A REVIEW OF PUBLISHED RESEARCH ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF SOME PERSONALITY VARIABLES TO ESP SCORING LEVEL

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 21
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 13, 1998
• Sequence Number: 14
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For R 4ease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96 87R000400100014-4
Parapsychological Monographs
A Review of Published Research
on the
Relationship of Some Personality
Variables to ESP Scoring Level
GORDON L. MANGAN
Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand
Published in 1958
PARAPSYCHOLOGY FOUNDATION, INC.
29 West 57th Street, New York 19, N. Y.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved For tease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96 187R000400100014-4
Nash and Richards (26) in 1947 first investigated the relationship be-
tween a measure of intelligence and scores obtained in a series of PK tests.
The I.Q. scores of their 48 college subjects, obtained from the Higher
Examination of the Otis Self-Administering Tests of Mental Ability,
showed a very small correlation (-.12) with PK scores.
Summary on Intelligence and ESP
The nature of the relationship between intelligence and ESP scoring
level is still undefined. Valid objections, which preclude any clear-cut
conclusions being drawn, can be levelled at most of the studies that have
been made.
In the first place, they have often involved too few subjects, a fact which
makes generalization difficult, despite some high correlations. Again,
the same intelligence test was never used by two investigators, and since
different tests may be sampling different aspects of intellectual ability,
the results are not strictly comparable. In addition, not all the intelligence
scales or estimates used arc of equal validity, and in two cases, the in-
vestigation of the relationship between intelligence and ESP scoring
level was a side-issue to the main experiment.
One tentative conclusion, however, may be drawn. There seems to
be one factor conducive to a correlation between ESP scoring level and
intelligence, namely, when the "best" estimate of scores is used as the
ESP criterion.
By the use of the "best" estimate of scores rather than averages for the
ESP criterion, Humphrey found that the correlation between intelligence
ratings and ESP scoring increased. An estimate based on the best results
achieved should eliminate those fluctuations due to factors other than
intelligence, such. as boredom and fatigue, which are known to affect
scoring level, and give a purer estimate of ESP to be correlated with in-
telligence. Obviously the overall average run scores need not be an ac-
curate reflection of the subject's real ESP ability.
Ilumphrey's findings particularly suggest either that the more intelli-
gent subjects have better ESP, or that the obtained correlations between
intelligence and ESP scoring are merely indicative of the subjects' adapt-
ability to the test situation. No more definite judgment can be made at
this stage.
[10]
C. E. Stuart was mi
lu?rsonality' factors an
cxprritncnt involving i
their effect Oil LSI' see
role of "atfcctahility"
mite of iiii success in
xlrc he has just prc%
In I9-I6 Stuart (52
list of GO items. Suhjec
which varied from "li
list, which included cv
Cu{h'ee su idelits, was
iti thc? expcruitent.. `I?ii~
c 'incr;llcd stimulus pi which were closely re,
o.tte whether the sul.,i
lIicturcs influcnccdtin
lic'c claievovauicc
tttatchinc mctliod, dc'
tit, .. The total LSI
I'M only one nun- i
rtes mule on the in,
to rite fi''c attitudes rc
%%:1s no t'vidci'ice, Itow
the stimulus picture'
St ia,t then separaf
tla;t'c hit'h fell near (
=rv(1(?nIle) from time Ili
i>i? 'ttl,ject.v to be `'art
,eI of asl)iration"
t chance, and ''tin.;
I?.al'c"r, Stuart tquatc'
?ala.idcrcd till' ctitrctt
nr turf as the "ttnaflcr
In the citawinq t
:llcct:ail~" crimp ht
1 hti~ard displ:icesnn
_~ ht nt?',tti.ve cirv iatts_
;:r dcv ati,iit (1i--.OOt
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 ,,
 Approved For tease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96 -W'787R000400100014-4
Summary of ESP and Interest Ratings
The successful discrimination between high and low scaring ESP sub-
jects on the basis of ratings oil both the full Interest Inventory and on
the restricted 14-item scale, which was reported by Stuart and Humphrey
in earlier investigations, did not hold up as well in the later series. The
results of these later series, however, are not published in their entirety,
but are merely briefly mentioned by Humphrey in a review (19). Whether
this decreased efficiency reported was in fact due to the lack of a real
relationship between interest ratings and ESP scoring level, or whether
it was due mainly to widely differing psychological conditions, such as
number of runs per subject, or type of ESP test, which obtained during
the later series, cannot be determined from the information available.
Inspection of the items of the full scale indicate that they cover fairly
well the full range of student activity and interest. Stuart equated
"affcctability" with range of interest; this fact, added to the pervasiveness
of the scale, seems to indicate that mid-range subjects may be those who
are moderate in their interests and who maintain a reasonably temperate
attitude towards their environment.
Inspection of the 14 items of the restricted scale, however, suggests
that they measure what could be loosely described as "social adjustment";
perhaps it would be more correct to say that the scale is heavily weighted
in favor of the more social or extravertive activities. The two scales appear
to be measuring somewhat different factors, and it would seem essential
to analyse the scales against established criteria in order to get at what
each scale basically is measuring. Without information so secured, we
can merely conclude that although both scales, to a different degree,
separate high and low ESP scorers, the personality traits concerned in
this differentiation remain in doubt.
