PERSONNEL IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 41
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 24, 1998
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: August 19, 1985
• Content Type: REPORT

- 010
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA- 00230001-8
PERSONNEL IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION (U)
By: DAVID SAUNDERS EDWIN C. MAY
SRI CONSULTANT SRI INTERNATIONAL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
USAI NSCOM
FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MARYLAND 20755
CENTER LANE-3
WARNING NOTICE
CENTER LANE SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM.
RESTRICT DISSEMINATION TO THOSE WITH VERIFIED ACCESS.
CATEGORY 3
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, California 94025 U.S.A.
(415) 326--6200
Cable: SRI INTL MPK
TW X : 910-373-2046
ed For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-R
A0-tjk Q91800MRP i J8 NATIONALS
 For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA- 00230001-8
CENTER LANE-3
Final Report
Covering the Period 15 November 1983 to 15 December 1984
PERSONNEL IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION (U)
By: DAVID SAUNDERS EDWIN C. MAY
SRI CONSULTANT SRI INTERNATIONAL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
USAINSCOM
FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MARYLAND 20755
Attention: LT. COL. BRIAN BUZBY
WARNING NOTICE
CENTER LANE SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM.
RESTRICT DISSEMINATION TO THOSE WITH VERIFIED ACCESS.
CATEGORY 3
ROBERT S. LEONARD, Director
Radio Physics Laboratory
DAVID D. ELLIOTT, Vice President
Research and Analysis Division
CLASSIFIED BY: CENTER LANE
Security Classification Guide
Dated 1 March 1983
DECLASSIFY ON: OADR
Copy No. ........ ..
This document consists of 54 pages.
941/CL-0028
NOT RELEASABLE TO
C r- e1111 NO qr FOREIGN NATIONALS
CENTER LANE-3
333 Ravenswood Avenue ? Menlo Park, California 94025 ? U.S.A.
[phone] ? Cable: SRI INTL MPK ? TWX: 910-373-2046
o?ed For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasVFQu/ 3S SI f r-00788R001800230001-8
CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
I OBJECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
III BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
IV METHOD OF APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
B. Personality Assessment Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Personality Assessment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. The Mobius Society Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
C. Baseline Data Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
D. Confirmation Data Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
E. "General" Population Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A. Baseline Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
B. Training Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
C. Preliminary Identification of Promising PSI-Q2 Patterns . . . . . . 24
D. Neurolinguistic Programming Investigation (NLP) . . . . . . . . . 25
VI SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
VII REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
APPENDICES
A NAMES OF PAS REFERENCE GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . 31
B REPORT ON NEUROLINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING . . . . . . 35
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 201 -IM P96-OO788ROO1800230001-8
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
TABLES (U)
1
(U) PAS Reference Groups of Precalibrated Viewers . . . . . . . . . . .
14
2
(U) Cluster Analysis of 14 Precalibrated Viewers . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
3
(U) Results of SRI RV Trainees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
4
(S/NF/CL-3) Results of the INSCOM RV Trainees . . . . . . . . . . .
21
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1800230001-8
 Approved For Release IV t L8M?l/ lC b6-00788R001800230001-8
I OBJECTIVE (U)
(U) The objective of this effort was to determine if a technique for testing personality
could be developed that, when applied to a general population, would delineate specific
personality types that exhibit a high degree of talent for remote viewing (RV).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasjW ff98jQ$.:?+ t@6-00788R001800230001-8
II INTRODUCTION (U)
(U) Traditionally, self-report inventories have been primarily used to assess personality;
i.e., carefully designed questions that ask the individuals to describe their own personality.
Although this technique has met with modest success, its application to the search for
personality correlates with psychoenergetic functioning has, for the most part, failed.
(U) The reasons for this failure are complex. First, it is necessary in any correlational
study to have reasonably quantitative measures of the variables that are being correlated. The
self-report measures have been inadequate and, until now,'* sufficiently precise measures of
psychoenergetic functioning have been absent. Secondly, the assessment of personality has
been, and still remains, a very difficult problem. This report describes techniques that have
provided some progress in personality assessment (using self-report inventories as well as
performance measures) for correlation with RV.
* (U) References are listed at the end of this report.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasuZQp1.UQ8ARY6-00788 R001800230001-8
III BACKGROUND (U)
(U) Self-report personality inventories provide the most commonly used measurement
approach in psychological practice, not because inventories have proven able to deal with
every situation, but because they are convenient to administer and often provide a reasonable
"return on investment," the latter being measured in terms of subject time plus cost of
administration and scoring. A wide variety of inventories are on the market, most of which
are more or less tailored for specific applications. Among the general-purpose inventories,
the Eysenck Personality Inventory, the 16PF Questionnaire, and the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator (MBTI) have previously been used in psychoenergetic studies, but with only modest
success.
(U) The assessment of personality through performance measurement is relatively less
common in psychological practice; the relevant techniques are frequently not even taught, are
relatively time-consuming at best, and are viewed with skepticism by many practitioners. In
this connection, although there is certainly room to improve the prevailing interpretive
methodologies, there is substantial evidence that performance assessment of individuals often
elicits important information about their personality that may be otherwise difficult to obtain.
(U) Two personality measurement approaches not systematically employed in this study
are "behavior ratings" and "indirect assessment." Ratings are often very easy to obtain, but
they are very difficult to objectify (i.e., to eliminate the effect of interjudge differences) and
are rarely able to achieve fine distinctions. "Indirect assessment" refers to the possibility of
inferring personality from the work-products of target individuals, such as their paintings or
speeches or decisions; in connection with RV, this is still a strictly theoretical possibility.
(U) Our decision to study both self-report and performance measures of personality,
each having potential advantages and disadvantages, may ultimately lead to a two-stage
screening process: a first stage employing self-report techniques and seeking simply to
identify promising candidates for second-stage screening; and a second stage employing the
more labor-intensive performance measurement methodology but aiming to isolate promising
candidates for serious training.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 20 P96-00788 R001800230001-8
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
IV METHOD OF APPROACH (U)
(U) To accomplish the object of this effort, we used a group of 19 "calibrated" remote
viewers as "baseline" indications of personality types for individuals who are likely to be
good remote viewers. All 19 viewers were scored on a self-report inventory and on a
performance measure. (Details of both are described below.) Item analysis was conducted
to determine if there were any above-chance groupings of individuals in accordance with
their RV abilities. By comparing the results of the performance measures with those of the
self-report inventories, we considered the possibility of correlations between the two
techniques.
(S/NF/CL-3) The next stage was to administer the same tests to all SRI, Army
INSCOM, and Mobius Society personnel currently involved in RV. On the basis of the test
results, predictions were made as to the individuals' RV abilities.
(U) As a test of correlations between self-report inventories and RV abilities in the
"general" population, we conducted item analysis upon 3081 responses collected by the
Mobius Society.
(U) To determine if Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) could assist in the search for
personality correlates to RV, we asked Dr. Nevin Lantz to provide us with a detailed analysis
with particular focus upon applications for psychoenergetic research.
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2C10gJr1pfEjY0788R001800230001-8
B. (U) Personality Assessment Instruments
1.0 (U) Personality Assessment System
(U) The particular performance measurement implementation chosen was the
"Personality Assessment System" (PAS). The PAS is a comprehensive interpretive framework
for profiles of subtest performances that have been generated by the Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale (WAIS). The PAS has been described in considerable detail elsewhere2
and will only be outlined here.
(U) The model on which the PAS is based defines three levels of personality that
can be considered as concentric spheres. The innermost is called the primitive level in that,
from birth onward, this level is responsible for determining how and to what a person
responds. The next layer (called the basic level) is achieved .by the time a child matures to
adolescence. Finally, the outermost layer (called the contact or surface level) is recognizable
in adulthood.
(U) The primitive or primary level includes three fundamental components.
