Approved For Retease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-80787R000400100014-4 Parapsychological Monographs No. I A Review of Published Research on the Relationship of Some Personality Variables to ESP Scoring Level GORDON L. MANGAN Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand Publishea in 1958 PARAPSYCHOLOGY FOUNDATION, ING 29 West 57th Street, New York 19, N.Y. So netern tera $9 RRO EPROM STEN CE eT Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-€Q787R000400100014-4 Nash and Richards (26) in 1947 first investigated the relationship be- tween a measure of intelligence and scores obtained in a series of PI tests. The 1,Q scores of their 49 college subjects, obtained from the Higher Examination of the Otis SolAdministering ‘Yesis of Mental Ability, showed a very small correlation (~.12) with PK scores, Summary on Isteligence ond ESP ‘The nature of the relationship, between intelligence and ESP scoring BRE level is still undefined, Valid objections, which preclude any clear-cut ie conclusions being drawn, ean be levelled at most of the studies that have been made, Tn the first place, they have often involved too few subjects a fact which makes generalization difficult, despite come high correlations, Again, the same intelligence test was never used by two investigators, and since Gifferent tests may he sampling different aspects of intellectual ability, the results are not strictly comparable. In addition, not all the intelligence scales or estimates used are of equal validity, ancl in two eases, the in- vestigation of the relationship between intelligence and ESP" scoring Tevel was a side-ssue to the main experiment. ‘One tentative conclusion, however, may be drawn. ‘There seems t0 bbe one factor conducive to correlation between ESP scoring level and intelligence, namely, when the “best” estimate of scores is used as the ESP eritcrion. By the use of the “best” estimate of scores rather than averages for the ESP criterion, Humphvey found that the correlation between intelligence ratings and ESP scoring inereased. An estimate based on the best results achieved should eliminate those uctuations 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 Humphrey's findings particularly suggest cither that the move intellix gent subjects have better ESP, or that the obtained correlations between {nteligence and ESP scoring ave mercly indicative of the subjects’ adape- ability co the test situation, No more definite judgment can be made at this stage. GP, Swart y personality factors an experiment involv their ellect on ESP sev role of “alfectability” inate of his success in ote ie hats just pr Ta 1946 Suaart (! Ais of 6D items. Snbjec sshich varied from fist, which included ey cotiewe soidents, was in the experinient. ‘Th aneealed stimulus pie whielt were closely re tw whether the sub pictures influenced These claievovianes nateling method, des Higa The catal EST Int only one on. is aibjeets to he Si trvel af aspiration’ wi chance, and “unl Paper, Seaet equate sonsidered the extren shop as the “unafle In the diawiar, 1 “etteerable” gan be wos sratistieatle signi : teaksvard digalieriw Soke pewative devia ‘ar deviation (POiK [10] Ap roved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 ; _ mete omcnar sy PEE RTE TERIOR EP FORT ET 1Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-89787R000400100014-4 Summary of ESP ard Interest Ratings ‘The successful discrimination between high and low scaring ESP sub- jects on the basis of ratings on both the full Interest Inventory and on the restricted 14eitem scale, which was reported by Stuart and Humphey 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 cfficiency 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 FSP text, which obtained during the later series, cannot be determined from the information available, Taspection of the items of the full scale indicate that they cover fairly well the full range of student activity and interest. Stuart equated “affectability” with range of interest; this fact, added to the pervasiveness of the scale, sccms to indicate that mid-range subjects may be those who fare moderate in their interests and who maintain a reasonably temperate attiude towards their environment. Inspection of the 14 items of the restricted scale, however, suggests that they mneasure what could be loosely described as “social adfstment”; pethaps it would be more correct to say that the seale is heavily weighted In favor of the more social or extravertive activitics. The two scales appear to be measuring somewhat different factors, and it would seem essential to analyse the scales against established crite order to get at what ‘each scale basically is measuring. Without information so secured, we ‘ean 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. (14) > Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 INTROVERSION-EXTRAVI Humphrey first reported an ESP 13) Personality Inventory in 19 the Laulhaan College Series | (6 viel che Hetmnphrey-Prate Press ives; Hernreuter ratings on 6 pte sulicieney, introversion, ddomiinan: fated wit snition series the CR of the dif ‘utters of the record page was tl «he correlations between evnreuter uimabiec who were table, ext wivever, tended 10. score poste “ppenite charaeterites tented to» Hep (16) ter zd hy termine! et-off point on the hand low scoring ESP subjects ere judged to be extraverted scored above or ilow the 30s Highly significant positive dev tverts scored at chance, ‘The tea 1 chanee. ‘The CR scores for the two groups wa Tab ESP Scoring Levels of Ext Subjects Scoring above Chance uy “ earner ereApproved For lease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%@8787R000400100014-4 smprehensive categury. 1 rey Pasgeit.on which the prediction was teed were the PrateHfumphe + version seals, such as rey Precognition and the unpublished Lawrence Clairvoyance Series, factor, and it is uncerta 4p we Pracamphrey seicy the tn caqavers ie age es Se reremaniete va dances rine IReoversadevistionaf=34 The Cot dedi | ‘nd questionnaice, x geaseitcamt (F = :02), In the Lawrence series, the Sextavereness Sw alteenative has been Srerintion of $4, the 12 intzoverts a deviation of 1M ie Clk cra jwdeMantin or Cattell wh fhe ene Nes non-significant (P 00). The total of 19 extsavere eee ff highly correlated aie: HE, Ses made 4 deviation of +104, and the 21 ingore geo Ihetter estimate of extraves won howe it ie GR of thls dilference vias significant (P= O05) analysis, to coreect for de As shown in Table 5, the consistency of this separation was shee ant ‘This method has been use & ez :005) with. 74 per cent of the extraverts curing shove se and anv) the direction is a prea 16 per cent of the introverts scoring at chance or bela cents of extraversion is) hese Hines Would have mn Altempis at Repetition c {Caspar (5), administered the Bernreuter Inventory to 20 subjects and seid 2 GESP and 2 BY runs from cach, He Clsifed He cate Sega avens oF Introverts on the bass of whether they scored shes Eplow jhe 80th percontle on the scale. ‘The exuavers hat dees Seater tne the Introverts a deviation of ~18. The CR. of dhe dite Ua istestive (P = 08). Hight of the fourteen extravens wor ere cranes; But none of the six introverts die. When evaluated be teens ‘method, the results are signifteant (P 02). foie Nicol and Humphrey study (27) correlations wore oe . 