INTROVERSION-EXTRAV1
Iumphrey first reported an 1iSP
Personality Inventory in 19,15 (13).
the l;arlhatn College Series I (Cl;s
rill(] the Humphrey-Pratt Precognit
jrcts; licrnreuter ratings on 6 perso
kill ciency, introversion, donhrnanc
iousuess were correlated With I
s ?r:r,nition series, the CR of the diff r;ttarters of the record page was tak
6w correlations between llcrnrcuter
lilt; subjects who were stable, extra
however, tended to score positivelx
" iplxrsitc characteristics tended to sr
lluntphrey (16) later utilized th,
drternhiue a cut-off point on the s
hit h and low scoring ESP subjects.
v r is were judged to be extraverted o
tt?'v scored above or below the 50t
f hitdiiy significant positive deviatit
t: nuts scored at chance. 'Fhc CR
1. 'P scores for the two groups w,,,is
'I 'a 1
I SP Scoring Levels of Extrt
Subjects Scoring
above Chance
14
5
19
o,a Ole basis of these results it was
`rrlr Percentile on the Iiernr?cu
*r fill I:SP card tests than those N%-
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved ForWlease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%6787R000400100014-4
The two series on which the prediction was tested were the Pratt-
Humph-rey Precognition and the unpublished Lawrence Clairvoyance Series,
In the Pratt Humphrey series, the ten extraverts had a deviation of
-I--56, and the nine introverts a deviation of --34. The CR of the difference
was significant (P - .02). In the Lawrence series, the 9 extraverts made
a deviation of +48, the 12 introverts a deviation of --18. The CR of the
difference was non-significant (P - .08). The total of 19 extraverts from
the two series made a deviation of -{-104, and the 21 introverts a devia.
tion of -52. The CR of this difference was significant (P - .005).
As shown in Table 5, the consistency of this separation was significant
(P .005) with 74 per cent of the extraverts scoring above chance and
76 per cent of the introverts scoring at chance or below.
Attempts at Repetition
Caspar (5) administered the I3ernreuter Inventory to 20 subjects and
obtained 2 GESP and 2 BT runs from each. He classified his subjects
as extraverts or introverts on the basis of whether they scored above or
below the 50th percentile on the scale. The extraverts had a deviation
of +26, and the introverts a deviation of =-18. The CR of the difference
was suggestive (P _- .03). Eight of the fourteen extraverts scored above
chance, but none of the six introverts did. When evaluated by the exact
method, the results are significant (P -- .02).
Although. only two studies have been reported with the Bernrcuter,
it appears, to be a very promising research tool. In both studies, high and
low scoring ESP subjects were separated with a high degree of consistency.
In the Nicol and Humphrey study (27) correlations were obtained
between ESP scores (Known and Unknown runs) and two measures
of introversion-extraversion. Factor T of Guilford's STDCR Inventory
is called 'T'hinking Introversion-Extraversion. The thinking introvert is
given to reflective thinking and analyzing himself and others, while
the opposite holds true for the thinking extravert. The correlations be-
tween Factor T and the known ES1' scores was ?-I-.10, with the Unknown
scores +.37,* and with total ESP scores +.33.
Factor S of this same test is called Social Extraversion,; it correlated
+.29 with Known ESP scores, +.21 with Unknown scores, and ?.34
with total ESP scores. None of these correlations was significant, but a
significant correlation (-k.54**) was found between Social Extraversion
and Self-Confidence (Factor I ) and a suggestive correlation (+.37*)
was found between Thinking Extraversion and Self-Confidence. The
latter correlations have value in this study. Self-confidence was found
to be the factor most highly correlated with total ESP score (r + .55 *
A person with a high score on Factor S is characterized as being social,
as one who tends to seek social contacts and enjoys the company of others,
while low scores indicate shyness and seclusiveness.
Summary of Introversion-Extraversion and ESP Scoring Levels
In all the studies reviewed in this section, it was found that extraver-
sion was associated with higher ESP scores than introversion. This factor,
or more precisely, the scales on which this factor is measured, separated
out high and low scorers with a high degree of consistency. Unfortunately,
however, it is not clear which aspects of behavior are included under the
terra extraversion, and for evaluative purposes it would seem essential
to have more specific information on the factors underlying this broad
[16 )
,, ,nprchcnsive Cate 'gory. P
. n,ension scales, such &;
,e factor, and it is uncert.
i.,clors as, or example, '
tcrm3 of classification oil t'
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved ForIease 2001/03/07 : C.IA-RDP9660787R000400100014-4
. `Do you believe in the cxia_
-css ESP abilities?' If we split
-cr category including mein,.
tv or the other, we find that
I by Schrneidler and Bevan.''
,lislicd,data bearing on the
c 10.
nut of 6 cases, the sheep had
sheep, with one exception
?., with 2 exceptions, hacl
t subjects who, for conven_
,ern lumped together as in-
;idcrable variation.
els, which was reported in
,at Groups (Petrol)
:Is Scoring
Chance
Totals
18
10
10! 12! 16!
28! 121 6! 0! 10!
scored above chance and
is pattern of scoring was
oIle-tailed probability is
c (IP, _ .01).
ran be considered as at-
estion which needs to be
as confirmation of Sell.
a" criterion on which the
idler herself changed the
series reported in 1943
Ieir attitude to psychic
dance in particular; the
na would occur, or who
-rejected the possibility.
, the two categories arc
chance". There seems to
flats, who rejected the
'orc at chance; on the
who accepts the reality
Ks to score at chance in
test situation. This could be a matter of confidence rather than belief.
ill her later series, Schmeidlcr defined sheep as those who thought
,t paranormal success in the experiment was at least a possibility,
:,:us as those who denied that there was any possibility of paranormal
,,cress under the conditions of the experiment. In her 1954 P-F study,
:.luneidler used essentially the same criterion, although some of the
::,,Ills in the sentence completion questionnaire, used to rate the sub-
??ct's attitude to the test situation as such, furnished additional informa-
:on on his attitude of belief.