These dimensions, which represent the primitive personality structure, are labled
externalized-internalized (E-I), regulated-flexible (R-F), and role adaptive-role uniform
(A-U). Each of these represents a continuum, but for clarity we will outline the polar
opposites for each dimension.
(U) The natural frame of reference for the externalizer (E) lies in the world
outside himself. Externalizers are perceptually dominant, environmentally sensitive, and
more responsive to external than to internal cues. They are behaviorally active and more
interested in interacting than in thinking. Their perception is relatively specific and concrete,
and their emotionality is directed outward. Internalizers (I), on the other hand, are
ideationally dominant, self-sufficient, and more responsive to internal than to external cues.
Internalizers are behaviorally passive, tend to withdraw, and are more inclined toward
thinking than doing. They perceive in abstract terms, and emotionality is directed inward.
(U) Regulated and flexible people represent the two poles of the R-F dimension.
Regulated persons (R) react to a limited number of specific, well-defined stimuli on which
they can concentrate and focus. The range of their reactivity is narrow, and because their
threshold for confusion and distraction is high, they are characterized by their ability to
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleastMerAgNEP6 j88s 6-00788R001800230001-8
(U) concentrate. Fl exible persons (F) have a wide range of reactivity. They tend to be aware,
almost simultaneously, of a wide variety of stimuli. As a result, they have difficulty
concentrating and their threshold for confusion is low. They are characterized by sensitivity,
empathy, and insight.
(U) The role adaptive-role uniform dimension is particularly difficult to explain.
Briefly stated, the ability to shift roles easily is a talent of the primitive A, but other
components of the personality may influence role flexibility as well. A primitive U, at the
other polar extreme of the A-U dimension, experiences special problems as he attempts to
respond or react to social cues. Although the social response style of the A child may mask,
obscure, and even inhibit development in the other dimensions of personality, the response
style of the U child tends to accentuate or even facilitate such development. (Much of the
above descriptions were paraphrased from Winne and Gittinger2.)
(U) The PAS is itself under development. Therefore, in this project we will make
primary use of an as-yet-unpublished series of PAS "reference groups." These reference
groups provide a simplified PAS in the sense that "only" 80 distinct profile classes are initially
recognized (compared to a possible 4096 in the full PAS). These classes can be given
meaningful names and may be associated with useful descriptions. Appendix A gives the
names that are currently being associated with each of the reference groups. At the writing of
this report only 40 reference groups have tentative narratives. Most individuals can be clearly
assigned, on the basis of overall profile similarity, to a single group. Some individuals,
however, prove difficult to assign to any class and some are almost equally capable of
assignment to two different classes. In the latter situation, both descriptions tend to apply. It
is to be understood that significant individual differences must still exist within each of these
80 reference groups and that some of this intragroup variance may be superficially very
obvious. The members of a given group are seen as facing very similar problems of
adjustment, but they may "solve" these problems in dramatically different ways ranging, for
example, all the way from "denial" to "exploitation" of the same underlying characteristics.
2. (U) The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(U) The MBTI3 was chosen as the self-report instrument because it is widely used,
well understood, and one of us (Saunders) has been a major contributor to its modern
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2QQQ(Q$ BA jPjj? QO788ROO18OO23OOO1-8
(U) v'v L V
development. Like most self-report instruments, it consists of a large number of questions
that may be answered without time limit. The current form (Form J) was developed, in part,
by Saunders, and includes questions to optimize its overlap with the PAS. By using the
MBTI, it was hoped that, because of the overlap potential with the PAS, it might be used as a
"mass" prescreening for the PAS.
3. (U) The Mobius Society Questionnaire
(U) The Mobius Society is a nonprofit organization in Los Angeles, California,
committed to research into and applications of psychoenergetic functioning. A recent effort
by Mobius involved a mass RV experiment and self-report inventory (called "PSI-Q2") was
published in OMNI magazine4 which eventually yielded 3308 usable responses. The
questionnaire itself included 48 self-report items, each to be answered on a 5-point scale.
These items were chosen to form 12 4-item scales; in combination with the 5-point response
format, the scales were expected to yield 17-point ranges of possible scores--enough to
provide some individuality of profiles, and certainly enough to permit correlational analyses
unhampered by scale unreliability. 227 of the respondents to this questionnaire actually
responded to a Japanese translation and will not be used here.
C. (U) Baseline Data Acquisition
(U) The possibility of applying the PAS to determine the ability/personality patterns of
skilled RVers did not originate with this study, and we were able to begin with a file search.
To begin, SRI files yielded 6 WAIS profiles that had been gathered in 1974 from the
successful viewers of a prior study5; three of these viewers (002, 414, 504) have subsequently
performed with enough consistency to be regarded as "stars." A search.of our own files has
now yielded five additional profiles of potential interest--persons who had spontaneously
reported psi phenomena such as precognitive dreams. In addition, we were able to administer
the PAS to eight other persons with demonstrated psi skills--two at SRI (one of these a
"star") and six through cooperation of the Mobius Society.
(U) An important change in the PAS since 1974 has been the addition of two new
subtests that are referred to as the "PAS Fourth Dimension" and administered at the end of
the Wechsler battery6. These two subtests, color naming (CN) and time estimation (TE),
contribute important data to the Reference Group assignment algorithms, and each can be
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasE J I st f -00788R001800230001-8
(U) ,V~.L
conceptualized as directly relevant to the remote viewing task. Specifically, color naming,
which is an individually administrable version of the Stroop task, is thought to invoke
interhemispheric conflicts of brain function by requiring the left brain to report what the right
brain has seen, rather than what the left brain has seen for itself. Tasks similar to the time
estimation subtest have already been shown to elicit unusual behavior from known psychics.?
Obviously, the fourth dimension has been included with all the newly administered PAS. In
addition, we have been able to acquire these data for three of the six earlier SRI cases,
including two of the three stars.
(U) Confirmation Data Acquisition
(U) Two experiments were undertaken at SRI for the purpose of comparing the relative
effectiveness of certain variations of psi training procedures8-9. The viewers (a total of 8) in
both training experiments were volunteers aware of these general purposes, but initially
inexperienced and totally naive as to possible training/learning strategies. The PAS, including
its fourth dimension, was administered to each of these viewers, who also completed Form J
of the MBTI. None of the results of the PAS testing were available to either the subjects or
the trainers before the tabulation of these results.
E. (U) "General" Population Survey
(U) We used the PSI-Q2 experiment of the Mobius Society as an initial test of
personality correlates with the "general" population. Since the readers of OMNI magazine
must be considered a selected population, the extension of the personality concepts to the
3308 respondents is "general" only in that it composes such a large sample. We conducted
item analysis upon this sample to determine if there were any correlations either with our
baseline data or with the data of the 16 trainees.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releas QQOM/NS 91MIfff-00788RO01800230001-8
L~L
V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (U)
(U) Table 1 distributes all 19 of the currently available "precalibrated viewers"
according to their primary PAS Reference Group assignments. The notation that will be used
for PAS Reference Groups throughout this report involves three letters to indicate the extreme
measures for the three components of the primitive personality level. The numbers 0 through
9 further delineate the reference group accounting for both the basic level and the 4th
Dimension addition. As an example, an ERU8 individual tends to be an externalizer,
regulated, and role uniform. A Level 8 is described as follows:
To a first approximation, Level 8 patterns are high on everything (except
Primitive indicators). Being not driven by weaknesses in their own personality,
these people often have difficulty figuring out "who they are" and why other
people are so sure of themselves. Their search for understanding may be
either empirical or theoretical. Their preferred problem-solving style is
contingency planning, i.e., they generate many more solutions than they
implement. (Saunders, unpublished)
(U) In Table 1 the eight SRI viewers are designated by three digit viewer numbers; four
viewers who are considered as extremely accomplished are underlined in the table. The
Mobius viewers are designated as M01 through M09, and the remaining cases are shown as
"???". Even without the formality of a statistical significance test, the pattern of results is
suggestive. For example, 14 of the 19 cases are actually assigned to the RU groups, which
account for only 1/4th of the possible groups. For example, all four of the accomplished
viewers are assigned to groups that include other members.