3 scores (Known anc Unknown runs) and two sean of Imrovenionextraversion, Factor of Guilford’s SEDC Inventory, is called ‘Thinking Introversion-Extraversion, ‘Tne thinking introvert is given o reflective thinking and analyzing. himself wet ‘others, while Tne pase holds trve forthe thinking extravert. The cooeeaone ie sores pater, and the known ESP scores was 4.10, with the Urtoy Scores -+.37,* and with total ESP scores 33, rtor S of this same west is called Socin! Extraversion; it coreelated Fak ith Known ESP scores, +21. with Unknown sonra ourctad Menintial ESP scores. None of thise correlations was conics het Significant correlation (-+.54**) was found between Soeet And Sell Confidence (Factor T') “and a suggestive crreamies: Ce. Inteer Und, beeween ‘Thinking Extraversion nad. Sle Comigens wr fatter coreelations have value in this study. Selkeonfcen oe fend pet factor most highly correlated with total ESP cose fe" 554"), ‘A Person with a high score on Factor 8 is characterized ng Cash, social, hate Tone fends seek social contacts and enjoys the company others, while low scores indicate shyness and scclusivecess ‘Summary of Itrvesion-Esiraverson and ESP Scoring Levels In all the studies reviewed in this section, it was found that extraver gion was associated with higher ESP scores than foros oe Ae factor, our high pre pays be sales on which this factor is mensurcd, sepesceed Powesae ind low scorers with a high degree of eonistench, Unfortunately, owever, itis not clear which aspects of behavior are hehwtea eee! the to hase aversion, and for evaluative purposes it would sem ee ‘0 have more specific information on the factors underyine ths mene asic aH te Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-80787R000400100014-4 seperti mnnemtinsntans mathe ttt Anas eat Jnonsive category. Part of the difficulty lies in the fact that single rested wore: the Pratt-Humph. same Gon scales, such as Rernreuter, may mot give a pure measure of Toren istoyancs Same chmenson 6, ro went cas be lend wih sock sweats Tatl'a deviaion of MEE or Game, social and thinking cxtraversion on the. Guile 1 fhe GI of the diference tional, " series the 9 exttaverts made "4 eenacive has been to use a muliple trait seal, such as the Gui iudom of 18 The CR cfare——_,-yaglemstiv ag bon oes mae al eal ch ths Ga he tt of 19 exravets ron gy eomelated tats, whieh fogetier should gve a progresivly wed the 21 introverts a devia- ites eclimate of extraversion, is utilized, and by the use of regression Wsigliean (P =~ 005), heir oti eoreet for the doyres of over besfeen the various ait this eparation was sgnifenne YSN ed has been used with some succes by Nicol and llumphrey, «rts scoring above chance and Vi che cirection is a promising one. Some clarification of the compou cor below. ints of extraversion is necessary, however, before further ‘work along these lines would have much value. Inventory to 20 subjects and rch. Te classified his subjects ‘whether they scored above or hie extraverts had a deviation 10. ‘The GR of the difference arteen cxtraverts scored above When evaluated by the exact 02), ported with the Bernreuter, gl a both studs, high and hha high degree of consistency. *) correlations were obtained ~ wn runs) and two measures Guilford’s SIDGR. Inventor he thinking introvert is self and others, while siravert, ‘The correlations be- vwa8 4-10, with the Unknown ‘xtraversion; it correlated Unknown scores, and £34 lations was sisaificant, but a between Social Exiraversion ssgestive correlation (+.37°) av and SelfConfidenee. The y. Selfconfidence was found total ESP score (r -+ .55**). : social, ‘thers, clhracerized os ei “joys the company of Scoring Levels » it was found tha: extraver= qian introversion. ‘This factor, ftctor is weasured, separated f consistency. Unfortunately, wiot are included under the voses it would scem essential actors underlying this ucoad ."Semoesr enn ron smeEpege Ensen eR TORI PAR Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 EXPANSION-COMPRESSION RATINGS AND ESP SCORING In 1942, while at Stanford University, Stuart (51) developed a tech- nique for judging similarities between four conecaled target pictures and the drawings made by a subject attempting to reproduec the pictures, ‘This technique, called the preferential matching technique (PMT), was used by Stuart to analyse the large collection of drawings he ob. tained at Stanford the latter provided the data to which the expansion. ‘compression ratings were applicd. Paula Fikisch (8) has devised a projective tost which utilizes the form qualitics of children’s drawings, Certain features of the drawings are consideredto indicate neurotic trends, and these features are measured in terms of four criteria: thythm-rule, complexity-simplexity, inteura- nn-disintegration, and expansion-comprossion (E-C), ‘The E-C criters was the only one which subsoquently proved successful in discriminas ting high and Tow scoring ESP subjects. kisch defines expansion and compression as follows: “Expansion stimulates the imagination dynamically. Tt conveys an atmosphere of freedom, courage, adventure, and may be a symptom of vitality and of healthily developed extraversion. Expansion stands for a direc. tion toward the surrounding world; for the potential ability of making contact. .Compression conveys a fecling of discomfett, of being. slut in, of pressure and compulsion. Compression may he, if connected with other iraits, a symptom of a neurotically developed’ introversion, even of a compulsion-newosis. Compression stands for isolation.” Certain aspects of expansion-compression can be fairly objectively described. For example, in making drawings, the compressives use only a small a nount of de available space, their drawings are cramped and badly proportioned, line: are light and feathery, they use too many cone ventionai forms—houses, boats, ete. By means’ of these characteristics it is possible to make an overall assessment of expansion-compression. Drowing Teste In the fuse reported E-C research, Humphrey (20) in 1946 used che data from four series of clairvoyance drawings obtained by Stuart. Of the 96 subjects involved, 41 were rated expansive and 55 compresive. ‘The