Bevan's criteron was somewhat different. Ile first of all asked his
.uhjccts whether they accepted ESP as an established fact. If they did
:;ut they were goats; if they did, after laboratory methods of testing ESP
were demonstrated, they were asked, "Do you think that ESP can be
measured by the techniques just explained to you?" If the answer was
"no" or "don't know", the subject was disqualified. All subjects placed
themselves on a continuum from belief to disbelief; Bevan thus obtained
a category of inclecisives. For the purpose of comparing Bevan's and
tichrneidler's work, the inclecisives should be combined with the sheep.
In series A of his experiment, Caspar asked his subiects whether they
believed in ESP (sheep), whether they were undecided (indecisives),
or whether they disbelieved (goats). In the second series, however, his
subjects were asked three questions; "Do you know what the term ESP
means?", "Do you believe that ESP is a theoretical possibility?", "Do
you believe that you yourself have ESP ability?" As Caspar himself
points out, question three of the questionnaire, concerning the sub-
ject's belief in his own ESP ability, resembles most Schmeidler's criterion.
He reports that, in the limited part (Series B) of his experiment that can
he compared with her results, the sheep (sheep and indecisives) averaged
-1.89 hits per run, and the goats 4.97; a more detailed analysis is not
presented.
Kahn's criterion was whether subjects thought that ESP is theoreti-
rally possible (1) in this particular experiment, (2) under other circum-
stances. Ile found that one group of subjects considered ESI' "impossible
here only", that is, in the test situation. These have been entered in
fable 10 as indecisives, but, in accordance with Schmcidler's final
critt~ion, they should be included in the goat category, together with
the "impossible anywhere" group. Kahn further questioned his sub-
jects on whether tticy expected to score above chance, at chance, or
below chance. This overlaps with Schmeidler's initial criterion; Kahn,
however, treats this as a separate analysis, bearing on the confidence of
the subject in the experimental situation.
1?ilbcrt considered both those subjects who were rated as "believes
in ESP and thinks he will do well in the experiment" and "believes in
1';SP but doubts that he will do well in the experiment" as sheep; those
who were doubtful about the whole thing, who rejected ESP corn-
pletely or who gave contradictory responses, were goats. His criterion
is sinlila.r to Schmeidler's; his results may be fairly compared with hers.
Woodruff and Dale asked their subjects three questions; "Do you
believe in the existence of ESP?", "Do you believe you possess ESP
abilities?", "I think my results in the above experiment are `above
t:hance', `at chance', `below chance'." Unfortunately, however, they
,Wade no overall sheep-goat assessment on all three items of their ques-
tionnaire. The subjects' scoring averages can merely be presented in
terms of classification on each item singly.
[35]
Approved For'Fe~easex`001%0/07:`'CIA= 1096-007878000400100014-4
 Approved For "ease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96`+9d787R000400100014-4
Experimenter
Type ESP
Sub.
Runs Dev.
Score Sub.
Runs Dev.
Scoi
Bevan
GESP
Cl
20
232
+110
5.47
10
120
+2
5.0.
Caspar
GESP
Cl
4.89
4`t:
Eilbert
Cl
37
185
+39
5.21
4
20
_2_'t
Kahn
Cl
62
733
+42
5.06
12
143
+13
5-'"
Petrof
Cl
29
232
d-1
5.00
10
80
-18
4
Dale and
Woodruff
(a)
(b)
(c)
Cl
Cl
Cl
460
1040
1500
+20
-3
-9
5.04?
4.997
4.99
1500
920
460
d-35
+58
-1-64
Inspection of the Table shows that in three cases the sheep (slit `?
and indecisives) scored higher than the goats, in three cases the C
higher than the sheep. Although the various experimenters in U.
cases obtained successful discrimination of high and low ESP
in terms of the sheep-goat criterion as each one defined it, these t'"
not be regarded as repetitions of Schmcidler's results.
COMBINATIONS OF RO1:
WITH ATTITUDES OI" ll
The Rorschach is a widely
arc' cards, administered in a
ponds by reporting what he
'''lie underlying principle is t
such ambiguous material, tin
ielf into the material. This s,
patterning of the subject's uni
"omc indications about many
he is rigid or flexible in his all
give, creative, anxious, inteilcc
A quantitive index of the sl
through use of a check list de
utore check marks are given
to in an atypical manner, ant
a single score representing the
In the ESP series, an iutrnt
iuhjccts then classified tltcrosc
ru,tupleted 3 clairvoyance ru
nitrir results as the target of
, soceeded until a total of 9
Hie group Rorschach test w?,
,Ilk blots on a large screen. '1
`r4ty.
1'he Rorschach records w
a':d subjects having 10 check
a ,iccts with 11 or more ch
rliniinate any possibility
inneidler was kept ignor:a
"Ill checked by an assistant
In preliminary work with
':tneidler noticed that U
".`tt the sheep-goat rating, i
P 'coring levels.
Ihe poorly ndjisted suhjc
the difference between
the well adjusted suhjc
-nn of Nve11 adjusted sbc
well adjusted goats 'sm.,
'.'Atrtd in future cries, at,
r fall of 19'15.
R'.,r':chach data frt.
_zrnts (1 i j Nvcrc ana'y7c
[36]
In considering these various analyses, it appears that no strict answer
can be given to the question of whether Schmcidler's results have been
repeated. In the first place, her criterion was initially a shifting one,
and the criteria others workers used clifl'cred from hers, in some cases
considerably. In addition, there were differences existing in subjects
(high school, volunteers and college), differences in targets (ESP sym-
bols, IBM sheets), differences in number of runs per subject (4,5,6,8,12),
differences in ESP situation (clairvoyance and GESP), and differences
in the experimenters (seven different experimenters).