(U) While Table 1 provides a descriptive summary of the available PAS data for
precalibrated viewers, this display does not lend itself to an efficient significance test. In
order to generate a test statistic that is sensitive to the sort of clustering we see in Table 1, we
consider the "distances" between pairs of cases that result when the scores of each case
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 4 /F8A8IS tP0788R001800230001-8
(U) PAS REFERENCE GROUPS OF PRECALIBRATED VIEWERS
Ref. Group I.D.
Ref. Group I.D.
ERAO
ERA5
IRAO M07
IRA5
IFAO
IFA5
EFAO
EFA5
EFUO
EFU5
IFUO
IFU5
IRUO
IRU5
ERUO M06
ERU5
ERA1
ERA6
IRA1
IRA6
IFA1
IFA6
EF'A1
EFA6
EFU]
EFU6
IFU1
IFU6
IRU1
IRU6
ERU1
ERU6 009 446
ERA2
ERA7
IRA2
IRA7
IFA2
IFA7
EFA2
EFA7
EFU2
EFU7
IFU2
IFU7
IRU2 ,(2022 M02 M05
IRU7
ERU2 ???
ERU7 ???
ERA3
ERA8
IRA3 986
IRA8
IFA3
IFA8
EFA3
EFA8
EFU3
EFU8
IFU3 M04
IFU8
IRU3
IRU8
ERU3 ???
ERU8 504 688 807 M09 ???
ERA4
ERAS
IRA4
IRA9
IFA4
IFA9
EFA4
EFA9
EFU4
EFU9
IFU4 ???
IFU8
IRU4
IRU9
ERU4
ERU9
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleaseUMLIA 5Sf PRPD-00788R001800230001-8
(U)
are used as coordinates to plot a "point" in a "PAS-space". In particular, suppose we locate
and tag the 14 best viewers within the larger collection of 3167 cases used to define the
Reference Groups. Suppose we then count, for each tagged viewer, the number of nonviewers
that are closer to it than any other viewer; this will result in 14 distinct counts, one starting
from each viewer. If we arrange these counts in a rank order, from smallest to largest, the
expected value of the jth count is given by
2j (N -
Expected value of the j h count = )
nX (n + 1)
where N is the total number of nonviewers (3153) and n is the number of viewers (14). For
the present data, the expected value is 30.02 X j. The actual counts resulting from this
analysis are shown in Table 2, in the column labeled "Number Between." The 14 viewers are
shown in "clusters" based on the calculated distances, which also "happens" to sort them by
reference groups. Half of the observed counts are below the expected minimum, while all are
below the expected mean (p :!9 0.00006).
(U) In view of the test summarized in Table 2, the PAS data gathered from the
precalibrated viewers demonstrate that the good viewers are bunched together, though not
necessarily all in the same bunch. Indeed, even the generalized distance measures underlying
Table 2 point to the existence of at least four prototypical good viewers, with one recognized
star performer included in each of these four types. Viewers M07 and 986 (of those reported
in Table 2) seem most likely to represent possible fifth and even sixth prototypical good
viewers.
(U) On the basis of Tables 1 and 2, the strongest case for the importance of a
particular PAS pattern or Reference Group focuses on ERU8. The meaning of ERU8 is given
by the following narrative description:
ERU8: Seeker--Intense, alert individuals who are likely to be seriously in
conflict about the meaning of life. As they look around, ERU8 persons see
people enjoying life and achieving satisfactions that do not come to them even
when they do the "same" things. In particular, they are prone to envy the
intense sensual experiences of the EFA and the fantasy life of the IFA, for
which they have no counterparts. At least partly to deal with this problem,
they may develop unusual interest in psychology, and readily volunteer for
studies of drug effects and other esoterica. Also, as part of their search for
"real" experience, they are likely to explore homosexuality. All the while,
they can be reasonably productive in a conventional role. ERU8 persons may
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release e- Sl?-Px1mQtP0788 ROO 1800230001 -8
W A
(U)
appear "laid back," but their perceptivity is really vigilance; they;are looking
for something, and they can become surprisingly active when they suspect that
they have found it.
(U) CLUSTER ANALYSIS OF 14 PRECALIBRATED VIEWERS
Nearest
Number
Reference
Viewer
Viewer
Between
Group
688
504
2
ERU8
504
688
3
ERU8
807
688
4
ERU8/ERU5
M09
807
469
ERU8/IRU7
M07
M09
153
IRAO
986
M09
959
IRA3
M06
446
10
ERU5
446
M06
39
ERU6
009
M06
17
ERU6
M02
002
13
IRU2
002
M02
25
IRU2
M05
002
382
IRU2/ERU2
M04
414
413
IFU3
414
M04
796
IFU3
Maximum 3153
Expected Mean 1577
Expected Minimum 30
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releas(UN(/bL/ASO -00788 R001800230001-8
(U) Normatively, ERU8 is not a common reference group. It is overrepresented in our
database because we have had access to numerous samples of volunteer subjects for
psychological experiments. The reference group parameters for ERU8 currently depend on a
sample of 98 known exemplars, which implies appreciably better-than-average clarity of
group definition.
(U) A review of the specific ERU8 viewers known to us confirms that they did not
spontaneously volunteer themselves as good, or even potentially good remote viewers. All
these people have other professional identities, and pursue psi as no more than an avocation.
avocation. Viewer 504, now considered a star, actually came into the program as a control
subject.
(U) The second major pattern evident in both Tables 1 and 2 is Reference Group
IRU2. The meaning of IRU2 is given by the following narrative description:
IRU2: Mystic--For Level 2 persons, the meaning of life is that it is to be
experienced. For IRU2 persons this is an essentially internal process; they
are predisposed to the possibility of mystical communion and communication
and find deep symbolic significance even in ordinary events. Media, art, and
music hold special interest. Because they think nonverbally, it is difficult for
them to share or explain their experiences; they are generally willing to try,
but often come across as merely hallucinating. In relation to the "real
world," they are a reactive problem-solver and an underachiever. They have
a strong conscience, seek to earn their keep, but usually gravitate to some
rote manual or clerical activity that demands neither social finesse nor
symbolic manipulation. Their need for guidance and supervision may become
either an asset or a liability.
(U) Normatively, we see no reason to believe that.IRU2 is either especially common or
especially rare. Because IRU2 persons are quickly perceived as "a little odd," they are likely
to be passed over by testers looking to fill quota samples for standardization studies, but they
are not really averse to being tested. The reference group parameters for IRU2 currently
depend on a sample of 53 known exemplars, resulting in average clarity of group definition.
(U) From a psychoenergetic perspective, the IRU2 group distinguishes itself by pursuing
psi with a true sense of vocation. Reviewing the four IRU2 cases, all these persons have
become known through their own initiative, and all have sought to capitalize professionally on
this perspective. Three of the four have published books in the field, another is registered as
a psychic at the local chamber of commerce, and one serves as a training monitor. We are
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2 0 '" IFP fUPO788ROO1800230001-8
not yet prepared to say whether an ERU8 or an IRU2 is a better viewer, but it is clear that
an IRU2 benefits more from the courage of his convictions.
