'VISAGES': A COMPUTER-BASED TEST OF FACE PRECOGNITION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 5, 2000
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: LIST

2Poved F6rRelre seedN/V `IR"DP - 000 3 ,qv /f16
3n
ke
_ion
at
rced.
7
in the
,
.e over
ecif is
rcate,
.4n
t of,
b1Y
n to
After
the
zher is
"VISAGES": A COMPUTER-BASED TEST
OF FACE PRECOGNITION
MARIO VARVOGLIS1& MICHEL-ANGE AMORIM
LABORATOIRE DE RECHERCHE SUR LES INTERACTIONS PSI
A computer-based psi experiment was conducted to explore
whether subjects could precognize the features of a randomly
composed face. The experiment was based upon a subset of the
"Photo fit" Kit used by police to help identify the facial
characteristics of a missing person or a criminal. Forty
subjects participated, each contributing a minimum of four
runs (16 trials).
Subjects were presented with 4 target packs each containing
16 different Instances of a particular facial feature (eyes,
nose, mouth and facial-outline with hair). The Instances for
each element were grouped, so as to suggest different
degrees of resemblance between them, and, hence, between the
subject's choice and the target.
There were two task-modalities. In the Scanning psi task
instances were arranged as a 4 x 4 Image array, allowing the
subject to consciously choose a particular image using the
computer "mouse". In the Timing psi task, the images were
presented in a rapidly shifting sequence; here the subject
could only choose when to stop the "image roulette" with the
mouse. Once the subject had chosen all elements of the face,
the program randomly selected an instance for each of the
four elements, constructed the target face, and presented it
to the subject.
Results were evaluated through goodness-of-flt tests,
comparing the obtained distribution of hits, for 5 different
levels of scoring, against the expected distribution. The
global test yielded a significant chi-square for the
experimental condition (p=.013), and chance results for a
simulation study. Further analyses, examining scoring under
the two different task-modalities, yielded a significant
chi-square for the Timing task modality alone (p=.006).
329
Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
INTRODUCTION
The possibility of applied parapsychological research has
been receiving considerable attention In recent years, both
in the U.S. (Agor, 1984; Harary, Targ and White, 1985;
Mishlove, 1986; Morris, 1986) and In Europe (Amorim, In
press). An application which seems to hold particular
promise is the use of psi to help locate missing persons or
identify criminals. A number of popular or semi-popular
accounts have referred to Instances in which psychics helped
the police, but little has been done by way of experimental
research. One of the few systematic Investigations In this
area is reported by Reiser et al (1979) who presented 12
psychics with sealed envelopes containing information on two
solved and two unsolved crimes. According to the authors,
the elicited "psychic Impressions" offered little support
for the claim that psychics could contribute information
necessary for the resolution of crimes. However, in their
book "Psychic Criminology", Hibbard & Worring (1982) cite a
number of cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
criticize the Reiser et al approach as being insensitive to
psychological and Interpersonal factors. Osis (1984) also
cites numerous cases resolved with the help of psychics, and
emphasizes the difficulties involved in attempting to
address this topic in laboratory contexts. ..
It is clear that the motivational characteristics of real-
life situations cannot be reproduced in the artificiality of
laboratory contexts. On the other hand, even If it is impos-
sible to recreate the motivational dynamics of real-life
psychic criminology, laboratory experimentation could
explore certain facets of this area. One such facet is the
Identification of an Individual. In many crimes, police rely
upon eyewitnesses to try to reconstruct the facial characte-
ristics of the criminal. However, witnesses may not be avai-
lable, or may be unreliable. Can "psychic witnesses" be
reliably used to Identify the facial characteristics of an
unknown person?
The exploration of facial characteristics as psi targets Is
also interesting in and of itself, Independently of any
immediate applications. Our perception of the face appears
to be a very basic process In human beings; like language,
It may constitute an Inborn, "hardwired" function, rather
than being an acquired capacity. Could the fact that we are
"primed" toward face-recognition translate Into a special
sensitivity toward face -precognition or -clairvoyance? If
experimental data were to Indicate that faces constitute
unusually good psi targets, then this would lend some
credence to the Idea that psi capacities are tied In to
basic neurophysiological and cognitive functions.