The question is an extremely important one, however, and some sort
of comparison, however crude, seems necessary. This is attempted in
Table 12 by fitting the various criteria to Schmeidler's as closely as
possible. Thus, since Schmeidler combined indecisive and sheep, in
Table 12 Bevan's, Petrof's and Eilbert's indecisives are combined with
their sheep. In Kahn's experiment, the indecisives were those who con-
sidered that ESP was "impossible here only," i.e. in the test situation.
These are included in the goat category in accordance with Schmcicller's
final criterion. Only that section of Caspar's results which he himself
claimed to be comparable with Schtneidler's results is included in Table
12. In the Woodruff and Dale experiment, no break-down is given for
the whole series. Differentiation in terms of three items, each of which
partly includes the sheep-goat criterion, is presented here.
'Table 12
Sheep-Goat Data of Other Workers
VX_
roved For Release 2,QQ_9Q107Rfl04001000'114'=a
 Approved Fos (ease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96 0787R000400100014-4
t appears that no strict answer
Schcncidler's results have been
n was initially a shifting one,
(red from hers, in some cases
!ifferences existing in subjects
Clcrences in targets (ESI' syni-
,f runs per subject (4,5,6,8,12),
and GESP), and differences
erimenters).
Ione, however, and some sort
-ccssary. This is attempted in
to Schmcidler's as closely as
ce.d indecisive and sheep, In
indccisives are combined with
rclecisives were those who con-
113'," i.e. in the test situation,
accordance with Schmeidlcr's
?ar's results which he himself
s results is included in Table
0., no break-down is given for
,)f three items, each of which
presented here.
Av.
Score Sub.
4.89
Av.
Runs Dev. Score
120 .1.2 5.02
5.21 4
5.06 12
5.00 10
3.04
x.997
11.99
1500 +35 5.02
920 +58 5.06
460 +64 5.14
rec cases the sheep (sheep
s, in three cases the goats
nos experimenters in most
acigic and low ESP scorers
one defined it, these need
results.
COMBINATIONS OF RORSCIIACH ADJUSTMENT RATINGS
WITH ATTITUDES OF BELIEF AND ESP SCORING LEVEL
The Rorschach is a widely used projective test consisting of 10 stand-
ard cards, administered in a set order; to these cards, the subject re-
sponds by reporting what he sees or what the blots represent to him.
The underlying principle is that in order to structure anything from
such ambiguous material, the subject must project something of him-
self into the material. This structuring is interpreted as reflecting the
patterning of the subject's unconscious needs and drives, thereby giving
some indications about many facts of his personality, such as whether
he is rigid or flexible in his approach to situations, whether he is impul-
sive, creative, anxious, intellectually ambitious, socially withdrawn.
A quantitive index of the subject's overall adjustment can be made
through use of a check list devised by Dr. Ruth Munroe (24). One or
more check marks are given for each Rorschach category responded
to in an atypical manner, and these check marks are added to obtain
a single score representing the subject's degree of adjustment.
In the ESP series, an introduction was given by Schmeidler and the
subjects then classified themselves as sheep or goats. The subjects next
completed 3 clairvoyance runs (a unit of 75 trials), and then checked
their results as the target order was read aloud to them. The testing
proceeded until a total of 9 runs had been completed in this fashion.
T1,.e group Rorschach test was administered by projecting slides of the
ink blots on a large screen. This was given either before or after the ESP
tests.
The Rorschach records were scored by Munro's check list method,
and subjects having 10 checks or fewer were rated as well adjusted, while
subjects with 11 or more checks were ,at--d poorly adjusted. In order
to eliminate any possibility of bias when scoring the Rorschach records,
Schnncidler was kept ignorant of the subject's ESP score, which had
been checked by an assistant and then later double checked.
In preliminary work with 85 subjects from two earlier series (39),
Schmcidler noticed that when an adjustment rating was combined
with the sheep-goat rating, it was possible to obtain greater separation of
I:SP scoring levels.
The poorly adjusted subjects scored at approximately the chance level,
but the difference between the sheep and goats became more marked
for the well adjusted subjects. She advanced the hypothesis that this
pattern of well adjusted sheep scoring higher than poorly adjusted sheep
and well adjusted goats scoring lower than poorly adjusted goats would
be found in future series, and large scale testing cf this hypothesis began
in the Fall of 1945.
When Rorschach data from 250 subjects tested in II classroom cx-
periments (41) were analyzed, the differec.~c in average run score found
[37]
Approved.. or Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved For~Rlease 2001/03/07: CIA-RDP90787R000400100014-4
significant (P = .0002) but
Nance, thus confirming the
,u in later experiments re-
ew article (32) presented a
experiments utilizing the
^ctobcr 1945 and December
I in Table 13.
Adjustment Ratings
No. Runs Av. Score
1121 4.97
2205 4.95
-cn the average scores of
significant (P .000003).
means of the poorly ad-
1.4).
and Goat Groups
jects Scoring
below Chance Totals
37 (1 (I.#)
3001
COMBINATIONS OF RORSCIIACH SEVEN SIGNS WITH
ATTITUDES OF BELIEF AND ESP SCORING
In an attempt to explore further the relationships between Rorschach
variables and ESP scoring, Schmcidler decided to analyze the 250 Ror-
schach protocols from her first work (41) for particular categories that
seemed to appear more frequently in the records of high and low scoring
subjects. She isolated 7 factors or signs whose presence in a subject's
record seemed to act as deterrents to ESP scoring.