(U) Another difference between IRU2 and ERU8 manifests itself in a training
environment. Persons having both these patterns are basic level internalizers to the PAS, but
they have developed quite differently. IRU2 persons are also a primitive level internalizer, so
that their basic i-orientation is relatively relaxed and spontaneous. ERU8 is a primitive
externalizer whose basic i-orientation is learned and requires unconscious effort to be
maintained. We expect ERU8 to have relative difficulty avoiding the pitfalls of analytical
overlay (AOL) while remote viewing. In a very real sense, the everyday successes of the
ERU8 depend on maintaining AOL continually, and it is fundamentally threatening for ERU8
to abandon it. Moreover, when it is abandoned, the individual reverts to a basic
e-orientation that appears to be less conducive to psychoenergetic functioning. We predict
that ERU8 persons will have more difficulty than IRU2 in learning RV, and that for this
reason they will be less likely to discover this skill on their own. On the other hand, although
AOL may be an impediment to successful RV, the typical psychokinesis (PK) experiment
seems unlikely to be influenced one way or the other by it. Indeed, if there is any
motivational component to successful PK, we suspect that an ERU8 might demonstrate his skill
in this realm relatively more quickly than an IRU2.
(U) As an aside, we note that two of our IRU2 exemplars (M02 and 002) were among
the five individuals studied by Schmeidler with Eysenck's "Chained Reproduction" procedure
for time estimation.? The PAS time estimation task is similar but not the same and involves
seven independently timed production trials with target times of 20, 5, 10, 30, 10, 5, and 20
seconds, respectively. Factor analysis of data from the latter task, treating each trial as a
separate entity, clearly suggests three factors at work. The major influence is the overall bias
toward over- or under-production, and this is the score currently reported as part of the
PAS. The second influence is a trend across the seven trials toward relatively longer or
shorter successive productions. Our psi subjects, and especially our IRU2 psi subjects, have
uniformly tended, as the task became familiar, toward equating more and more clock time
with the same subjective time. We see this as equivalent to Schmeidler's result. (The third
influence evident from the factor analysis is a trend across size of time interval that renders
the conversion between subjective and objective time more or less nonlinear.)
(U) Primarily for the record, we include our ERU6 and IFU3 precalibrated viewers.
There are clear statistical portents of significant patterns beyond ERU8 and IRU2, but we
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/fl r Blignp96-00788R001800230001-8
(U)
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
have not yet seen enough exemplars to warrant specific discussion. Certainly, it is important
to continue the process of gathering PAS data from known viewers in the expectation that
further exemplars will be recognized. The meaning of ERU6 and IFU3 are given by the
following narrative descriptions:
ERU6: Manager--Proactive problem solvers who are forthright in their
dedication to constituted authority and decisively rational in their views, but
who tend to be overcommitted to their work and tend to overcontrol their
own feelings and emotions. They are extremely competitive and ambitious
and seek to inspire and involve others through example. Their social behavior
often demonstrates a concern to show that they cannot be manipulated by
others. They are better at creating procedures than policies, but nevertheless
see themselves as intellectually creative and expect to be appropriately
rewarded for these efforts on behalf of their organization. Members of this
group are found in the middle echelons of any major organization, such as a
bank, business, hospital, or government agency.
IFU3: Votary--Polyactive problem-solvers who are prone to be autistically
self-centered, who recognize and feel guilt about this, and who combat the
implied threat by immersing themselves in a multitude of worthy activities. As
children they were permitted to pursue their considerable intellectual curiosity,
without the imposition of either mental discipline or social conformity. As an
adult, they remain intellectual and creative, and attach much importance to
their own and others' right to be "different." They have a strong conscience
and are likely to be politically "liberal" and to have well-developed aesthetic
judgment. Their vocational interests are likely to be in the humanities and
social science, rather than in mathematics or physical science. They may
function well as teachers, administrators, consultants, or team-members.
B. (U) Training Results
(S/NF/CL-3) As reported earlier, two training groups at SRI and one at INSCOM
served as the confirmation cases. The PAS, including its Fourth Dimension, and Form J of
the MBTI were administered to each of the trainees. None of the results of the PAS testing
were available to either the trainees or the trainers before the tabulation of the results.
(U) The bunching of the precalibrated viewers in PAS-space, shown in Table 1,
suggests that outstanding psi ability is not a widespread trait. ERU8 and IRU2 together may
represent as much as 2 percent of the general population and, allowing for a few other PAS
patterns still to emerge, our ultimate interest is estimated to be limited to no more than 5 to
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 20004-00788 R001800230001-8
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
(U)
10 percent of the population. We must expect that most of the trainees in an unscreened
sample will have little psi aptitude.
(U) The results of the SRI training efforts and the personality measures are shown in
Table 3. Two measures of RV performance are shown. The RV-Figure--of-Merit column
displays an overall level of RV ability. (Because different target sets were used for the two
training efforts, the Figures of Merit are valid as relative measures within a training group
only.) The RV-Learning column displays a statistical assessment (student's t-test) of the
slope of a line drawn through the session-by-session Figure of Merit data. Although there
are other possible RV measures that could be considered, these two represent the current
state of the art.
(U) RESULTS OF SRI RV TRAINEES
Viewer
PAS
MBTI
RV Learning
RV Figure of Merit
807*
ERU8
ISFJ
2.06
0.227
249
IRU7
ISTJ
1.43
0.239
997
IFA1
ESFP
0.70
0.194
454
IFU4
ENFP
0.52
0.199
309 t
IRA5
INXP
1.72
0.353
558
IFA8
XNFX
1.40
0.372
694
ERA2
IXXP
0.91
0.387
Track II SRI training group.
Track I SRI training group.
Note: The figure of merits are only valid within a training group.
UNCLASSIFIED
(S/NF/CL-3) Table 4 shows the results for the INSCOM trainees. The
RV-Ability-Estimate column represents the best qualitative assessment RV abilities of the
trainees. A "" represents a "star viewer", while a "*" represents an extremely good
viewer. "+" represents "good" or "OK" viewers and "7" represents viewers who are
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 GNP--M ,
Approved For Release 200&/91 A _ P096-OO788ROO18OO23OOO1-8
(S/NF/CL-3)
currently unevaluated. These measures are very subjective; for example, the difference
between "" and " * " is somewhat arbitrary.
(S/NF/CL-3) RESULTS OF THE INSCOM RV TRAINEES
Viewer
PAS
MBTI
RV Ability
Estimate
372
ERA6
INTJ
**
063
ERA6
INFP
*
016
ERA8
ENTP
+
099
IRU4
INTJ
+
043
IFA5
INFP
+
018
IRU7
XNXP
+
035
IFU5
INTP
?
101
IFA6
ESTJ
?
Note: The RV Ability Estimate is qualitative.
SECRET/NF/CL-3
(U) When we compare all 15 of the training subjects with all four of the potentially
interesting reference groups identified above, there is only one trainee who can be properly
regarded as a member of any currently interesting group-Viewer 807. Because of this,
much depends on how we perceive the training results for Viewer 807. Actually, among the
seven trainees with quantitative data, Viewer 807 ranks as best on three of the six RV
measures and ranks as second-best on two more of them (only two measures are shown in
Table 3. Puthoff and MayB and Humphrey9 contain complete details.) The significant
positive slope for Viewer 807's Figure-of-Merit is what we might expect from an ERU8
personality. We have stated earlier that ERU8 personality should expect to experience at
least initial difficulty with overcoming AOL.
(U) The only other trainee in Table 3 with consistently positive RV measures is Viewer
249. There is simply no way to regard this person as a member of any of the four groups
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1800230001-8
 crimn9l
Approved For Release 200 88R001800230001-8
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
(U)
already identified. Either we may regard these training data as a fluke, or we may regard
them as suggesting that IRU7 is a fifth group for which to watch. The latter possibility is
somewhat reinforced by the presence of another IRU7 in Table 1.
(S/NF/CL-3) Perhaps the most important observation to make about the results of the
INSCOM group (Table 4) is that they represent the results of a selection process very
different from the "process" implicit in Table 1. We need be neither surprised nor
discomfited by the apparent absence of any IRU2, ERU8, ERU6, or IFU3 cases. For one
thing, except for ERU6, we suspect that good examples of these groups simply were not
available in the pool from which the selection began. (Part of this may be because IRU2
and ERU8 personalities, on average, might have difficulty with security clearances.) Also, we
observed earlier that our known IRU2 viewers initially made themselves known, and our
known ERU8 viewers responded to calls for volunteers explicitly for psychoenergetic research.
