generator with sine or pulse signals having frequencies up to 10 kHz.
We attribute this insensitivity primarily to the conductive silver paint covering the sensors.
Magnetic field susceptibility was measured using a specially fabricated Helmholtz coil
driven by a voltage pulse generator. The resulting coil current was used as the reference signal.
The Helmholtz coil was calibrated against a commercial Gaussmeter (Bell model 610). Both the
Helmholtz current and the RA response voltage were applied to the signal analyzer for
measurement and comparison.
Current to the coil was switched on, held at about 1.5 amperes (A) (7.5 gauss [G]) for
about 18 milliseconds, and then switched off. The RA sensor response to this stepped magnetic
field was essentially an impulse with little time or frequency structure. A nearly uniform response
of the sensor and the lack of aloes-frequency component implies that the effect was essentially
proportional to the time rate-of-change in a magnetic field.
As shown in Figure B-5, the calculated transfer function indicates an initial increase in
output with frequency, peaking around 1 kHz, and then a decay. We believe the rise with
frequency was caused by the charge induced in the RA charge amplifier by the magnetic field
"cutting" the loop formed by the charge amplifier, the PZT sensor plate capacitance, and the
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
interconnect wiring. This loop lies in the X-plane of the enclosure and perpendicular to the
piezoelectric element. When the Helmholtz coil was rotated 90?, the system response dropped
markedly. It is not clear whether the piezoelectric element contributed to this effect.
. t_ti......y__..._...}........_ti____..._.r-~__..._.}__......_}.._.._.._}._..~...-
1`i . i _ .,. _ .
,r F ~
r?
?
~i .
50. Hz .~a~J'i.`~Y: 4~.1'~ ~~
2000 3000 4000 5000
FREQUENCY - Hz
FIGURE B-5 MAGNETIC FIELD TRAh`SFER FUNCTION
The sensor response increased when a static magnetic field (from a permanent
magnet) -was near the sensor during the pulse testing. In this case, a large static field appeared to
change the piezoelectric polarization or some other electrical characteristic. This auxiliary field
was quite strong--hundreds of gauss--and stronger than would be encountered under RA testing
conditions. We performed subsequent tests without the pulsed field but with the shielded box
closed. In those experiments, a 1.4-kilogauss (kG) permanent magnet did not produce any
measurable output when held stationary. or waved (~ 5 Hz} within a few centimeters of the
enclosure.
Using the peak value of the excitation step function 7.5 G, and the peak response of
the RA system, about 0.1 V, we arrived at a susceptibility coefficient of about 13 mV/G. To
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
produce an RA system signal of 50 mV, the sensors would require a transient of about 3.8 G--a
value approximately seven times that of the earth's ambient magnetic field. For this to occur, that
magnetic field would have to change fast: in less than a fraction of a millisecond.
The RA sensor enclosure was fabricated from mild steel, primarily to provide
insulation from high-frequency electromagnetic fields. Published theory is weak regarding
shielding of low-frequency magnetic fields, so a simple test was performed to determine whether
the box provided any isolation. A single coil of twenty turns of wire was formed onto a cardboard
box that was about 2 x 3 feet. A current of 1.5 A was applied, and the interior field measured to
be about 0.5 G. The entire sensor package was placed inside and the coil activated with various
current waveforms.
To offset the lower field strength, the measurement sensitivity was enhanced by
choosing a waveform that was a sine sweep over the 50- to 10,000-Hz range. This resulted in
about the same spectral density as that produced in the small Helmholtz coil under step-function
excitation. The 1tA system response was quite small .(about 7 mV at peak), and the associated
spectrum showed one predominant peak at about 1.95 kHz. Special tests were run with a pulsed,
continuous-wave (CW) magnetic field current at that particular frequency, and, indeed, a
relatively large response could be induced. Even in this case, however, with the excitation pulse
length in excess of 20 milliseconds, the peak response was barely 20 mV.
The conclusion is that the steel box appeared to provide some isolation since the
response for similar excitation Field strength spectral density (in G/Hz) at the sensor was smaller
with the steel box than without it. The observed resonance response in the latter case appeared to
result from circuitry in the box other than the piezoelectric sensor. Because shielding against
low-frequency magnetic fields is difficult, we incorporated a magnetic field antenna into our
environmental monitoring. If unusually large magnetic field transients occurred, then we could
discriminate them from candidate RA events.