drawings from each group were scored by the preferential matching technique. With mean chance expectation at 40.0, the mean ESP score for the expansive group tumed out to be 41.88, for the compresive sroup only 37.45. ‘The difference in average seoring level between dhe {wo groups has a significant value (P Although there was no significant overall deviation in his data, Stuar¢ had found significant backward displacement (P= .003) which hid been the main ESP effect. Displacement data were not available for fone series, but a comparison was made between backward. displace- ment scores of the expansives and compressives on the remaining sis fis) Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9648@787R000400100014-4 With mean chance expecta of 29.54 and the 33 campr between the scores of the ts Following this swecessfui Humphrey" applied te sn used the data of the Stu Individual ‘Tests, A total of exch, With mean chance ex sive group was 38.23, for ¢ seoring level between the E-C rating made a GESP drawings. Th the expansives now se mar these two reports i compression, discriminates | soyance and GSP drawing presives are the positive se the nature of the ESP test, A logical follow-up was ti test resulls. The fist study Humphrey (45). The 106 shed (9 make drawings hen qiven 2 BT card runs. nonsignificant. The. dravvir a subject was expansive or expansive, 97 compressive, The average run score ol jresives 4.79, Due the diff However, since there were ted twWo sessions, & total brent. The expansives brad a ‘ing this eonsisteney inte tween the espansives and co Ina large scale expecim Scotty sand MeMahan (53) JP subjects on the basis hetof dl ted 4 clair root aibject did 4 spontanee “is far the purpose of com ‘et different conditions Ea the group series, 63-t wed hy 2 clairvoyance ‘sings, all in one session, he overall results of the 4 troup series were noni ive subjects scored abuve lance, but the dilferene © oh weonip series the 25 es + Srinpressives below chance (P= 01). When t 5 ceoig level was highly Fa the card tests the total « Fes was nun aipniicant sep Thorne eenApproved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96°98787R000400100014-4 ratings were compared against PK scores, it was found that both groups scored slightly above chance. Summary of EAC ratings and ESP scoring ‘This review indicates that the F-C. ratings were not always successful in separating high and low scoring FSP subjects. The best evaluation ‘of the overall efficiency of E-C ratings is Humphrey's 1951 review article ADJUSTMENT k (19). In this she states that in 10 of the 12 clairvoyance drawings scties QUESTIONNA| evaluated up to that time, the expansive subjects, as a group, obtained a higher average ESP score than did the compressive subjects If the prot abilitics associated with, the difference in cach series are combined ly Fisher's method, the E-C difference, considered in its entirety, was siguil- cant (P = .005}, although the overall ESP results of the series were is. significant. Although projective techni ‘Humphrey reported that 54% of the 140 expansive subjects scored ally use! to assess an. indivi above chance, while only 42% of the 345 compressive subjects scored personality hventories and qu above chance. If these percentage figures are evaluated for consistency dan overall adjustment ines of group scoring, a significant chi square of 6.03 (Id. £.) is found (P=.01) inted to adjustment. An ex: In analyzing the GHSP drawings, it was discovered that the compressive ceurity Questionnaire. subjects had a higher average ESP’ score than did the expansives im eight ‘Asliort form of the Mu of the mine series evaluated Hiimphiey states thatthe difference between ssed by Sih and Huinph the two types of subjects for all series pooled is statistically significant, The seeure subjects averaged but the method of evaluation is not specified. 4.71 in 166 runs; the differen There were 29 expesiments completed in which clairvoyance card ot signifieant. tests andl drawings were given each stibject. In 17 of these, dhe expansives Mater aetile by Sear made a positive deviation on card tests while the compressives had a test when applied to. deat negative deviation; in nine experiments this direction was reversed, +f this experiment, the secure and in three no difference between the two groups was found. ‘There tiation onthe drawings than was a deviation of -+62 for the 955 runs of the expansive subjects and Scties the insecure subjcets se deviation of —51 for the 1949 runs of the compressive subjects; the {elu chance. None of these lifference between them was insignificant. “ant. ‘The differences on ‘The difference in average run score for the 26 Duke series was of fieant, with the sceure borderline significane (P= approx. .02), while the three non-Duke C307 and dhe insecure subje series showed a nonsignificant reversal of ellect. Another interesting The Heston Personal, Adj point reported by Humphrey was that the four series in which subject ‘shtain a overall index of were tested individually gave a much larger differen e than that found !evile scores for each of the sis the majority of subjects in the group-tcst scries group- ned positive deviations an In these series where the E-C rating was applied to clairvoyance 2 eores, the psychological conditions varied widely from series to series tained negative deviations. ‘The E-C rating was based on one drawing in some sevies, on two daw voised sas consistent at a si ings in others; sometimes four drawings were wsed. ‘The ratings were ade Kiveis (JU} aduinistered th ministered before the card rune in some of the secics, in others after Ur estents and a eollege group runs. ‘rrol app the subjects wh (On the basis of her experience, Humphrey suggests that the EC ratin® | ciatiy”, “feelings of inader is not dividing subjects according to whether they will score positivch #¥ scores on the elaitvoya or negatively, but rather according to the type of hie distribution ties 2 Sety sight relationship 10 1 =r of the mental health rat the colleve sashicets in the Nicol and derived from ns having a factors which coud emt. Among dose will give, Although compresive subjects as n group gave negative FST scores, closer analysis of te results revealed that this score was due. the bad beginning and that compressves are quite eapable of makins high positive FSP scores after they are “warmed up”. twas also observed that an individual's draveings may change frm expansive to compresive. within a single sation, or between sen With the ESP’ scores tending to reflect these changes. The E-C ati therefore appear to be indicative of the subject's temporary mood. SSC ISP scoring were freede [22] URE PRINCE ETI SERE REN S RTE Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved For Retease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9648@787R000400100014-4 lucky disposition), freedom from nervous tension, emotional stability, calm trstulnes, and low ieitabilty level, Summary on Adjustment Ratings from Questionnaires and ESP Scoring Levels ‘With the exception of Rivers study, the results of the research in- cluded in this section all point toward the conclusion that higher ESP scores arc obtained by subjects possessing the personality characteristies OG generally inchided under the label of “good personal adjustment.” eT Whether well-adjusted subjects score higher because of greater co- ESP § operation, quicket adaptation to the experimental situation, better ability Pate rapport with the experimenten fresdom from personal i Hibitons, sone combination of die factor, of other unsupécted factor in'a matter for further rsearel, Some ofthe researches re: the relationship between ESL cused’ previously, however, of ny combination of i xeon will be der the relationship of ese eo veri eve thea review article Hunph in nwrage wore wes Obl ive between these combine shu represents the pooled verot and the diferenee in ESP Seoring Luv Subjects Scori ‘above Cham Fepansive Molrange itor 6 Compressive Foreme 36 Loe i ‘Tora, Fomhigh gronp and the moneedd, but bear ference war not as s # combination af person Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 4, eater —— ee . peeeeeeeeeaaaApproved For R@jease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-Q9787R000400100014-4 e 2 a found t0 be signifi, able 7 "ey study on inttoversion-xtraversion (16), and raises the question of personality measur ipo optimal nusnber of runs to be used in studies utilizing personality 3). The highest averse. ‘easnipements, Tin a later study, based upon data gathered in the 1952 study and a 1 1958 series, Nicol ane! Humphrey (28) attempted to discover whether Subjects could correctly identify successful FSP calls. Subjects were re- {quested to place a check mark beside each call which they felt was a hit, This, of course, was done before the subject was informed of his success. ‘The method used to evaluate whether an awareness of ESP had been dem= owstrated was to compare the proportion of checked hits against ‘jects (49.98) ands subjects (36.51), ‘ti, * = 0002). The dite pscure and the eo tality combination yas alts of the two studi shows an average checked mises. subjects, and ‘61 fae “The authors reported that the 34 subjects represented in the pooled . © CR of the difference Unknown runs were succesfull in identifying correct calls to a very sant degree (P_-= .0003). This effect did not hold up for the 22 Snot the eae walls clavey wi subjects represented! in the Known runs. Sinee only the Unknown runs secure subjects had fave significant results, hese alone were considered! when the attempt ze subjects. If the fwis made to discaver if “convietion af success” was related to personality ix gave resulis accord, factors (Oly those subjects who gave an average of five to ten checks per run wore incladed in any of the statstial evaluations. The checking sucess OF the confident and unconfident subjects were compared, and it was are subjects and 5.45 found that the 17 unconfident subjects had a significant (P -- .0006) ; TOR ofthe dill «acess of checked hits over misses; the ehecking success of the 12 cmo- with the HC results tionally unstable subjects was also highly significant (P= .002). 8 clairvoyance to the ‘On the surface, these findings appear to have considerable theoretical importance. If on te basis of personality tests, cestain groups of subjects could be selected who “sometimes know when they're right,” the prov ress of ESP research would be considerably advanced. However, there ms which can fairly be leveled at the experimental “suns under known procedare, For instance, it seems questionable to include only subjects having an average of 6-10 checks per ran inthe overall evaluation, Beeause ofthe wellknown bias resulting from atypical scores in computing an average, it would appear that a more appropriate measure of cent tendency, euch ag the mode, might have boct employed to seloct sub- dich eliminates the Js. An interesting comparison would have been to present the overall -onrlation as, BE ‘valuation in terms of all uns having 5-10 cheeks, rather than making 2 (R 4.65) was the subject the basie unit. ‘Another point deserving attention is that there appears to be some rounds for assuming that checking behavior per seis a fumetion of self Confidence. Since the authors meation that quite persistent urging and Jag ¥ as resorted to in an effort to obtain the desired 5-10 checks, scems reasonable to assume thal subjects who were unresponsive to sich prodding could be considered as lacking in confidence. Yet it was = predicted group these same “unconfident” subjects who were excluded from consideration idually, however, when the role of confidence upon checking snccess was investigated, dleviated dl sharply Summary on Combined Personality Measures and ESP a the magninide _ Tn all the reports reviewed in this section, a higher degree of separa- number of rans tion was obtained between subjects when combined rather than single ] ‘nee scores were personality measures were used. ‘This suggests that the expression of 5,im the session, ISP may be dependent upon a number of personality factors Working in 2, after 12 non combination and that the most profitable method of selection for “ob- 2 found in Hume taining high and low scoring ESP subjects would be to use a battery of Dersonality tests rather than single meamures. 27] (28) where a “pure aliore was an average recalled that a bate tered to 36 subjects 2 conditions (knowe are certain crit 3** and emotional ne inter-correlation ng them, there ‘rae factor, seonfidence. and ° {wo measures to- 20 either measure Tommy gi PRR tay etrormmemar niente pte RO RRS ER Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP968@787R000400100014-4 Some of these reports also give indications that through the use of combined personality measures and more refined methods of statistical analysis, it may be possible to show a relationship between personality characteristics and amount of ESP, rather than merely sign of deviation, a3 has been found in studies employing a single personality mncasure and a simple statistical evaluation. ATTITUD! 18 OF Bi “The most active worker pSP scoring level ny Ines (37) on an iavesigntion in of an individual servi postiley of ESP (aliep) The sheep clanifeation a undecided about the post ‘After the subjects had hy testing environments were The goats were placed in periodic knowledge of ren Working conditions, wete © adhe ten eune in te testi sheep and goats were teste "The nest andele (38) se of the sheep for the 3 pool the 574 runs of the goat Ste sini (P01 Since the sheep and she Intonship between the att sinee the posible clfects res nitude of the expe the ferences fm soning “these te see, ire. fal evaluations mt intr dha from which, the hyp ‘core of the sheep world Uypothesis. 