By contrast, the viewers in Table 4 were much more deliberately recruited; they are all
"volunteers" in the sense of "informed consent," but the request for this consent was only
the final step in a multistage process of testing and interviewing.
(U) We regard the confirmatory signs in Table 4 as encouraging. For example,
although we find no actual IRU2, we note that our IRU2 training monitor regards his IRU4
student as "having the most long-term potential" despite his also being the "most difficult to
work with." Apart from the irony in this, IRU4 is theoretically just an IRU2 with a
successful PAS contact pattern built on the surface. As another example, although we find
no single unmistakable ERU8, we see four of these eight cases falling within three standard
deviations of the ERU8 centroid according to ERU8 norms.
(U) Although we have yet to see a bona fide star viewer in the IR;U7 reference group,
Table 4 provides at least one (018) and possibly a second (043, a borderline IRU7) example
with affirmative precalibration, reinforcing the context already developed earlier (??? and
249).
(U) Reasonable arguments can be made that self-generated interest in psi flows from
Primitive U (17 of 19 cases in Table 1 are Primitive U) and that selection by interview will
tend to favor Primitive A (five of eight cases in Table 4 are Primitive A). On the other
hand, it is not obvious that A-U differences should affect psi performance. (We think it is
obvious that E-I and R-F differences should affect psi performance.) If we set aside the
A-U differences on grounds they may be artifactual and then reexamine Table 4, we now
CLrRCT
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 20 88R001800230001-8
%F am %0 *FORD
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
(U)
have three of the eight cases falling into "known" psi-positive categories. Two of these (063
and 372) are ERA6, now grouped with ERU6; the same two already have the strongest track
records represented in Table 4. The third one (016) is ERAS, now grouped with ERU8; he
is still a trainee, but is seen as "making the fastest progress" of anyone in his training group.
(S/NF/CL-3) Without identifying any new categories, it is possible to relate six of the
eight INSCOM viewers to the previous data. Viewers 101 and 035, who are unambiguously
Primitive F, are left over after this process. We have seen very few F personalities in the
whole course of this project, and would be ready to write it off but for Viewer 414 shown in
Table 1. Several of the viewers have spontaneously suggested that the PAS task that defines
this primitive dimension (the WAIS Block Designs) seemed to them especially relevant.
Theoretically, we see this dimension as defining an individual's signal-to-noise requirements-
R persons work with a relatively high threshold, and can count on the "reality" of percep-
tions that pass through their filter. The problem for them is to make up for what does not
pass. F persons operate with a lower threshold requirement and can count on not missing
much that's real, but they also perceive a lot of noise as though it too were real. Thus, an R
person is typically better motivated than an F person to learn how to perceive more with
higher accuracy regardless of the use of psi abilities.
(U) Only two of the individuals in Table 4 (035 and 018) display the trend within the
time estimation task thought to be a hall-mark of psychic performance. In view of the much
larger effect previously observed in IRU2 as compared with ERU8, the present observation
may mean nothing at all. On the other hand, it may relate to the need/use of technical aids
to initiate psi conducive attitudes, particularly for Level 6 viewers. More than any other
groups, Level 6 individuals are accustomed to making time work for them, and their time
estimates tend to be among the most accurate.
(U) The self-report data in Table 4 illustrate the point that the PAS versus MBTI
correlation is complex. Two INTJ persons have very different PAS patterns; likewise, so do
two INFP persons. It is difficult to imagine that these eight viewers have, in fact, been
selected partly on the MBTI; the only clear trend in the data is toward intuition, but intuition
is common at high normal levels regardless of WAIS patterning. A self-report analysis
employing a finer breakdown, perhaps along the lines of PSI-Q2 (see below), seems likely to
be necessary if the goal of mass screening is to be attained. MBTI Form J, the form used
thus far, contains enough items to support such a finer breakdown.
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2000iii6-00788R001800230001-8
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
(S/NF/CL-3) The emergence of ERA6 as a potentially psi-positive reference group is
an especially encouraging event. Of all the groups we have had reason to mention, this one is
normatively the most common, by far, and is especially common in military-type organi-
zations, in which ERA6 individuals function well and comfortably as the middlemen in a chain
of command. They are more loyal to individuals than to abstract ideas and are capable of
insulating themselves from philosophical and ethical questions. In terms of psi, therefore, they
appear to be willing, able, and relatively likely to stick with it. A problem for selection,
however, is that ERA6 ranges over several MBTI types, reducing the poxential efficiency of
first-stage screening. The meaning of ERA6 is given by the following narrative description:
ERA6: Role-Player--These persons are proactive problem-solvers who are
naturally both involving (A) and involved (E). As an adult, ER6 persons
have presumably found a socially functional role that requires them to be
active and apparently relating but depends upon a minimum of true
involvement. In effect, ERA6 persons spend life "proving" that they cannot
be tempted. The tension that this implies is relatively repressable because of
the R, but somatic symptoms may develop over time. Members of this group
are relatively common and have included actors, dancers, musicians, waiters,
salesmen, policemen, teachers, and managers.
(U) On balance, our efforts to cross-validate the important PAS patterns have yielded
only partial results. There is nothing strongly inconsistent with expectations, but the results
are not statistically conclusive primarily because of the low proportion of psi-talent estimated
to exist in unselected populations. Future efforts to achieve cross-validation should be
planned so that approximately 50 percent of the experimental trainees are expected to show
strong learning curves. This will require excluding about 80 percent of an unscreened
population.
C. (U) Preliminary Identification of Promising PSI-Q2 Patterns
(U) We report the initial exploratory results of psi in relation to self-report personality
(U) The first level of RV analysis on the PSI-Q2 data involves a simple one-in-six
"guessing" task. Viewers were asked to pick which of six target categories best matched their
response. No significant evidence of psychoenergetic functioning was found. However, a
"forced choice" task is shown throughout the literature as an ineffective way of eliciting good
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasU 2000/08/08 .S I1 r b96-OO788ROO18OO23OOO1-8
(U)
responses, and thus we require a more sensitive RV measure before we can verify some of
the earlier findings.
(U) With regard to personality questions, we already know that reasonably clear-cut
correspondences may exist between psi-criteria and PAS information. We also know10 that
the correspondences between the PAS and the MBTI are relatively complex; they can be
described as many-to-one mappings of complete patterns (PAS) onto other complete patterns
(MBTI). Because not all MBTI types occur in any given reference group, the search for
members of a given reference group can advantageously begin with self-report methodology,
but the selection ratio must not be set too restrictively. These observations based on the
MBTI seem likely to apply equally to the PSI-Q2 data.
(U) We have sought confirmation of this reasoning in an analysis of the PSI-Q2
data-base analogous to the PAS analysis reported in Table 2. We began this new analysis by
identifying ten respondents whose drawings in the OMN1 experiment had been informally
recognized (during routine processing) as outstandingly good examples of what "could"
happen; these ten cases were tagged within the larger data base. The question then is, are
these ten cases randomly distributed or not. The answer is, probably not; more probably,
they represent clusters that are suggested by analysis of the self-reporting questionnaire.
Further, based on what we know of the MBTI responses of ERU8, IRU2, and IFU3, it
appears likely that the questionnaire cluster analysis is consistent with these findings.