The current study, then, was conceived as a preliminary step
In exploring the use of faces as psi-targets. Specifically,
we explored "face precognition" through a computer-based
version of the "Photo-fit" Kit, employed by police to Inter-
rogate eyewitnesses, and explored In a number of investiga-
330
Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R00070106
r
Davies, recall
tiona of face and recognition Elli. r
ran 1975; Sergent
e of eases, eyes, 1984). This kit contains a ry W d e
reng o n thus mouths, jaws, a ver
different allows an Intervieertto drawn y wide
instances of to on tch" a_
approximate the face recalled facial mix and match"
features,
In by a witness, so as to
our study, we selected
outline a subset of facial
for ech eyes, nose, mouth) features
a
feature, and and a small subset (face-
We created a program passed these into of instances
Instances, nnwhich can randoml the Computer. Then,
and compose a face, The y mix
pt to choose and match these
most approximate the the facial characteristics task was td
features of the com which would
Despite certain superficial face.
was not perfIcial similarities,
quite analo
thing, we used " g0US to Psychic however, this task
Also, the pal normal" (rather than riminology, For one
as subjects wouldkbe as "elementaristicil Special) subjects.
than attempting to focusing upon facial n ature, insofar
researchers Precognize the feeatures, rather
important (e.g', E11Is, 1975; face as a whole.
not facets of face Serpent, 1984) Some
captured by e l eace Percept ion areho l i st i c9'gest tha t
tarlstl re
compensate somewhat fo
approaches. and ato
Provide to r this problem, we decIn order
Feedback eremeal
ant feedback ided not to
Y once the foll?win9 each trial
after all four
s ntire face h
but
give
element
as be
would have en
still make their been composed Ci.e,5
least selections oneofe Though subjects
the moment of featto ure
perception; it feedback would at a time, at
feedback Precognitive Informatloninvolve a holistic
the back point, then it would orient the deCjves
whole
face
rather from this
th
an Isolated featur?e.s Psi toward
A mOCe important
approach deviation from
the ' was that the Psychic criminology in r
human elements eXperimental context included,noneoof
the task In real which lend meanie
features of a life. Rather, it g and significance
e
i fictional face inV?lved to
ptors or hlStor , one stripped of guessing the
onal tar et_ y. To address any meaningful
a ca
ndoml
g face some Identitis, We sought to
from y selected name and Y, associatln glue
the fiactliarge biography; these g it witd
"meanie Pool of possibilities, were
sub gfulness device The relevance derived
sect scoring with the was to be ex of this
biograph Placed by comparing
Another y present vs. absent.
address factor explored _
little the potential problem task rnodalIty", was
doubt that, to different?f response meant to
repelled by different degrees biases, There
a Psi task faces (orfacjai we are attracted or
Pos In whi
l-1 ch subj ects
a characteristics), In
sibilities within Can freel
factors could a target Y choose from
facto easily drown Pack, such among
leading People to choose out subtle aesthetic
they dislike. As it heemed images they like psi information,
avoided, as that this and avoid long those
Possibilities as the subJect could not be completely
which the we decided is free to choose
subject could to add a s _ among the
Approved For Release 2000 go/+w I GJA Dff~30O7 RA607QV60001-3
image.
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
This second modality was a "timing" psi task, demanding of
the the subject only a decision as to when to stop a rapidly
changing "Image roulette" containing all possibilities.
Thus, there were two task-modalities: one based upon the
implicit question "when is the target passing by" (the
timing task), the other based upon the question "where is
the target", and Involving the usual scanning of possibi-
lities in order to make a choice (the scanning task).
METHOD
Subjects
The subjects of this study were 35 female and 5 male
volunteers, ranging In age from 19 to 59 years old. Thirty
four of these participants came to the laboratory following
an article in a popular woman's magazine, which presented
the laboratory's computer-based psi research. The remaining
6 subjects were either acquaintances, or had heard about the
laboratory through acquaintances. Personal and psychological
data on all subjects were collected using french versions of
the Personal Inventory Form (PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-
Inventory (MBTI); these data have not yet been analyzed.