7 : Late Series Jn all experiments incl Sere tested under ie cellege stutonty and il Mer of rune’ per sie reader ei find a fol Approved For Release 2001/08/87 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 oeeeaeeecececee sma ragmeranresmrrmp anes: ncopg go BR IrUpREL ETS <:cemENRE Te vearERame newemprpcH ts enApproved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9659@787R000400100014-4 oF 2 very negative response to the questions. ‘Do you believe in the exist. ihe test situation. This cout shee SFP oa Be Jow below you jones ERP abilicg Hi wey in het. ner Sorts x Group into high-low categories, neither category including meet that. paranormal succes, ee LT ‘The serley of thow other ‘workers publishes ee —- sheep-goat clasification are collated in Table 10, n't PeSTPS 0D the Inspection of Table 10 reveals that in 3 out of 6 cases, th jet’s attitude to the test si the goats, with 2 exceptions: had Bevan's eriteron was Fee flevtions. ‘The non-sheep non-goat subjects whi for convene subjects whether they cee fence and for comparative purposes have lyecn lumped tegeten wa tot thoy were goats; if they Alves, bad dleviations which showed cosiderabievariagon ” "=" ere desnonsetedy thes ‘The consistency of the group scoring levels, which was reported in measured by the technique one study only (8), shown ta Table EL ot or “dont know the themselves ona contininien ‘Table 11 sretegory of iadecie ESP Scoring Levels of Sheep and Goat Groups (Petrof) Stes A ot his capers Subjects Scoring Subjects Seorin, Ielieved in ESP (sheep), Group above Chance Below Chance’ "Tota or whether they disbeliev ee subjects were askedd three « Sheep a 7 1a meant”, “Do you believe Goats ai ——— sow eve hat yu Yon eat 9 pints. out, question three = ets belie ini oS 16 He reports that, in the lini * le compared with her re P= Ist 101 12! 16! + 18! tor 121 a6 #29 HN por Fon, and wae eee resent 21) Ware! 26 1 Kalin's eriterion was wh = O11 1 121 61 01 101 cally possible (1) in this p stances, He fauind th ‘Table U1 shows that the majority of sheep scor. eu ieee hore only", that i, the majority of goats below chance. Since thi pattern of aes ond atten of scorine wi Table 10 ‘as indecisives, predicted from Schmeidter’s results, only a. one-tailed probability : criterion, they should be i Feporteds this has a statistically signifieant value (IP Ob, the “impossible anywhere faving reviewed all the researchos which can be considered as at jects en. whether hey est fempts to repeat Schineidier’s findings, the question whieh wees so te telow chance. This over answered is “Can these studies be interpreted as, confess sf ec lowever, treats this as & = , the ajet the expen he erucial problem is obviously that of the criterion on which the Villers considered bot {titcrion as hier experiments progressed. Tn the scties repo ee es USP hut doubts that he v Gp sublcets were merely questioned is to. tier alae 0 tayehie “ho Were doubfal abo phenomena in general, telepathy and clairvoyance in particaloey ihe Hletely oF who gave, cont {heep were those who wondered if such phenomena world occur, or whe ® similar to Schmeicller"s: Pa ai theit Fealcy, the goats those: who rejected the possi, Woodralf and Im the tables presented in the report, however, the two catcgories are ‘lieve in the existence © Jabelled “open-minded” and “expect to score at chance” Mee een lities?”, 1 think, my hing of @ contradiction here. ‘The goats, who rejected, the hance’, fat chance’, ‘bx 4 P, would certainly expect to score at chan. th tude no overall shecp-ge : Other hand, it is possible to imagine @ sheep who nec se oats ® The suljec™ ble to imagine a sheep who accents the reali naire. The. subj (34) “veeApproved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 AREER ESE TER REAR) “mrmengeny mseApproved For@elease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%@6787R000400100014-4 anne A OMRON SAMMI “Do you believe in the exiy. | ~ text situation, ‘Phis could be a matter of confidence rather than belief ess ESP abilities? If we spl ‘iThor later sevfes, Schmefdler defined sheep as those who thought “category including ore at paranormal success in the experiment was at least a possibility, ty oF dhe other, we fad iat « ats'as those who denied that there was any passibility of paranormal by Scheider and Bovan* Wed ander the conditions of the experiment. In her 1954 P-F study, “an, veces, pe ler used! essentially the same criterion, although some of the Alshed data bearing on « te ‘the sentence completion questionnaire, used to rate the sub- 10, {iC oF 6 cases, the sheep had sas ate to the test situation as suc furnished additional informa- sheep, with’ one exception, son on is altitude of bli & with 2 exceptions. had Tone ateron was somewhat different. He first of all asked his € subjects who, for conv atete whether they accepted ESP as an established fect. I shey dit ‘ten Tamped together ae i autthey were goats; f they did, after Iaboratory methods of testing ESP “iderable variation am NPL omated, they were asked, “Do you thiak that BSP ean be Measured by the techniques just explained to you?” If the answer was : Ka of “don't know", the subject was disqualified. Al subjects placed Themselves on. a continuum from belief to disbelief; Bevan thus obtained category of indecisives. For the purpose of comparing Bevan’s and Schmoldler’s work, the indecisives should be combined with the sheep. vals, which was reported in im Groupe (Petrl) Tecister of his experiment, Caspar asked bis subjects whether they 1s Scoring telieved in ESP (sheep), whether they were undecided (indecisives), “Chance Totals Cniwhether they disbelicved (goats). In the second series, however, his Uinjeet were avked three questions; “Do you know what the term ESP 18 tnean”, “Do you believe that ESP is a theoretical possibiity?”, “Do you believe that you yoursclf have ESP ability?” As Caspar himself 10 Paints out, question three of the questionnaire, concerning the sub- $$ Kets belie in his own ESP ability, resembles most Schmeidler's criterion. u 28 Iie reports that, in the limited part (Series B) of his experiment that can he compared with her results, the sheep (sheep and indecisives) averaged = 18! tor 121 a6 489 hits per run, anc the goats 4.97; a more detailed analysis is not TE resented. 2! 