D. (U) Neurolinguistic Programming Investigation (NLP)
(U) We include Dr. Lantz's report on NLP as Appendix B. Although there are many
misunderstandings about NLP, it has it roots in sound scientific research. We did not expect
that this investigation would yield a new screening technique, but it did provide a sound basis
to include it in further research. Specifically, we have added it to our list of
recommendations (see below).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1800230001-8
 Approved For ReleaIj ffiff Wt !SGIp 96-00788ROO 1800230001-8
VI SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS (U)
(U) This project has investigated the possibility of developing personality testing methods
capable of discriminating individual persons by their degree of talent for remote viewing. Both
self-report and performance-based personality assessment methodologies have been
considered. Baseline data have been drawn from a sample of 19 precalibrated viewers and
have been applied to new samples comprising 15 viewers and trainees.
(U) The results affirm that important personality differences between viewers and
nonviewers can be measured. In addition, the results suggest the need to recognize several
relatively distinct "types" of good viewers. It appears that potentially good viewers appear in
about five to seven personality categories and collectively represent about 10 percent of the
general population.
(U) In our view, we have just begun to recognize the power of these techniques, and
recommend that all viewers should be selected, in part, by the procedures outlined in this
report. Specifically we recommend
? Extending the RV analysis of the PSI-Q2 data to determine the degree
to which the MBTI can be used as an effective prescreening instrument.
? Continuing to collect baseline data as more accomplished remote viewers
become known.
? Training a number of individuals to administer the specialized version of
the WAIS.
? Selecting all new psychoenergetic participants on the basis of the PAS
guidelines.
? Determining if NLP techniques are able to model excellent remote
viewing.
? Determining if NLP techniques can be used as an aid in mass or
selective screen for RV personnel.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releasc ZQQ0,(0`/Q8- ?IQP-6-00788 R001800230001-8
VII REFERENCES (U)
1. E. C. May and B. S. Humphrey, "An Automated RV Evaluation Procedure (U),"
Final Report, SRI Project 7408, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA (October 1984),
SECRET/NOFORN.
2. J. F. Winne and J. W. Gittinger, "An Introduction to the Personality Assessment
System," J. Clin. Psych., Monograph Supplement 38 (1973), UNCLASSIFIED.
3. I. B. Myers with P. B. Myers, Gifts Differing, Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.,
Palo Alto, CA (1983), UNCLASSIFIED.
4. S. A. Schwartz and R. DeMattei, Psi-Q Test II, Omni 5(1), pp. 136-142 and 182
(October 1982), UNCLASSIFIED.
5. H. E. Puthoff and R. Targ, "A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over
Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research," Proceed. IEEE
Vol. 64, pp. 329-354 (1976), UNCLASSIFIED.
6. D. R. Saunders, "PAS Fourth Dimension Kit," MARS Measurement Associates,
Lawrenceville, NJ (1983), UNCLASSIFIED.
7. G. R. Schmeidler, "A Possible Commonality among Gifted Psychics," J. Am. Soc.
for Psych. Res., Vol. 76, pp. 53-58 (1982), UNCLASSIFIED.
8. H. E. Puthoff, "Track I Training R&D (U)," Final Report, SRI Project 7408, SRI
International, Menlo Park, CA (October 1984), SECRET/NOFORN.
9. E. C. May and B. S. Humphrey, "Alternate Training (U)," Final Report, SRI Project
7408, SRI International, Menlo Park, Ca (October 1984), SECRET/NOFORN.
10. D. R. Saunders, "The MBTI and the PAS: Matching Patterns to Patterns," J. PAS
Foundation, Vol. 3, in press, UNCLASSIFIED.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releasee jTffQ8{AP:?j. f. ft IY6-00788RO01
Appendix A
NAMES OF PAS REFERENCE GROUPS (U)
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releas e' ffe?8J2 :?+t ff tj6-00788R001800230001-8
no ff-Ist
(U) PAS REFERENCE GROUPS: TENTATIVE NAMES
Reference
Reference
Group
Name
Group
Name
ERAO
Psychopathic
ERA5
Conservator
IRAO
Chameleon
IRA5
Investigator
IFAO
Schizoid
IFA5
Physician
EFAO
Vindictive
EFA5
Analyst
EFUO
Gladiator
EFU5
Philosopher
IFUO
Psychotic
IFU5
Acolyte
IRUO
Automaton
IRU5
Programmer
ERUO
Athlete
ERU5
Educator
ERA1
Participant
ERA6
Role-Player
IRA1
Game-Player
IRA6
Technician
IFA1
Martinet
IFA6
Tactician
EFA1
Scorekeeper
EFA6
Auditor
EFU1
Competitor
EFU6
Pastor
IFU1
Opportunist
IFU6
Advocate
IRU1
Team-Member
IRU6
Engineer
ERU1
Rulekeeper
ERU6
Manager
ERA2
Artisan
ERA7
Aide
IRA2
Compliant
IRA7
Pragmatist
IFA2
Narcissist
IFA7
Entrepreneur
EFA2
Hedonist
EFA7
Salesman
EFU2
Interdependent
EFU7
Politico
IFU2
Galatean
IFU7
Egotist
IRU2
Mystic
IRU7
Enthusiast
ERU2
Proprietor
ERU7
Leader
ERA3
Adherent
ERA8
Confrontive
IRA3
Volunteer
IRA8
Cynical
IFA3
Observer
IFA8
Anxious
EFA3
Speculum
EFA8
Defensive
EFU3
Naturalist
EFU8
Compulsive
IFU3
Votary
IFU8
Suspicious
IRU3
Performer
IRU8
Dilettante
ERU3
Showman
ERU8
Seeker
ERA4
Nurturant
ERA9
Psychosomatic
IRA4
Consultant
IRA9
Explosive
IFA4
Counselor
IFA9
Addicted
EFA4
Professional
EFA9
Repressed
EFU4
Coach
EFU9
Depressed
IFU4
Individualist
IFU9
Withdrawn
IRU4
Specialist
IRU9
Obsessive
ERU4
Teacher
ERU9
Stressee
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasQJ /48t gMCfff -00788R001800230001-8
Appendix B
REPORT ON NEUROLINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releas 1"c8AAS SYFIIEFD6-00788R001800230001-8
AN INVESTIGATION OF NEUROLINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING AND ITS
POSSIBLE APPLICATION TO REMOTE VIEWING TRAINING
Remote viewing training, like any other skill that requires complex mental processes,
has been hampered by the inability to perceive directly and thus codify those particular
mental strategies necessary for accomplishing the task. Recent studies in the area of
nonverbal behavior suggest that mental states can be read from such external behavior as
facial expressions [Ekman and Friesen, 1976], eye movements [Galin and Ornstein, 1974],
body posture and movement [Spiegel and Mackotka, 1974], and voice qualities [Hernsen et.
al., 1973]. Review of the literature in this area led to the question of whether remote
viewing training could be enhanced by systematically observing the nonverbal behavior of a
viewer and inferring or encoding helpful mental strategies that could be utilized in training
this skill. It was hypothized that elements of the remote viewing process, crucial to per-
formance and training, are not being recognized because of a lack of systematic attention to
the viewers nonverbal behavior and too heavy a reliance on self-report for what happens
internally as the viewer proceeds with the task. A search was conducted to discover possible
systems for observing and encoding nonverbal behavior.
I was attracted to Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) as a possible tool for increasing
the ability to observe and interpret nonverbal behavior. The originators claim NLP as a
process for making explicit those mental patterns necessary to perform complex tasks and
rely heavily on the observation and explanation of nonverbal behavior to construct their
mental maps [Dilts, 1983]. The present study was conceived to address the following: (1) Is
there any validity to NLP techniques and if so what are the limitations? (2) Can NLP be used
to model excellent remote viewing? (3) Can NLP techniques be used as a screening device
for selecting remote viewing trainees? (4) How would one use NLP in remote viewing
training? The investigation was conducted by (1) attending the NLP Practitioner Certification
program designed by John Grinder and his associates at Grinder, DeLozier & Associates, (2)
reviewing the independent NLP publications, and (3) reviewing the literature for research that
might validate or invalidate the techniques.