If these seven signs are analyzed in terms of their interpretative signifi-
cance, three patterns of "response tendencies" seem to emerge. A cold,
withdrawn, restricted attitude can be inferred from the presence of
F+%, Mr., and no shock; extreme impulsiveness or lack of emotional
control from the presence of CF+ and C+; and excessive, near-com-
pulsive mental activity or "quantity ambition" from the presence of
R+ and total movemcnt++. Thus, subjects who have even one of
these seven signs present in their record could be considered to have a
s/iecific maladjustment which might prevent them from demonstrating
ESP.
After having empirically determined these seven signs from this
collection of 250 records, Schmcidler went on to gather new data from
other subjects to see if the seven signs would continue to show the same
relationship to ESP scoring. The two review articles (33, 34), which
report further testing with the Rorschach, indicate that absence of seven
signs continued to be associated with higher scoring, i.e., her data
show that sheep in whose records these signs do not appear score higher
than sheep in general, and goats from whose records the signs are ab-
Table 15
ESP Data of 250 Subjects from whom 7 Signs were Empirically Derived
7 Signs No. Subjects
No. Runs
Average Score
Sheep
Present
66
590
4'II4
Absent
51
459
5.44
Goats
Present
62
559
5.09
Absent
71
638
4.73
-ted subjects arranged in
own indicates that when
p were positive scorers,
hance scorers. The chi-
`illy a one-tailed test of
ins were predicted from
sent score lower than goats in general. Table 15 shows the scoring levels
of the original 250 subjects from whose records the data were derived;
Table 16 shows the scoring level of 329 additional subjects whose rec-
ords were subjected to a similar analysis.
[39]
pp roved
aivib fib /07j :ii4-1 P96- 07 Uoi k 0100014-4
 Approved For %Oease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP961-W787R000400100014-4
The Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study (P-F) is a projective tech.
nique used to obtain a measure of a person's reaction to frustration. It
consists of a booklet of 24 cartoons, each depicting an unpleasant or
frustrating circumstance, such as missing a train, in which one person
makes a remark of frustrating significance, depriving or blaming the
other. The subject responds on behalf of ti-ie frustrated person. The
drawings are deliberately crude, having only indistinct facial features
and a minimum of background provided.
The test can be. scored for several different categories but so far only
three have been used for research in parapsychology. These three are
defined as follows:
Extrapunitiveness-refers to aggression overtly directed toward the
environment in the form of blaming some outside force for the frustra-
tion or of placing someone else under an obligation to solve the diffrcult~'.
Intropunitivencss-aggression is expressed overtly by the subject against
himself in a martyrlike fashion with an acknowledgment of guilt or
shame, or by assuming the responsibility to clear up the situation.
Impunitiveness-aggression is evaded or avoided in any overt form,
and the situation is interpreted as being insignificant or no one's fault
or as likely to solve itself if the subject simply waits or conforms.
The first indication that the P-F might be a useful test in parapsychology
grew from a thesis study by L. Eilbert at CCNY. An article by filbert
and Schmcidler (7) reported that when the P-F scores of Eilbcrt's sub-
jects were divided into four quartiles, the differences between ESP scores
obtained by subjects in the first and fourth quartiles were suggestive
(P around .05). The correlation of _-.32 between extrapunitiveness and
ESP score was significant (P - .01) but the correlation of +.28 for in-
tropunitivcness and +.22 for impunitiveness were only suggestive
(P = .04 and .07 respectively).
Schmeidlcr (43) then attempted to see if similar results could be ob-
tained from analysis of P-F scores which she had obtained during several
years of testing. She had P-F scores for 446 subjects and obtained a
correlation of -.09 between ESP scores and extrapunitiveness (P ==.03)
and a correlation of -{-.10 with impunitiveness (P -= .02). When her re-
sults were combined with filbert's, the correlation of -.12 between
ESP scores and extrapunitiveness was significant (P --.005), and the
correlation of +.12 with impunitiveness was also significant (P =-.003).
These combined data were also analyzed by comparing the difference
in mean ESP score between the subjects scoring in the lowest 10%o and
highest 10% of the Rosenzweig categories. The mean score of the least
extrapunitive (lowest docile) subjects was 5.20, while the mean score
of the most cxtrapunitive (highest docile) subjects was 4.86. This difference
(423
in mean score was significant (P 01
11itivc subects was 4, of 11
IIIIPU
v'a .
this difference in scoresthe
5.2.7;
scoring directions were in all cases in,
than for the goats. In fact, most of tin
tioned were independently significant
for the goats.
Despite the fact that significant co;
twee, the P-F and ESP scores, the cur
the relationships measured would scorn
,night be expected since the P-F scorc-
the subjects would respond to a nnildli
life. This does not necessarily nick.
be expressed in an ESP situation. It N
ideas as to how the subject interprcu'c
joyable experience, the aggressive tci
annoying situation would have little
LSP situation.
To test this assumption, Schtncidlei
in a group setting with the P-F and
annoying the subjects found the l:Sl' di
ance was based upon a combined scot
naire, a variation of the incomplete >c
of a paragraph written on the subject"
sentence method contributed roost he,
Ratings were made along a 7 point
rating, the greater was the clegrec of
.jects. Since the P-F scores were dct
projection into a moderately frustrate
hand that only the P-F scores of suL
,moderately frustrating would be co
annoyance ratings of 5 or 6 were sole'
annoyed group.