2. Shock and Vibration Susceptibility
To determine the sensors' susceptibility to vibration, a shock was applied to induce a
peak acceleration of slightly less than 1-g to the RA enclosure. The enclosure was struck at a
point aligned with the unit's center of gravity in each of the three orthogonal axes to induce lateral
translational motion. The actual applied acceleration was measured with three calibrated
accelerometers affixed to the enclosure along the three primary physical axes. These axes
corresponded to the front, side, and top surfaces of the enclosure box.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
The transfer function, shown in figure B-6, confirmed that a predominant resonance
occurred at about 8 Hz. Other peaks were substantially lower, except for one at about 68 Hz and
another at about 138 Hz.
.}.~~.... .i~~~
ao izo
FREQUENCY - Hz
FIGURE B-6 SHOCK AND MECHANICAL VIBRATION TRANSFER FUNCTIOti
As described earlier, we assumed an RA system output of 50 mV. Applying the
measured shock transfer coefficient of 0.65 V/g yielded an equivalent shock threshold of 76 mg.
Because this value for vibration .and shock was small, the amount of environmental isolation had
to be large. We obtained this isolation for the RA sensor enclosure by using the air-suspension,
large-mass vibration isolation table and the elastomeric support pads described in Section A of
this Appendix. The- float table had a resonance of about 1 Hz for light loads and was hea~~ly
damped, providing an isolation of 12 dB per octave. This figure implies an attenuation of 36 dB
at the lowest system resonance of 8 Hz; therefore, a floor acceleration of 4.8-g would be required
to produce 50-mV events. We field tested this isolation by dropping a mass of more than 100
kilograms from a height of 75 centimeters within less than a meter of the table. Since the sensor
_ i'
.....___.y---......}._.._....y.._...__.}__..__...}....__._.~_......_.}._.__._..}______.._ti_.__._.__
..
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
room was on the top floor of the building, this experiment was repeated on the roof directly above
the sensor enclosure. No significant RA system output was observed in either case.
Although this testing and characterization indicated the sensor output was not
susceptible to outside vibrations, we attached an accelerometer to the sensor enclosure to record
any extraordinary vibration (e.g., earthquakes) that might occur during an RA session and create
signals.
We measured the acoustic susceptibility of the piezoelectric transducers in the audible
range of 20 to 20,000 Hz. All power levels were expressed in decibels. As a practical reference,
40 to 50 dB is the level of the average quiet residence; average traffic at a distance of 100 feet is
60 to 70 dB; and heavy traffic may be 70 to $0 dB. The threshold of sound discomfort is about
118 dB, and hearing impairment occurs at about 140 dB.
The source of the acoustic excitation was a commercial audio speaker unit that
consisted of a combination lowJmid-range woofer and ahigh-range tweeter, both in a bass-reflex
enclosure to extend low-frequency response down to less than 30 Hz. Maximum acoustic power
was less than 10 watts (W) input. The speaker system was driven by a standard audio-power
amplifier that was fed arbitrary signal waveforms from an .audio-function generator. Pulse,
pulse-CW, and FM CW (chirp) waveforms were used to excite the test unit.
Sound level at the PZT sensors was measured using a Bruel and Kjaer (B-K)
sound-level meter (type 2203) calibrated in decibels (pascals). The meter was used to provide
the complete audio-pressure versus time waveform as defined in the 20- to 20;000-Hz frequency
range. No filters or weighting were employed.
Our test geometry placed the RA sensor and the sound-level meter at the same
distance from the speaker unit. The distance normally employed was about 2 meters. Both the
sensor unit and the speaker were placed about 1 meter above ahard-surface floor inside a large,
high-ceiling-room (about 30 x 30 x 15 meters high). No anechoic capability was provided, but
the distance ratio between the direct and any reflected energy was large enough to make
reverberation contamination insignificant.
Based upon the B-K meter measurements, the sound level at the RA sensor was about
0.8 pascals. Spectral intensity varied somewhat, but in general was flat from 50 Hz to 5 kHz.
Regardless of the source format, the response from the piezoelectric system was quite
complex and can best be described as a multitude of resonance peaks (Figure B-7) . The overall
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
spectral response shows most sensitivity was in the 1- to 3-kHz band with predominant resonance
modes near 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 kHz. These measurements were made with the piezoelectric
element installed inside the steel enclosure but with the enclosure door open.
2000 3000
FREQUENCY - Hz
When the door was closed and tightly clamped, the amplitude of the acoustic response
was markedly reduced (by more than 20 dB), but the spectral character remained the same.
Thus, we concluded that most of the acoustic response was produced by the sensor element itself. _
An important observation was that the piezoelectric sensor was quite sensitive to
acoustic energy on a time scale that was pertinent to the RA application. The response to a short
acoustic pulse (a few milliseconds duration) was a relatively long-lived "ringing" time waveform
composed of the primary resonances described in preceding paragraphs. Hence, a simple
acoustic transient (produced by a variety of common actions) could induce a sizable and
long-lasting RA artifact.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Even more important was the sensor's extreme sensitivity to discrete CW frequencies
that corresponded to the sensor resonances: a low level "whistle," if of sufficient duration,
sufficiently nearby, and at the correct frequency, could induce a large RA artifact signature.