Hardware
The experiment was run using an Amiga 1000 with a color
monitor, two disk-drives, a 2-megabyte random-access memory
extension, and a "mouse" for subject Inputs. The transfer of
Photo-fit images into the computer was accomplished using a
surveillance camera and an Interface which permits the
"dIgitization" of video inputs.
Software
The program controlling the present experiment was based
upon a compiler-language named "The Director", similar to
BASIC, but explicitly oriented toward graphics- and sound-
manipulations.
Pseudo-Random function: The random numbers for the program
are generated by the Director language's pseudo-random
function, reseeded every cycle by the Amiga clock (read in
in micro-seconds). A "Cyclic Redundancy Check" scheme
scrambles the clock values and ensures the adequacy of the
random distribution. In a personal communication, the
creator of the Director language stated that tests of the
random function have shown that it yields the expected range
and frequency of values. While no detailed assessment of the
random function was undertaken by the experimenter, a one-
line program was written to at least ensure that the
function was reseeded each time. Run Immedlatly after the
"booting" of the computer, this program served to verify
that the pseudo-random function was indeed bein
y `W6 ed RIb1eavetW00106M- CCdA RffiP9 0T$2 ' 001-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
"Viaagea" Program: The Vlaggeo pcecogr it Ion teat, Wt i.tten by
the first author, presents subjects with 4 graphic target
packs, each containing 16 distinct instances of a facial
element, and, on the basis of the subject's choices,
progressively constructs a graphic face. Then, once the
subject is satisfied with the face as constructed, the
program uses the Amiga's pseudo-random function four times,
selecting, for each facial element, one of 16 possible
instances. Finally, the program calculates feedback scores
(i.e., measures of the proximity between the subject-chosen
and the randomly-chosen elements), stores the results,
provides feedback (showing the target-face and the score),
and offers the subject options to continue or quit.
A slightly modified version of the program serves to collect
control or "simulation" trials, in which no subject is
present. The program essentially creates two faces, on the
basis of two sets of random numbers; the first set substi-
tutes for the subject's guesses, while the second defines
the target face as described above.
A more detailed description of the program's operation is
given In the Target-preparation and Procedure sections.
Target-preparation
The Target pool was based upon a portion of the Penry Photo-
fit Kit, kindly provided by the central police department of
Paris (Ministere de l'interieur), In photocopy form. The kit
Involves transparencies showing different male facial ele-
ments (eyes, noses, mouths, etc.); these can be freely
combined and mixed, and so as to produce a very wide range
of possible male facial types.
Four facial elements were used for this study: eyes, nose,
mouth, and facial outline (showing hair, forehead, and jaw).
To select from among the many instances provided, we used
our subjective judgement and several criteria; for example,
selection of as wide a range of characteristics as possible,
for each facial element and avoidance of facial characteri-
stics which are too striking or weird. We then passed this
subset of photo-fit Images Into the computer through a
"digitization" process, and each digitized Image was treated
with diverse computer graphic tools, so as to maximize
definition and clarity. Then, for each element, we selected
16 different Instances (i.e., sixteen noses, sixteen mouths,
etc.), and arranged these images into 4 computer bit-map
screens or "pages", which would serve as target packs (Two
of these pages are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2).
The 16 Instances of each page were arranged in a 4 x 4
array, images being grouped according to different levels of
resemblance between them. Taking Figure 1 as an example, we
see that the top two rows are distinguishable from the
bottom two ("little hair" vs. "lots of hair"). Then, the 4
Instances of a fact
A li'bv~edtFcilcReIeA e20#~/( 'e ear- a I '0b 701 A800 333
short hair,
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
Figure 1. Target pack for
face-outline
Figure 2. Target pack for Lips
_Figure 3. Face with three
elements selected
fu'
art
334
Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-
full hair and long-hair). Finally, within each row, 2 groups
are distinguishable (e.g., In row D, D1 / D2 and D3 / D4).
The idea behind this arrangment was to create a psi task
which could allow for different degrees of psi -accuracy or
-resolution - from vague feelings to detailed Information.