Although the correlations betwec,
266 subjects were in the cxpccted
insignificant. IIowc-cr, when the
moderately frustrated subjects wer statistically significant for extralnani
impunitiveness (r =- -}-.21, P =-- .01
cntly significant for the sheep, but
Schmeidlcr's interpretation of the
habitual response to mild frustration
and hostile while making F, SP resl'c
mildly frustrating, and would thci ct
subjects who characteristically rt';u
punitive fashion would emphasize t
ately frustrating experiment and co-(
fore, make higher ESP Scores. I he it
correlation for the intropuni-ovably
virtue of being a goat, was 1
toward the experiment, he nevoid,
in a. frustrating situation, and i,c`
would take upon himself the rc'i".
lie would, therefore, tend to r.,ni.m
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved ForIease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP960787R000400100014-4
stcr, and through securing positiv,
r in such a situation. Such finclinc,
i subject's scoring level in an ESI,
know is how the ESP situation is
VALUE-RATINGS AND ESP
There is one article by Schmcidler reporting on the use of the A p rt-
Vernon Study of Values (AVSV) in an ESP experiment (35). This indicates in which of six different value areas (theoretical, religious,
social, economic, political, or aesthetic) a subject seems to identify him-
self most. Scores are obtained in terms of percentile ranks and subjects
scoring high in one or two areas must necessarily score low in the remain-
ing ones.
Although it had been found that sheep made higher ESP scores than
goats, it is apparent that the subjects' answers to the theoretical question
of whether ESP exists or not did not separate them into clearly distinct
groups with favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward the experiment.
Some of the sheep might find. the experiment boring oirritating and
some of the goats might like competitive tasks and enjoy playing g g
games". Schmcidler had earlier suggested (44) that the sheep-goat
dichotomy would be most meaningful for subjects to whom theoretical
problems are important (that is, subjects with high theoretical scores on
the AVSV).
Table 19
to file Rank on Theoretical
ESP Data Arranged According AVSV
Scale of
Sheep Coats
Percentile
No. Runs
Diff. in
Ave. Score No. Runs Ave. Score Ave. Score
P
All Subjects
504
5.30
455
4.93
.37
.002
Below 90
384
5.18
367
4.95
.23
.06
`88
85
4
85
4
.83
.002
90 or Above
120
5.68
.
.
95 or Above
5.95
24
4.38
1.57
.001
100
24
6.54
8
4.50
2.04
.006
The hypothesis stated before these data were gathered therefore was
that the difference in scoring level between the sheep and goats would
be grcatcr for those subjects who had a strong theoretical orientation.
The problem of whether ESP could be demonstrated in the test situation
should then be one that takes on personal significance for these subjects,
since it is closely related to their systems of values or expectancies. Such
[45]
p~r`oisedFor~ a x`2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved ForIease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%-0787R000400100014-4
subjects would presumably identify more closely with the purpose of the
experiment, that is, to show the presence or absence of ESP.
A total of 63 sus ccts from four different psychology classes were
tested in a classroom setting. Each subject was supposed to classify him-
self as a sheep or goat, make 8 ESP runs, and complete the AVSV. The
theoretical scale of the AVSV was then scored and subjects receiving a
percentile rank of 90 or above were considered to be theoretical subjects.
Table 19 shows the results of the various breakdowns which were made
to compare theoretical and non-theoretical subjects.
In Table 19 it is shown that the difference between the mean scores
of the non-theoretical sheep and goats was not significant (P == .06),
but when the theoretical sheep and goats are considered, the difference
between their average scores is over three times as great as the difference
of the non-theoretical subjects (P = .002). From the table, it appears
that the differences in scoring level continue to become larger as the
degree of theoretical orientation becomes more marked; the P values
associated with these differences are significant or highly suggestive. The
interpretation advanced is that subjects who place increasing emphasis
on theoretical values are able to exhibit a corresponding increase or
decrease in their ESP score.
Generally, the number of cases in each category is too small for such
generalization. In addition, however, when the three categories (90 or
above, 95 or above, and 100) in Table 19 are considered as discrete
rather than continuous categories (ic., 90-94, 95-99, 100), as they should
be in any valid comparison of scoring levels, the differences in scoring
'Table 20
ESP Data Arranged According to Percentile Rank on Theoretical
Scale of AVSV (Amended Figures)
Percentile
No. Runs Ave. Score
Diff. in
No. Runs Ave. Score Ave. Score
P
All Subjects
504
5.30
455
4.93
.37
.002
Below 90
384
5.18
367
4.95
.23
.06
90 or Above
120
5.68
88
4.85
.83
.002
90 to 94
80
5.55
64
5.03
.52
.06
95 to 99
16
5.07
16
4.32
76
.14
100
level between the sheep and goats at each level of theoretical orientation
cease to be significant except in the case of the 3 subjects on the 100th
percentile. These amended figures are shown in Table 20. It is apparent
that although there are significant differences in scoring level bctwcc17
theoretical and non-theoretical sheep and goats as groups, the im-
pressive progression of theoretical level with ESP scores does not stand I'll
under strict evaluation.
[46)
From this review of the pc;
studies, it seems that some pr.
the personality characteristic:
subjects. As a generalization
somewhat extraverted, secure.
ably disposed towards ESI', it,
tend to score high, while su
tend to score low.
It was stated at the begiiu
propriatc to review the ESP
two basic approaches of Ilu
spects; on the one hand, in
other in the consistercY of t
In general, IIumplrrcy I cr
of questionnaires, or from a
qualities exhibited in drawn
either by herself or by otlu'i
although she did have sour
rived from the ESP maters:
reuter and the Stuart litter
It is generally recognized!
limitations. Regardless of tl
be rernernb'red that Unit >
"surface" traits like cxp;
measuring instrument its, -U
:end to give rise to spurious
the well-known "halo" C11'
,w..rnreuter and Guilford
{actor of the attitude of th
condition his responses to ,a
A second factor is the tc
shown to affect responses o'1.