121 6! O! 101 Kahn's criterion was whether subjects thought that BSP is theoreti- cally posible (1) in this particular experiment, (2) under other circune stances, He found that one group of subjects considered ESP “impossible scored above chance and here only”, that is, in the test situation, ‘These have been entered in is pattern of scoring was Table 102s indecisives, but, in accordance with Schineidler's final Queialed probability is triteion, they should be included in the goat eategory, together with ee 0b) the “impossible auywhere” group. Kalin further questioned, his subx an be considered as ate jects om whether they expected 10 score above chance, at chance, or estion which needs to be telow chance, ‘This overlaps with Schmeidler’s initial criterion; Kahn, 8 confirination of Sch- however, treats this as a separate analysis, bearing on the confidence of the subject in. the experimental situation. ¥ ctiterion on which the Pilbert considered both those subjects who were rated as “belicves sidler herself changed the in ESP and thinks he will do well in the experiment” and “believes in "geries reported in 1943, ESP but doubts that he will do well in the experiment” as sheep; those ie autinide to paychie 'o were doubtful about the whole thing, who rejected ESP com- ance in particulars. the pletely or who gave contradictory responses, were goats, Tis criterion "st would oceur, or who ‘similar t Sehmeldler’s his results may be fairly compared with hers. _Jejected the posibilty. Woodruff and Dale asked their subjects three questions; “Do you »the two categories are Iiclieve in the existence of ESP?”, “Do you belicve you possess ESP {ance itere seems t0 aistides?", “T think my results in the above experiment are ‘above 225 who jected. the hance, fat chance’, ‘below chance.” Unfortunately, however, they are at chaxice; on the ‘made no overall sheep-goat assessment on all three items of their ques iho aecepts the reality tionnaire. ‘Phe subjects’ scoring averages can merely be presented in © score at chance in terms of elasification on each item singly. [35] , ‘Approved For Release 2001/03/07 CIA RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96586787R000400100014-4 In considering these various analyses, it appears that no strict answer can be given to the question of whether Schncidler’s results have Leen repeated: Tn the first place, her eriterion was inidally a. shifting one, dnd the eaiteria others workers used differed from hers, in some cass considerably. In addition, there were differences existing in subjecs (high school, voluntesrs and college), differences in targets (ESP sym- BoE IBN tena), eferencs fe ime of uns por ee! 26818) COMBINATIONS OF KO iffercnces in ESP station (clairvoyance and GESP), and differences WITH ATTITUDES OF R {n_the experimenters (even different experimenter). WITH ATTITUDES OF B The question is an extremely important one, however, and some sor of comparison, however ertide, secms necessary. This is attempted in Table 12 by fiting the vasious eriteria to Schmeidler’s ax closely a+ Fort, Thuy since Semele combined indecive and sheep rable 12 Bevan’s, Petrol’s and Falherts indecisives are combined with their sheep. In Kahn's experiment, the indecisives were those who co ‘The Rorschach is a widely ard cards, administered in Whicred tee ESP was “intpowible here only,” ie. in the text sition sponds by reporting. what he sree eicladed in the foat category in accordance with Schmeidler= The underlying principle is fral"cherion Only thacscetion ef Gaspar’s results which he himscl such, ambiguous raaterizh. hy Claimed to be comparable with Schmeidler’s results is included in Tabl fell into the material, This s. 12. In the Woodruff and Dale experiment, no break-down is given fer patterning of the subiecrs vy the tihole seriex Differencindon in terms of three items, each of which we ineations about many partly includes the sheep-goat criterion, is presented here fers righd or flesible in, bis ap Whe, ereative, anions, intl quantitive index of the s sable throug ate of a check fst de Shoep-Goat Data of Other Workers tnore check marks are given a ae win an atypical mannery 40 1 dng score represcating th Inthe ESP series, an nt" subjects then clasiied. then ‘npieted 3 clairvoyance Sie reals a the tary iceeded sunita total of 9 Hie group Rorschach test ‘Sheep i snk ts on large ste } —— The Rorschach records w* : a ww 40 sa 4 @ 2 t sad subjects having 10 elcek ae are ar ar arer its ihieets avith TL or more cl. G73 HR OH HS aliminate any possibility « aaa eae falls wat kept ner: ’ ‘rem checked by an 2sistant } 1m preliminary work vith 4 ‘ntidier noticed that % a 400 40 08 100 95 chthe sheepegont ratings 1 a io 3 tsar on 58 *P ceoring level. a 1500 <9 490 fo bo The pontly adjusted subie ye — So the slferenee”ewees Inspection of the Table shows that in three cases the sheep (re the well adjusted sulde and indecisives) scored higher than the goats, in three cases the ©? af well acted a higher than the sheep. Although the Various. experimenters : sc gt cases obtained successful discrimination of high and low ESP st ee fn terms of the sheep-goat eriterion as cach onc defined it, these ae fot be regarded as repetitions of Schimeldler's rests. oan an i [36] I Approved For Release 2001/03/07.; ClA:RDP96:00787R0004001000T8:2-~->mpes m4Approved Fottelease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP98e60787R000400100014-4 appears that no strict answer Sete reat have ee nwa fnidally shifting > "red from het in some cacy tifferences existing in fi erences in targets i ges crimenters). m0 breakdown is given for er Workers _ Coste Ay ae Score Suh, Race Dev. sete {£6 eases the sheep (sheep wy in three cases the goat us experimenter. in mos igh ad low ESP scores one defined these ne + results, en ' “Time eee: Approved.£or Relea: etc nines eR NAS A el A lB COMBINATIONS OF RORSCITAGH ADJUSTMENT RATINGS WITH ATTITUDES OF BELIEF AND ESP SCORING LEVEL “The Rorschach is a widely used projective test consisting of 10 stand~ and cards, administered in a sct order; to these cards, the subject re- Sponds by reporting what he sees or what the blots represent to him. The uoderlying principle is thac in order to structure anything from such ambiguous material, the subject must project something of him- dint the-material, ‘This steucuuring is Interpreted as reflecting the patterning of the subject's unconscious needs and drives, dvereby giving Come indications about many facts of his personality, such as whether fe is rigid o flexible in his approach ¢o situations, whether he is impul- five, creative, anxious, intellectually ambitious, socially withdrawn. 