The scoring scheme, accordingly, was meant to reflect dif-
ferent degrees of resemblance between subjects' choices and
the target image. For example, let us assume that the target
for facial-outline were D2. Selection of any Instance within
row C - the other row of the same half-page - implies having
correctly identified that the target-face generally has
"lots of hair"; this would be a "half-page" hit. Selecting
D3 or D4 - the other pair on the same row, or a "row" hit -
Implies having identified the target face as having specifi-
cally long hair. Selecting D1, the other member of the pair,
would be a "pair" hit - whereby the subject has found the
instance which most resembles the actual target. Selecting
D2, of course, Is a direct hit.
As mentioned in the Introduction, the target face was
accompanied by a name and, In half the trials, a biography.
The names were drawn from a file containing 80 names com-
monly found in France. The biography was drawn from a second
file, containing 200 statements, organized into 10 theme-
related groups (sports and leisure, living quarters, child-
hood and education, mood and temperament, social life, para-
normal experiences, reactions to world events, beliefs and
philosophy, favorite sayings, health).
Procedure
Upon arrival at the laboratory and preliminary exchanges,
the subject was placed in front of the Amiga, and Instructed
on the utilisation of the mouse. The subject then took
computer-based (French) versions of the PRL Personal
Inventory Form (PIF) and the Myers-Briggs-Type-Inventory
(MBTI). Following feedback on the MBTI, the subject was
switched to the Apple-based computer-RNG test "Volition".
Then, after a minimum of two Volition runs, the subject was
brought back to the Amiga, for the Visages precognition
test; the experimenter remained present throughout the
Visages session.
The subject was told that, unlike Volition, the Visages test
was geared toward receptive psi. It was explained that the
computer would create a face, randomly selecting instances
for the four facial elements; the person was asked to use
their intuition to guess which Instances of each element
would be selected by the computer. It was emphasized that
the computer would not select those Instances on the basis
of any aesthetic criteria, but on the basis of random
decisions.
The run, consisting of four trials (one for each facial
element), begins with the presentation of
gyp` 1r6VedPF6tERele 2000708/1 63 r5C 4WR9-QQ79$g~?b 10,~1'O 1-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
"t.Io,oe' , '1LIPe", The program await the. subject's eeIeet.ion
of one of these, using the mouse. (For the first run, the
experimenter encouraged the subject to start with face-
outline, and progressively fill In the other elements of the
face). Once an element Is selected, the computer presents
the subject with the target pack, i.e., the 16 Instances of
that element.
Depending on the psi-task modality, the target-pack is
presented in one of two different ways. In the scanning
condition, all 16 possibilities are present on the screen
simultaneously, arranged in the 4x4 array described above;
the person uses the mouse to place the cursor over one of
these 16 instances and then "clicks" to select it. In the
timing condition, only one of the 16 instances is visible on
the screeen at any moment; the Images succeed each other
very rapidly in a random sequence (giving the impression of
a nose changing shape, a mouth talking, etc.), and selection
is made by clicking on the mouse and stopping the "image
roulette" at some particular Image. The image actually
selected, however, is not the one last seen by the subject,
but rather one which is randomly generated just after mouse
input; irrespective of how fast their reaction time might
be, subjects cannot consciously select a particular target.
The order of task presentation, fixed across subjects, was
based upon a predetermined schedule allowing for different
permutations of the biograhhy and task-modality variables.
The first four runs were scanning/biography, scanning/no
biography, timing/biography, timing/no biography.
In both scanning and timing modes, the specific Instance
chosen by the person is Immediately added to those
previously selected. Thus, as subjects proceed through the
four facial elements and select a particular face-outline,
set of eyes, nose, and mouth, they see the face being
constructed. (Figure 3 illustrates a face with three
features already chosen and lips not yet selected). The
process of face construction is automatic: placement of the
feature chosen on the face depends not upon the subject, but
upon predefined coordinates.
Following the subject's selection of all four elements, and
thus the completion of the face, the individual Is presented
with options 5:"Review Face", and 6:"See target". Option 5
allows subjects to review the face constructed, in case
they've changed their mind about a particular selection (in
which case, they can re-initiate the selection process by
clicking on the corresponding number in the Menu).