:t similar influence on seer
q'ply particularly to the
!hc fact that some sO!t;ed
-cnn expansive to comp'.'
would, presumably, clranC
+;nreliability lies in thr fa
.,f drawings dispiaycd ,,ot
probably the explanauu
'tth such scales as the M.
:'eneral explar. ation apps a
ir< ; _ .YCA9SAM00400100014-4
 Approved For1i+ (ease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96787R000400100014-4
y with the purpose of the
ncc of ESP.
psychology classes were
supposed to classify him-
omplete the AVSV. The
and subjects receiving a
_o be theoretical subjects.
-towns which were made
bjects.
ictween the mean scores
t significant (P = .06),
K)nsidcrcd, the difference
pis great as the difference
nn the table, it appears
ao become larger as the
c marked; the P values
,r highly suggestive. The
!ace increasing emphasis
rresponding increase or
=.)ry is too small for such
three categories (90 or
r considered as discrete
-99, 100), as they should
e differences in scoring
Rank on Theoretical
yures)
Dif#. in
Score Ave. Score P
13 .37 .002
3f theoretical orientation
3 subjects on the 100th
_l,able 20. It is apparent
71 scoring level between
its as groups, the iin-
cores does not stand ill)
CONCLUDING REMARKS
From this review of the pertinent data of most of the ESP-Personality
studies, it seems that some progress has been made towards determining
the personality characteristics of groups of high- and low-scoring ESP
subjects. As a generalization, we might judge that subjects who are
somewhat extraverted, secure, temperate, well-adjusted, who are favour-
ably disposed towards ESP, and who have a high theoretical value system
tend to score high., while subjects who possess opposite characteristics
tend to score low.
It was stated at the beginning of this monograph that it seemed ap-
propriate to review the ESP-Personality research in two sections. The
two basic approaches of Humphrey and Schmcidler differ in two re-
spects; on the one hand, in type of measuring instrument used, on the
other in the consistency of the results achieved.
In general, Humphrey made her personality assessments by means
of questionnaires, or from a more or less objective estimate of certain
qualities exhibited in drawings. Her results were usually not repeatable
either by herself or by other experimenters working along similar lines,
although she did have some repeated success with the E-C rating de-
rived from the ESP material itself, and partial success with the Bern-
reuter and the Stuart Interest Inventory.
It is generally recognized that the questionnaire method has severe
limitations. Regardless of the stability of the factor itself, and it must
be remembered that Humphrey was largely concerned with transitory,
"surface" traits like expansion-compression, security-insecurity, the
treasuring instrument itself is subject to irrelevant influences which
tend to give rise to spurious measurements. In self-rating scales, there is
the well-known "halo" effect, and the amount of "halo" in such scales as
Ilernrcuter and Guilford-Martin is considerable. The strong general
factor of the attitude of the subject to the experimental situation may
condition his responses to a considerable degree.
A second factor is the temporary mood of the subject. This has been
shown to affect responses on the Bernrcuter scale, and it probably exerts
a' similar influence on security-insecurity assessments. It would seem to
apply particularly to the expansion-compression ratings, judging from
the fact that some subjects rated by one judge were found to change
from expansive to compressive in the one experimental session, and
would, presumably, change from day to day. An additional sourcz of
unreliability lies in the fact that ratings by two judges on the same set
'If drawings displayed not a great deal of consistency. The second factor
It probably the explanation of the non-repeatability of the E-C studies;
Iitli such scales as the Maslow and Bernreuter, however, the first, snore
ecneral explanation appears more pertinent.
[47]
Approved o':s
I '=Rb'P9S-007'87R000400100014-4
 Approved ForeIease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9660787R000400100014-4
Schmeidlcr generally used attitude classifications and projective
techniques. She obtained consistent results, and her experiments were
generally repeatable. Insofar as the sheep-goat classification is cun.
cerned, however, the question remains of precisely what factors are icl-
volved in this differentiation. In the first place, is it possible for a subject
to give an unequivocal answer to the question of his attitude towau?l];
parapsychology, which is a multi-dimensional subject? Ile may acecl-a
one aspect of psi (telepathy, for example), and reject another (clair.
voyance, for example); in such a case, differentiation must obviou~,hv
be made along these lines. Further, it is possible that in addition to ill(.
theoretical acceptance of ESP other factors such as confidence, interc,t
in the experiment, and willingness to co-operate might be concerned
in the sheep-goat differentiation. If these additional factors are involve(],
the subject's answer might merely reflect much deeper multiphasic
motivational factors.
Concerning the personality measurements obtained from projective
tests, it is generally agreed that the factors measured on Rorschach and
the P-F Scale are basic fundamental aspects of personality structure.
Because of the endurance of this structure, one would expect to get
repeatability of differentiation in terms of Rorschach and P-F criteria
providing the tests themselves are reliable. When we describe separa-
tion in terms of Rorschach or P-F variables, we are describing a somewhat
gross estimate in each case, and it seems reasonable enough to assume
that the Rorschach estimate of adjustment and the P-F estimates of
extrapunitiveness and intropunitiveness, in their gross evaluation, arc
reliable enough measures. Since there has been repeated success in dis-
criminating high and low scorers on the basis of these criteria, we imply
that there is a relationship between these deeper factors and E SP.