On an absolute level, a single sensor would produce an artifact of 50 mV if the applied
audio level (in sine-sweep mode) was more than 1 pascal (with the enclosure door open). Given
this acoustic sensitivity, it was necessary that we locate and characterize asound-attenuating
facility in which to locate the RA system.
Approval was obtained to use an existing soundproof room in Building G of SRI's
Geoscience and Engineering Center. The room had been constructed to meet a sound
transmission class (S`I'~tr) of 45. STC 45 implies a weighted average attenuation of 45 d8 for a
band of frequencies principally in the speech range. To verify this assertion quantitatively, we
employed SRI's acoustic testing expert to examine the room. Using a calibrated noise source,
precision microphone, and standard measurement techniques, we determined that our facility
provided the acoustic attenuation shown in Figure B-8. As indicated, transmissions at the critical
resonant frequencies were reduced more than 40 dB. We then positioned the noise source
directly outside the door of the sensor room to simulate an acoustic intrusion. In his summary,
the acoustic consultant stated:
"...a 100 Watt source of pink noise, set for maximum output, was placed in the
hallway, facing both the silencer [ventilation) opening and the door. Measured sound
levels midway between the loudspeaker and the wall were 117 dB, [yet] there was no
detectable interference with the instrumentation in the room."
"To determine the sound level at which interference would occur, the sound source
was placed in the southeast corner of the room. The output was gradually increased
until interference was detected. This was found to occur at a sound level, measured at
the equipment in question, of 91 dB. Therefore...a sound level of approximately 127
dB would be needed in the hallway before interference would occur to the interior
instrumentation. This level is at or above the pain threshold for most people, and its
generation would require at least an audio kilowatt. It is my opinion that room G-316
is quite satisfactory for its present use."
Despite these extraordinary measures, some artifact-inducing noise could occur inside
the room, thereby defeating the insulation. To detect such noise, we positioned sensitive
microphones to record the acoustic background continuously during all sessions.
4. Pulsed Infrared Radiation
During the original construction of the RA system, we noticed that the PZTs appeared
to be photosensitive. As a result, we decided to measure the photo-susceptibility of the PZTs
principally in the infrared but also over the visible spectrum.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Transmission
Loss (dB)
Region of Maximum Sensitivity
400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000
FIGURE B-8 ACOUSTIC ATTENUATION OF THE PZT SENSOR ROOM
The source of the thermal illumination was a standard microscope-stage lamp bulb.
Peak temperature was at least 2,700? Kelvin so that the spectral intensity was maximum at the
1,000-nanometer wavelength. Bulb power was at least 15 W and source-to-element distance less
than 18 inches.
To provide aquasi-impulse, the bulb filament was excited by ashort-duration current
pulse configured to produce a fast temperature increase with a coincident photo energy rise in less
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
than 50 milliseconds. Thermal pulse decay resulted when the bulb cooled down. The
photo-illumination time waveform was measured using a PIN photodiode operated in the
short-circuit current mode to obtain linear output. Spectral response was that for standard silicon
devices and covered the visible and near-infrared region.
Based upon the current waveform measurements and the filament cold resistance, the
input energy was about 1.2 joules. From the measured optic pulse waveform and the geometry,
the peak power density at the sensor element was about 60 milliwatts per square centimeter.
The thermal pulse applied to the piezoelectric element occurred in about 35
milliseconds and then decayed back to the 10% level in about 150 milliseconds. The piezoelectric
element responded almost immediately (about a 10-millisecond delay) and had a very similar
impulse-type of response (Figure B-9). Apparently, the thermal energy was absorbed by the
front surface of the sensor, and the ceramic material expanded, forcing the element rod to bend
away from the light source. This bending then induced a charge in the sensor amplifier, which
was observed as the response. The piezoelectric sensor electronic circuitry was AC-coupled;
hence, the response would overshoot on initial recovery and ring at what appeared to be a thermal
resonance.
Although both the optic power density used for the susceptibility test and the time
rate-of-change were large, they were generated by switching on a simple incandescent lamp and
so can be found in most industrial work areas. The shielding of such thermal pulses is quite easy,
however, because most materials readily absorb and/or reflect the energy. In the case of the PZT
sensors, they were completely enclosed in a steel box having a wall thickness of 1/16 inch. Steel
has a very high thermal mass coefficient and, hence, a long time constant and large energy
absorbing capability. In addition, the lights in the sensor room were always turned off during
experimental sessions and control trials.