The NLP Practitioner Certification program offered to the public was a 24-day training
program consisting of one three-day weekend per month over a seven-month period with
certification testing at the end of the sequence. The author attended training from January to
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2Q 18A(9 ff fL00788ROO1800230001-8
July, 1984, in the Newport Beach area of Southern California and was certified as an NLP
practioner at the end of the program. This report is not intended to make anyone expert in
the use of NLP but rather to give enough of an overview so decisions about its applications to
remote viewing training can be made.
NLP was developed by linguist John Grinder and Gestalt therapist Richard Bandler
during the early seventies as a method for mapping the cognitive processes involved in human
communication. Their claim is "that if any individual or group displays any sequence of
behavior that others find useful, we-employing the tools and techniques of NLP--can
"chunk" and "punctuate" that sequence into units that can be practiced and readily learned
by any other member of the species [Dilts et. al., 1980]." The method involves systematic
observation of verbal and nonverbal communication behavior and mastering new
interpretations of these behavioral cues.
Early observations by the founders of NLP were concentrated in the field of
psychotherapy studying the methods by which such luminaries as Virginia Satir (family
therapist), Fritz Perls (founder of Gestalt therapy) and Milton Erickson (medical hypnotist)
produced rapid and apparently lasting changes in intrapersonal and interpersonal behavior
[Harman and O'Neill, 19811. These observations led to the development of techniques for
encoding and understanding changes in an individual's behavior that have since been applied
to a wide variety of human endeavors including business, medicine, law, education, and the
military.
Research reports on specific NLP assumptions and observations have not been numerous
to date. Although they have written more than a dozen books on NLP, Grinder, Bandler
and their associates have yet to publish in professional journals. However, in searching the
more general psychological literature it appears that many of their basic assumptions have
been independently substantiated. The following section shows the overlap of NLP with
cognitive psychology and the recent proliferation of research in nonverbal communication.
2. Basic Assumptions of NLP
One of the fundamental assumptions of NLP is the belief that behavioral responses to
the external world are mediated by internal representations or models of previous experience
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleasFMeQL8/$ ~EI/ l lb6-00788R001800230001-8 J-% hf
(both internal and external). Thus a person does not react directly to the real world but to a
mental representation of the world. This places NLP squarely in the tradition of cognitive
psychology, which emphasizes the structures and processes within an individual's mind as a
major factor in behavior. As Sampson [1981] has noted cognitivism is the dominant point of
view in current social, personality, and developmental psychology and has a long and
distinguished history in psychology.
Another basic postulate of NLP is that there is a connection between observable
nonverbal behaviors such as eye movements, gestures, changes in breathing, posture and
muscle tonus, skin color, voice tone and tempo and even particular words and the internal
neural patterns for processing incoming perceptual data. Thus a trained observer can identify
systematic patterns in external behavior and use these data to determine mental processing
patterns that individuals use to make sense of and communicate about their experience.
The identification of neural patterns from external behavior depends on two principles
of cybernetic systems: (1) Any change in one part will affect all other parts in. some way so
that when the rules of interaction are understood the effects on different parts can be
predicted and (2) activity in one system is a transform of activity in another and, therefore,
carries information about the other [Ashby, 1960, 1964]. It follows that all behavior is in
some way communication.
The communication aspects of nonverbal behavior have been well researched. Scientific
study of nonverbal communication is often dated from Charles Darwin's The Expression of
the Emotions in Man and Animals [Rosenthal and Depaulo, 1980]. Recent importance of
this area is evidenced by the introduction in 1979 of a journal devoted exclusively to research
in nonverbal behavior (Journal of Nonverbal Behavior). Mehrabian [1972] has noted the
dominance of nonverbal behavior in his finding that the vast majority of our communication
is carried out nonverbally.
Nonverbal communication behavior begins in infancy according to Hubert Montagner
who developed a system for predicting future behavioral problems from the gestures of
preschool children [Pines, 1984]. Others have identified emotions [Ekman et.al, 1979],
states of consciousness [Ekman and Friesen, 1974, Freedman and Hoffman, 1967], intent to
deceive [DePaulo and Rosenthal, 1979, Ekman and Friesen, 1974, Kraut, 1978, Zuckerman,
Spiegal, DePaulo and Rosenthal, 1982], aggressive intent [Freedman, et.al. 1973, Hernsen
et. al., 1973], and attitudes [Mehrabian and Ferris, 19671 using various nonverbal behaviors.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2ffWQ8gfffirf Q0788R001800230001-8
Davidson [1984] describes some of the brain patterns related to the facial expression of
emotion.
Ekman and his colleagues at the University of California Medical School at San
Francisco have developed one of the most extensive lexicons of nonverbal behavior outside
NLP in their work with facial expressions and hand movements [Ekman and Friesen, 1969,
1972, 1975, 1976]. They offer a 40-hour training program in the use of their techniques for
research purposes.
A third NLP assumption is that data are constantly being processed below the threshold
of awareness or consciousness and these data can also be responded to unconsciously.
Awareness is, therefore, not necessary for learning or transmitting information. Jaynes [1976]
cites studies supporting this hypothesis, most of which use nonverbal behavior as the method
of information transfer. Research in the field of subliminal perception also supports this
assumption [Dixon, 1971].
The unique contribution of NLP theory has been the development of the concept of
representational systems. Information about the environment is received; through the five
senses. Each sensory system is responsible for the transmission and processing of unique sets
of distinctions about the individual's immediate universe. Action and movement are initiated
via neural interconnections with the motor system. These sensory-motor: complexes are called
representational systems and are named after the five senses: (1) vision, (2) audition, (3)
olfaction, (4) gustation, and (5) kinesthesis. Activity in a representational system is
considered behavior regardless of whether it happens internally or externally. Thus making an
internal visual image is as much a behavior as walking. All external physiological changes
ranging from skin color through breathing rate and eye movements to language are considered
behavior.
Accessing cues are the ways by which representational system activity is identified. NLP
specifies left-right and vertical eye movements, linguistic predicates, gestures and changes in
breathing, muscle tonus, skin color and voice tone and tempo as the behavioral cues to
representational system activity. For example, if a person during an ordinary interaction looks
upward and breathes shallowly, he is thinking visually according to NLP theory. By observing
representational system shifts an observer can identify the strategy used to perform
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For ReleastyN"M SI"-00788R001800230001-8
a task. For instance if a person looks up and to the left when asked to spell a word, the
person is thought to be making a mental picture of the word before spelling it. More
complicated strategies can be elicited from sequences of representational system shifts.
4. Application Proceedures
NLP techniques have two broad applications: (1) producing behavioral change
(therapeutic), and (2) learning completely new behaviors (modeling). The specific techniques
for using the information gathered through the observation of representational system activity
are numerous and a thorough presentation is beyond the scope of this report. One procedure
especially useful in modeling will be mentioned, however. The procedure is known as
anchoring in NLP terminology.
The process of anchoring is one of the most important procedures in NLP [Dilts, 1984].
An anchor is simply defined as any representation (internally or externally generated) that
triggers another representation or series of representations. The assumption behind anchoring
is that because experience is represented as a gestalt of sensory information when any portion
of the gestalt is reintroduced the other portions of the experience will be reproduced to some
degree. Therefore, any portion of an experience may be used as an anchor to access the
total experience. Written words, for instance, are visual anchors for internal representations
from the reader's past sensory experience. The visual symbol "mouse" has meaning only in
its ability to trigger internal representations based on previous experience.
According to NLP theory anchoring is a naturally occurring process that, if used
consciously, can be a major tool in modeling. Anchoring is useful in several ways during
modeling. An anchor can be established by the programmer in order to gain access to
particular strategies or states which may be useful in accomplishing a specific task. Anchoring
can also be used to mark certain parts of a strategy in order to shift the sequence as well as
to delete portions of a sequence. A third way of using anchoring is in the installation of new
strategies during the learning process.