It must be remembered that in all ESP experiments, the role of the
experimenter is a vital one. A factor which might contribute to
consistency or lack of it in any series of ESP experiments is the delicate
experimenter-subject relationship. The effect of such a factor is very
difficult to estimate, as it involves the personalities of the experimenter
and the subject, and their interaction. In considering this problem of
consistency of results, however, cognizance should be taken of the possible
effects of such a factor.
It must be emphasized that at this stage of ESP-personality research,
more successful predictions of ESP scoring levels have been made on a
group than on an individual basis. Certainly the greatest amount of re-
search effort has been directed towards differentiation of scoring levels
on the basis of single personality measurements. This is a. separation in
terms of direction rather than amount of deviation, and as such, is
generally not discriminating enough for the purposes of in'diviclual pre-
diction. For example, though Schmeidler's poorly adjusted group, as
a group, scored around chance, the variation in range of individual
scores, from very high to very low, was statistically significant.
Better prediction of direction of group deviation has resulted from the
use of combinations of personality measurements, rather than single
dimensions. Evidence for the efficiency of such combinations is offered
by Humphrey with combinations of E-C and Interest ratings, and E-CX,
and Security-Insecurity ratings, by Schmeicller with combinations of
sheep-goat and adjustment criteria, sheep-goat and "absence of seven
signs" criteria and sheep-goat and value ratings and by Nicol and Iluin-
phrey with a combination of confidence and emotional stability factors.
[48]
These combinations permitted
measures used in isolation,
Schmcidler's AVSV study i
the sheep-goat attitudinal clay:
linear relationship between 1.`1
orientation. Although no su ic
predictions were made. ( fort r
(numbering 1-5). 1),0
with theoretical orientation it
criticisms notwithstanding, this
this area.
Of major importance is the
some success in predicting irn_l
personality ratings, using no,
level of s mreporle(l ost promi.-ir
the approach
In the final evaluation, it .a
unique factors in a suhjcct s
possesses marked tendencies i
stimulated to competition, it
predicting the direction, and.
ESP deviation. The qucstiou
characteristics possesscd by th
similar in kind to those posse ~'
above chance, and whether
therefore, might reasonable'
the characteristics possessed
to be one of the major probie
The answer ma of Nvell the coil, intensive study p ''
jects, and direct oslp'fasu l.1
displayed by g' p'
on the other, from develop(
techniques for sclccting melt"
levels, solely on the basis ul
tests and assessments.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4
 Approved FortIease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96Y0787R000400100014-4
.cations and projective
d her experiments veer,
:tt classification is con_
;cly what factors are in.
is it possible for a subject
of his attitude towards
-iubjcct? He may accept
d reject another (clair.
ntiation must obviously
that in addition to the
h as confidence, interest
ite might be concerned
anal factors are involved,
_ich deeper multipliasic
btained from projective
_,urcd on Rorschach and
K)f personality structure.
is would expect to get
schach and P-F criteria
len we describe sepa.ra-
a?e describing a somewhat
-liable enough to assume
id the P-F estimates of
-ir gross evaluation, arc
repeated success in dis-
these criteria, we imply
factors and E SP.
)eriments, the rcle of the
2h might contribute to
-periments is the delicate
if such a factor is very
dies of the experimenter
siclering this problem of
-Cl. be taken of the possible
"',SP-personality research,
Is have been made on a
c greatest amount of rc-
itiation of scoring levels
;. This is a separation in
-iation, and as such, is
rposes of individual pre-
Worly adjusted group, as
in range of individual
-aUly significant.
on has resulted from the
%nits, rather than single
t combinations is offered
.nterest ratings, and E-C
-r with combinations of
and "absence of seven
and by Nicol and Ilurn-
notional stability factors.
These combinations permitted greater differentiation than any of the
measures used in isolation. c eared Once
Scsheeple0ast AVSV attitudinal study ti'n, there app nee
the sheep_ a
iedictions were made,
linear relationsh~~ ~hwnol st~P ly scoring v id ualap degree of theoretical
orientation. r ou -is which in some cases were very small
predictions wcr). One for g point out that the progression of ESP scores
One must 1 impressive as it appears; these
(numbering ical
with theoretical orientation is not as criticisms notwithstanding, this study is an important contribution in
this area. unip
Nico Of major importance is tiindividual by SP scores froxm a knowl dgerof
some success in predicting multiple regression analysis. Although the
personality ratings using
level of success reported is not high) the method is a valuable one,
the approach most promising.
In the final evaluation, it appears clear that if. something is known he
unique factors in a subject's personality make-up, if,
possesses marked tendencies towards social participation, or is easily
stimulated to competition, it is possible to utilize this informatio n in ree,
t of
e predicting the direct. uc t on sill re nainscof rwh ttl erg the personality and, a much
ESP deviation. The? q
Jb
rare simil ae ki tosthOsdpossessed by groups of subjeccts who scoresligl tly
above in n kind evel above chance, and whet whether the
a.ttrilnite d tof differences in is nount of
therefore, might reasonably possessed or to motivational factors. This appears
the cli t problems in this area of ESP personality research.
to beone of the ma~orsources-on from lYl two
The answer may well c C1 e fro ty makeup of the fc ~lvel gh cori di~g sub-
j ects,i study of the persona
and,
jests, and direct comparison with what is known of the aligrioup'ri and,
bscctotrecr positively,
displayed by groups of subjects who
ing
on the other, from dcvi ldividuals and predicting their probable scoring
techniques for selecting ersonality
levels, solely on the basis of measurements on a number o# p
tests and assessments.
[ 491
.,,prove se- -i1/03 - CIA-ROP9'6-007878000400100014-4