5. Ionizing Radiation (a,~,y)
We obtained a variety of radioactive sources in order to examine the possible
susceptibility of the sensors to ionizing radiation. It was suggested that because the transducers
operate as capacitive devices, they might detect a charge deposited by radiation. However, their
electronic structure was not like that of a diode and, therefore, did not resemble a typical
semiconductor radiation detector. Our prediction was that no artifacts would be observed.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
The sources used and their principal decay products are as follows:
?
80Co
1.33, 1.17 MeV y, 318 keV
?
10gCd
88, 23 keV y
?
'~Ba
80, 223, 356 keV y
?
137Cs
662 keV y, 31 keV y
?
241Am
60 keV y, S.5 MeV a
0 4 8 12
FIGURE B-9 TRANSFER FUI~'CTIOI\' FOR THERMAL PULSE
In our test geometry, we positioned the source as close as possible to the surface o[ the
PZT and observed the system output. As expected, no discernible change in output was detected.
We note that discrete semiconductor components resided both in the sensor enclosure and the
controller housing. It is well known -from testing the effects of radiation on components for space
and reactor applications that both so-called "hard" (nonrecoverable) and "soft" (recoverable)
errors can occur when ionizing radiation affects semiconductor devices. For this reason, we
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
elected to incorporate abroad-spectrum radiation detector into our environmental monitoring
(the detector is described in the following section).
C. Environmental Monitoring
From the susceptibility testing mentioned above, we determined several types of
instrumentation that were used to monitor environmental conditions during control runs (to
determine the background conditions) as well as during RA data collection. Figures B-10 and
B-11 show the fully instrumented RA system.
1. Accelerometer (shock and vibration monitoring)
The motion accelerometers were type 508HS/LF piezo elements manufactured by the
Vibrometer Company. These devices have a sensitivity factor of 10 mV/G, a noise level of less
than 2 milligauss, and a 3-dB amplitude-frequency response from 0.25 Hz to 10 kHz. They are
approximately 0.5 inch in diameter and 0.8 inch long. Abattery-powered excitation/scaler unit
(model P-16) connected the piezoelectric element with the recording instrument. We also added
a 40-dB wide-band signal amplifier to boost the accelerometer signal at the chart recorder and
tape recorder.
2. Magnetic Field Antenna
We used aferrite-core magnetic field antenna fabricated at SRI. These antennas
have been used successfully in a wide variety of measurement applications over the last 8 years.
Extensive testing has demonstrated that the battery-powered antennas are very stable with time,
poss>ssing a response characteristic that is extremely flat from about 250. Hz to more than 25
kHz. From do to 250 Hz, the response of the antenna is very similar to that of the piezoelectric
element, making the antenna extremely well suited to artifact detection.
3. Calibrated Microphones (acoustic monitoring)
Two Nakamichi CM 100, recording quality microphones were used to detect potential
acoustic artifacts. Their frequency response is essentially flat from 30 Hz to 18 kHz, thereby
entirely covering the sensitive region of the piezoelectric sensors. We independently verified the
frequency response using the B-IC sound-level meter described earlier. Since each microphone
has a cardioid spatial pattern, two units were employed--facing away from each other--to ensure
a spherical pickup geometry.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
~~' .SENSOR
:ENCLOSURE
~`s (WINDOWLESSi
w sR~.~r~Y~1~~N~if4~i1,i1
FIGURE B-10 THE SHIELDED ENCLOSURE (DOOR CLOSED) IS SHOWN
IN PLACE ON THE VIBRATION ISOLATION TABLE. SOME
OF THE MONITORING DEVICES ARE VISIBLE.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
 Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7
Nai FADIATION
DETECTOR
FIGURE B-1l PRINCIPAL MONITORING EQUIPMENT IS DISPLAYED.
TWO MICROPHONES WITH CARDIOID PICKUP PATTERNS
WERE EMPLOYED TO ENSURE ACOUSTIC COVERAGE
FOR THE ENTIRE AREA.
4. Sodium Iodide Detector (ionizing radiation detection)
Our ionizing radiation detector (Canberra Industries Model 802-3) was an industry
standard, 2-inch-diameter sodium iodide scintillation crystal affixed to a photomultiplier tube.
.The combined unit had a charge output directly proportional to the incident energy of the
radiation. A charge-sensitive preamplifier (Canberra Model 2007-P) and
Gaussian-shaping-pulse amplifier produced a 0- to 10-V signal for subsequent digitization.
Approved For Release 2002/11/18 :CIA-RDP96-007878000300300001-7