'X quantitve index of the subject's overall adjustinent can be made through use of a cheek list devised by Dr. Ruth Munroe (24). One or more check marks are given for cach Rorschach category responded to in an atypical manner, and these check marks are added to obtain ‘single score representing the subject's degree of adjustment. In the BSP series, an introduction was given by Schmeidler and the subjects then clasifed themselves as sheep or goats. The subjects next completed 3 clairvoyance runs (a unit of 75 trials}; and den checked their results ay the target order was read aloud to them. The testing cere yp a cial of 9 runs bad boon comple in hi fashion, whe group Rorschach test was administered by projecting slices of the ink blots on a large sercen. This was given either before or after the FSP teats. "The Rorschach records were scored by Munro's check list method, and subjects having 10 checks or fewer were rated as well adjusted, while fubjects with 11 or more checks were vated poorly adjusted. Tn’ order to eliminate any possibility of bias when scoring the Rorschach records, Schimeidler was kept ignorant of the subject's ESP score, which had Inegn checked by an assistant and then later double checked. n preliminary work with 85 subjects from two earlier serics (39), Sehincidler noticed that when an. adjustment rating was combined il the sheep-gont rating, it was posible to obtain greater separation of scoring levels. "The poorly adjusted subjects scored at approximately the chanee level, bout the difference between the sheep and goats became more marked for the well adjusted subjects. She advanced the hypothesis that, this pattern of weil adjusted sheep scoring higher than poorly adjusted sheep And well adjusted goats scoring lower than poorly adjusted goats would he found in future scrics, andl large scale testing cf this hypothesis began in the Fall’ of 1945. When Rorschach data fiom 250 subj Periments (41) were analyzed, the differ (37) ts tested in 1] classroom exe in average rum score found PE NEE ISRO ET LET TERE TEE EI 8 ST se 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4 |Approved FoNéelease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP98%60787R000400100014-4 significant (P= 0002) tue Aloe" ta conten sin later experiments se: ‘ew article (82) presented 5 “splines tli tir COMBINATIONS OF KORSCIAGH SEVEN SIGNS WITH pee December ATTITUDES OF BELIEF AND ESP SCORING In an attempt to explore further the relationships between Rorschach vanbles and LSP scoring, Sehmeidier decided to analyze the 250 Ror- No Rum Aw Scag tach protocols from her fist work (11) for parvcular carcgorics tha 5 re Seemed to. appent more freuenty inthe records of high and low searing ae Aiicets, She isolated 7 factors or signs whose presence in a subject’s ane ee eoed 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” gcem to cmerge. A cold, | Giiidrawa, restricted attitude can be inferred from the presence of Fit0%, Me, and no shock; extreme impulsiveness of lack of emotional + gontyel from the presence of CF++ and Ct; and excessive, near-come » Adjustinent Ratings 2205 4.95 pulsive mental activity or “quantity ambition” from the presence of eee Fer and total movement-+-+. Thus, subjects who have even one of 5.10 hae seven signs present in their record could be considered to have a uevie maladjustment which might prevent them from demonstrating 1349 485 ef ~ “Aller having empirically determined these seven signs from this ven the average scores of callection of 250 records, Schneider went on to gather new data from signifieant (000000) ‘ther subjects to see if the seven sigus would continue to show the same means of the poorly ad flatomhip to ESP scoring, ‘The wo review articles (88, 94), which 1.4). Teport further testing with the Rorschach, indicate that absence of seven Signs continued to be associated with “higher scoring, i.c., her data Sliow that sheep in whose records these signs do not appear score higher than sheep in general, and goats {rom whose records the signs arc ab- and Goat Groups faa Chee “Tota . Table 15 — ee ESP Data of 250 Subjects from whom 7 Signs were Empirically Derived 85 209 a a — Classification 7 Signs No. Subjects No, Runs Average Score 176 aa sheep Present 27 (df) 2001 Present sabjects arranged in ‘Absent a gre cates that when — P were positive scorers, chance scorers. ‘The chic sent score lower than goats in general. Table 15 shows the scoring levels ‘oly a one-tailed test of of the origiual 250 subjects from whose records the data were derived; ans were predieted from Table 16 shows the scoring level of 329 additional subjects whose rec~ rds were subjected to a sinnilar analysis. [39] “rrersce4 proved FOPREIESE ZOOORIO7 7 CIA RDP96.50787RO00400100014-4 |a teccumnscccansimninaannntritreh niet a wee Na Sooner a Mt ame rercn ree ‘Approved ‘or Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4. Approved For &please 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9696787R000400100014-4. REACTIONS TO FRUSTRATION AND ESP SCORING The Rosenzweig Picturc-Frustration Study (P-F) is a projective tech nique used to obiain a measure of a person’s reaction to frustration. It consists of a booklet of 24 cartoons, cach depicting an unpleasant or frustrating circumstance, such as misting a train, in which one person ‘makes a remark of frusirating significance, depriving or blaming. the other. The subject responds on behalf of” the frustrated person. ‘The drawings are deliberately crude, having only indistinct facial features anda 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: Extrapunitivencss—refers to aggresion overtly directed toward the environment in the form of blaming some outside force for the frustr tion oF of placing someone clse under an obligation to solve the difficult. Intropunitiveness—aggression is expresied overtly by the subject agains himself in a martyrlike fashion with an acknowledgment of guilt or shame, or by assuming the responsibility to clear up the situation, Impunitiveness—agaression is evaded or avoided in any overt form, and the situation is interpreted as being insignificant or no one’s fault (ora likely to solve itself if the subject simply waits or conforms. ‘The firs indication that the P-F might be a useful test in parapsychology ‘grew from a thesis study by I. Eilbert at CGNY. An article by Elbert and Schmeidler (7) reported that when the P-P scores of Eillert’s su Jects were divided into four quartiles, the differences between PSP scores ‘obtained by subjects in the first and fourth quartiles were suggestive (P around .05). The correlation of —.32 between extrapunitivencss and ESP sore vas significant (P= 1) but the corrclation of #28 for ‘tropunitiveness and -+.22 for impunitiveness were only suggestive (P= 04 and .07 respectively). Schmeidler (43) tlien attempted to sce if similar results could be ab tained from analysis of P-F scores which she had obtained during several years of testing, She had PAP scores for 445 subjects and obtained a correlation of =.09 between ESP scores and extrapunitivencss (P_=-03) and a corrclation of -+.10 with impunitiveness (P= .02). When her » sults were combined with