Option number 6, once clicked, launches the construction of
the target face. The program generates four random numbers,
between 1 and 16, each corresponding to a particular
instance of the four features. The program also randomly
selects a name out of the name-file, and, In the "biography"
condition, constructs a biography by randomly selecting 6
statements from the 20 categories of statements. The program
Srovda6 - Releasec2000/08/'b6 CiCdA-RD296a QU92RB0017Q Ot'.3
I
A
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
the target face on the screen, along with a name, a graphic
"button" for re-viewing the subject-chosen face, and another
button for reading the biography (*).
The screen with the subject-chosen face allows for compa-
risons with the target-face; it also shows the scores
obtained for each of the four elements. These scores give
subjects a numerical estimate of the
choices to the target-instances. For eachim element,ththe
possible ..scores are 0 (no relation between target and
choice), 2 (half-page success), 4 (row success),
success) and 16 (direct hit). Thus, the total scor8 (air
epfor the
run could range from 0 to a very unlikely 64 (direct hits on
every trial).
Subjects were asked to complete at least four runs (sixte
trials), but were allowed to Oontribute additional runs, if
so desired. Thus, following feedback they could either click
on a Replay button, to initiate a new run, or, if they had
completed 4 runs, click on a Stop button to close the
Visages program and end the session.
Simulation Runs: In order to ensure that the RND function of
the Amiga operates correctly, and that there were no
problems in the program's logic, we conducted a simulation
study', based upon a slightly modified version of the Visages
program. In this progam, the subject's scanning or timing
guesses for each element were replaced by the generation of
random numbers between 1-16. Thus, the Program ld
construct a face on the basis of 4 random numbers, and wthenn
a second, target-face on the basis of 4 more random numbers.
Once launched, the simulation program ran automatically,
until it completed 9 runs; it was then re-launched by the
experimenter. This process continued until the number of
runs accumulated equalled the total of experimental runs.
* The screen with the biography text was Intended to examine
the meaningfulness factor mentioned in the Introduction.
From the first few sessions, subjects a -
fused as to the role and purp PPeared to be con-
biography seemed incongruent with ethe of the satemens; the
statedtnaturetof the
task-precognizing a randomly constructed
repeated negative comments b face. Followin
y menter realized that the biography was u of as, the expe for
assessing meaningfulness not PPropriate for
this factor from the stud and decided to drop assessment of
directed subjects to click Fr
onm tt het b point b y b h no l onged
Practically no one did. g P Y button, and
337
Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/15: CIA-RDP96-00792R000701060001-3
Collectivly, the 40 participants contributed a total of 212
experimental runs (848 trials). Individuals' contribution to
this database was quite uneven: 28 of the 40 participants
completed just the minimum of 4 runs each, while the remai-
ning 12 contributed between 5-14 runs. Using subjects' mean
feedback score as an index of individual performance, we
find that the average score for the group contributing 4
runs is 10.16, while for the group contributing more runs it
is 9.18. A t-test for Independent means shows no difference
between the two groups (t=.752, 38 df, ns). Figure 4, depic-
ting mean feedback scores for all subjects, also shows that
there are no consistent trends distinguishing the scores of
the 28 subjects who contributed exactly 4 runs, from the 9
contributing 5-9 runs, and the 3 contributing 10-14 runs.
The evaluation of overall results, utilizing the trial as
unit, was based upon two goodness-of-fit tests - one for
experimental and one for simulation data. These analyses
examine whether the observed distribution of hits, for all
scoring levels, conforms to the binomial expectation (the
probability corresponding to each scoring level multiplied
by the number of trials). The probabilities used to estimate
expectation for each scoring level represent the likelihood
of obtaining exactly (rather than "at least") a pair hit, a
row hit, etc.; they thus allow each scoring level to be
treated independently. The probabilities corresponding to
each level of hitting are direct hit, 1/16; pair hit, 1/16;
row hit, 1/8; half-page hit, 1/4; and miss, 1/2. (For
example, in the facial-outline example cited earlier, with
D2 as target, there Is exactly 1 way to obtain a direct hit,
1 way to obtain specifically a pair hit