Research by independent investigators on the NLP notion of representational systems has
so far been confined to what has been dubbed the Preferred Representational System (PRS).
PRS is the idea that individuals exhibit a preference or dominance of one sensory-motor
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 23Q3 fV6L90788R001800230001-8
system over others and thus limit the richness of experience. One of the ways the NLP
practitioner can develop rapport is to determine a client's PRS and then match verbal
predicates to that system [Grinder and Bandler, 1975]. Sharpley [1984] reviewed 15 studies
investigating PRS and found that less than one third support the PRS concept as well as
methods used to discover it. Critical examination of these studies, however, shows a failure
on the part of the researchers to specify context (as demanded by NLP practice) and the use
of various paper and pencil measures instead of specific behavioral outcomes (as required by
NLP).
NLP's own research on representational systems and accessing cues using EEG recordings
as the dependent variable has been reported by Dilts [19831. Though not independently
confirmed to date it is an extension of findings reported by other researchers [Galin and
Ornstein, 1974; Kocel, 1972].
6. Discussion and Suggestions for Utilization of NLP Techniques
NLP theory represents the compilation of a massive amount of information scattered
throughout the fields of linguistics, psychology, psychotherapy and communications. The
originators started their observations from a formidable base of scholarship and have
developed one of the most powerful and comprehensive communications tools of modern
times [Conway and Siegelman, 1983]. Although NLP methods are empirical, there is no
question that the theory has a solid base in the experimental literature. As a system it
deserves the attention of researchers interested in the processes of learning and information
transfer.
Application of NLP technology to the task of modeling excellent remote viewing depends
on two things: (1) the availability of consistent remote viewers and (2) the use of highly
trained NLP practioners. The need for the former is obvious. The latter requirement is not
so obvious because of the ability to acquire some of the more gimmicky techniques quickly
without developing the refinements necessary for successful modeling. Certification at the
practioner level currently requires close to 200 hours of lecture, demonstration, practice, and
evidence of ability to produce certain specified outcomes. NLP modeling seminars are
currently offered to those who have achieved practitioner certification. Another alternative
would be to hire someone who has achieved the level of master practioner or trainer. There
are currently very few people at these levels.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release peQ8 jk ? TpPa6-00788R001800230001-8
Use of NLP to develop a screening strategy for finding natural talent in the general
population could be accomplished by studying accomplished remote viewers for similarities in
processing styles and then seeking out these styles in the population at large.
A logical place to start in using NLP techniques would be to have one or several
researchers specifically trained in NLP modeling techniques and have them work with known
remote viewers to develop training strategies. Screening can be accomplished by ascertaining
the strategy of these viewers and searching the general population for individuals who possess
these strategies for similar tasks.
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releas Q1(L8A85SIIEID6-00788 R001800230001-8
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ashby, W. R., Design for a Brain: The Origin of Adaptive Behavior (John Wiley and Sons,
New York, NY, 1960).
Ashby, W. R., Introduction to Cybernetics (London University Paperbacks, 1964).
Conway, F. and J. Siegelman, "The Awesome Power of the Mind-Probers," Science Digest
(September 1983).
Darwin, C., The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1965) (originally published 1972).
Davidson, R., Emotion, Cognition, and Behavior (Cambridge University Press, 1984).
DePaulo, B. M. and R. Rosenthal, "Ambivalence, Descrepancy, and Deception in Nonverbal
Communication," in Skill in Nonverbal Communication: Individual Differences, R.
Rosenthal (Ed.) (Oelgeschlager, Gunn, and Hain, Cambridge, MA, 1979).
Dixon, N. L., Subliminal Perception: The Nature of a Controversy (McGraw Hall, London,
1971).
Dilts, R., Roots of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (Meta Publications, Cupertino, CA, 1976).
Dilts, R., J. Grinder, R. Bandler, L. C. Bandler and J. DeLozier, Neuro-Linguistic
Programming: The Study of Subjective Experience, Vol. 1 (Meta Publications,
Cupertino, CA, 1980).
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, "The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior: Categories Origins,
Usage and Coding," Semiotica, Vol. 1, pp. 49-98 (1980).
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, "Hand Movements," Journal of Communication, Vol. 22, pp.
353-374 (1972).
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, "Nonverbal Behavior and Psychopathology," in The
Psychology of Depression: Contemporary Theory and Research, R. J. Friedman and
M. M. Katz (Eds.) (Winston, Washington, D.C., 1974).
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, "Detecting Deception from the Body or Face," Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 29, pp. 288-298 (1974).
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, Unmasking the Face (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
1975).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Release 2C ftL J J 1 r 1 C V 788RO01800230001-8
Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen, "Measuring Facial Movement," Environmental Psychology
and Nonverbal Behavior, Vol. 1, pp. 56-75 (1976).
Ekman, P., W. V. Friesen, M. O'Sullivan and K. Scherer, "Relative Importance of Face,
Body, and Speech in Judgements of Personality and Affect," Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology (1979).
Freedman, N. and S. P. Hoffman, "Kinetic Behavior in Altered Clinical States: Approach to
Objective Analysis of Motor Behavior During Clinical Interviews," Perceptual and Motor
Skills, Vol. 24, pp. 527-539 (1967).
Freedman, N., T. Blass, A. Rifkin and F. Quintkin, "Body Movements and the Verbal
Encoding of Agressive Affect," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 26,
pp. 72-85 (1973).
Galin, D. and R. Ornstein, "Individual Differences in Cognitive Style-Reflective Eye
Movements," Neuropsychologia, Vol. 12, pp. 376-397 (1974).
Grinder, J. and R. Bandler, The Structure of Magic 1: A Book about Language and Therapy
(Science and Behavior Books, Palo Alto, CA, 1975).
Grinder, J. and R. Bandler, The Structure of Magic II (Science and Behavior Books, Palo
Alto, CA, 1976).
Hartman, H. L. and C. O'Neill, "Neuro-linguistic Programming for Counselors," Personal
and Guidance Journal, Vol. 59, pp. 449-453 (1981).
Hernsen, M., R. M. Eisler and P. M. Miller, "Development of Assertive Responses; Clinical
Measurement and Research Considerations," Behavior Research and Therapy, Vol. 11,
pp. 505-521 (1973).
Jaynes, J., The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bi-Cameral Mind
(Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA, 1975).
Kocel, K., "Lateral Eye Movement and Cognitive Mode," Psychonamicl Science, Vol. 27, pp.
223-224 (1972).
Kraut, R. E., "Verbal and Nonverbal Cues in the Perception of Lying," Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, pp. 380-391 (1978).
Mehrabian, A., Nonverbal Communication (Aldine/Atherton, Chicago, IL, 1972).
Mehrabian, A. and S. R. Ferris, "Inference of Attitudes from Nonverbal Communication in
Two Channels," Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 248-252 (1967).
Pines, M., "Children's Winning Ways," Psychology Today, pp. 57-65 (December, 1984).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8
 Approved For Releasl^ffifr2f S %I fff -00788RO01800230001-8
Rosenthal, R. and B. M. DePaulo, "Encoders vs Decoders as Units of Analysis in Research
in Nonverbal Communications," Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, Vol. 5, pp. 92-103
(Winter, 1980).
Sampson, E. E. "Cognitive Psychology as Ideology," American Psychologist, Vol. 36, No. 7,
pp. 730-743 (1981).
Sharpley, C. F., "Predicate Matching in NLP: A Review of Research on the Preferred
Representational System," Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.
238-248 (1984).
Spiegel, J. E. and P. Mackotka, Messages of the Body (The Free Press, a Division of
MacMillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York, NY, 1974).
Zuckerman, M., N. H. Spiegel, B. M. DePaulo, and R. Rosenthal, "Nonverbal Strategies for
Decoding Deception," Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 171-187
(1982).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001800230001-8