Bilbert's, the correlation of —.12 beween ESP scores and extrapnnitivencss was signifieant (P_=005), and the coriclation of ++.12 with impunitiveness was also significant (P =005 These combined data were also analyzed by comparing the difference in mean ESP score between the subjects scoring in the lowest 10% avd highest 10% of the Rosenzweig categories, The mean score of the least extrapunitive (lowest decile) subjects was 9.20, while the mean scure of the most extrapunitive (aighest decile) subjects was 4.06. This difference (42) SER TRS enna st soos was sgniGcane (P= 0 in merce aubjocts was 4, of tes Spe erence nen ee a rectons were all eases scaring pe goat, Ta. fret mst of than i yere andependendy,signiieant the oats ° 7 for te he fact that significant cor ate po and BSP seus, the cor seen meas wld to tepected ince the PF so might be oud respond 10,2 rik eS gos not pecesaiy Me reed in an ESP situation, IC \ Vise toh the sbot en dovable ewtigcon’ would have ite isp ination, : PSP ACs assumpton, Sehncd sn Soup sect he Po ins ge met found th 1ST 8 amy eed upon. comin 0 sara ofthe Hneompee ai raph atten, on the subi Parola contrite 0st he wees were made along a? eit attaings greater was the degree o Rest shecetthe BF scores were de et om into a moderately Fetal Beno nt the Po nme aay trestraving would be aero rings of 9 oF 6 ere sl annoyed seouP, ee wag te corglatons Bete ago eaects were im the. pes re tineants Towser, when OF aden ttre fa ea cetvlane on Pat, B= 2 tay gniteant for the sce 0 Salutes interpretation of 1 satitual response to ma sso tia we whe mating FSP Te milaty usoating, ana woul Be tales who cheracterscaly To prfivefaaion would em mr psteating expeinent a tt ne higher BSP scores: Corelaon oF the nwo Strato eg a gonty wre proba toward he eqpenimenty he newt se trusting stator, 2 Mout take upon himself Se Tewoulcs therefore, tend © Sm emeperece eT ;Approved Fongelease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%0787R000400100014-4 « _ aera Aaa OC LA sam eee pose 1 subject’s scoring level in an ES know is how the ESP situation iy VALUE-RATINGS AND ESP i “There is one article by Schineidlr reporting on the us of the, Allport; nee oe sek (AVON) in ast BSD experiment (35). This est Veron Si orn of ae iffeent value areas (theoretical teigiosy salicate e politen), oF aestictc) a, subject seems to identify bin: ae oor Ee gbiained in tors of percensile ranks and sublests 1 cae roe vo areas mut necessarily sore low inthe remain- onesie hae been found that sheep made higher BSP sores than colton Poteet hat the subjecs’ answers tothe theorteal quesion oat It 8 appre aor not didnot separate them ino clearly distinct of whet ocenble on unavorable tutus fvard the experiment Our Wt avcep might nd the experiment boring or iritating and | Some ont igh ke compete tsk annoy paying using faggot Scone ha ele rete sheep-goat i een would be Taost meaningful for subjects to whom theoretical seigtone are important (that is, subjects with high theoretical scores on the AVSV). Table 19 ESP Data Arranged According to Percentile Rank on Theoretical Seale of AVSV Sheep Goats Dig Percentile No, Rune Ave, Seare No, Runs Ave, Score Ave. Score P SS Ld io Captian 498 ‘7-002 Al Subject sot 880 “The hypothesis mated Defoe these data were gathered therefore was ends 2yRiterence in scoring level between the sheep andl goats would De greater for those subjects who had a strong theoretical orienration | Bea fear ‘ot wheter ESP could be demonstrated i. the test sitaten + RSET Shen be one that takes on personal significance for these subject arene ie closely related to their systems of values or expectancies. Such ! [45] “RE BESUed For RETSRSS 7001/03/07 ; CIA-RDP96-00787R000400subjects would presumably identify more closely with the purpose of the experiment, that is, 10 show the presence or absence of PSP. ‘A total of 63 subjects from four different psychology classes were tested in a classroom setting. Each subject was supposed to classify him. sell as a sheep of goat, make 8 ESP runs, and complete the AVSV. The theoretical seale 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-theorctical subjects. In Table 19 it is shown that the difference between the mean scores of the nonthcoretical sheep and goats was not significant (P= .05), 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 nonstheoretical subjects (P = .002). From ‘the table, it appears that the differences in scoring level eontinue to become larger as the degree of theoretical orientation becomes more marked; the P values fassociated with these differences are significant o highly suggestive. ‘The interpretation advanced! is that subjects who place increasing emphasis fon theorctical values are able to exhibit a corresponding increase or dcerease in their ESP score. Generally, the number of cases in cach category is too sual for such generalization, In addition, however, when the three eategorics (90 oF above, 95 ot above, and 100) in Table 19 are considered as discrete rather than continuous categories (Je., 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) ‘Sheep Goats ith, in ‘Ave, Score No, Runs Ave, Sore Ave. Seore 493.37 «002 ae! Meee 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 100 percentile, These amended figures are shown in Table 20. It is apparent that although there are significant differcnees in scoring level between theoretical and non-theoretical sheep and goats as groups, the im pressive progression of theoretical level with ESP scores does not stand I! under striet evaluation. [46] Approved ForNaélease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%90787R000400100014-4 aerate enone CONCL From this review of the pe coro stern that some ‘te personality characteristic Rigor As & gonteaienio Seow’ exert eb “iy cisposed towards ESI, see seore iu, while tend to scare low. He eas tated at the begin propriate to review the Est Be basic approaches of 1h ‘Joos on tHE one ana i Sher in the consistency” of Hn general, Tlumphvey at questionnaires, of froin 2 {qualities exhibited in drawit thes by herself or by ote although she did have sony fved from the ESP ma realer andthe Stuart Th itis generally recognize fnntations. Regardles of 1 te rememfy red that Honp surface” traits Bke es ineaguring instrument isl tend to give rise (0 spuion She wellknown “hala” ol ernreuter_ and Guilford. feetor of the attitude of th condition his responses (0 3 ’A second! factor is the t shugwn to affect responses & 2 hilar influence om se wwply. particularly t© the e fact that vome sublee rom expansive to oP would, presumably ch cnrliabiity Ties in the © 4 deawvings displayed s probably the explant with oye scales sv he SI Smeral explanation app “-Approved:feor Release 2001/03/07" CIARDPIBDOTE7AO00400100014-4Approved For felease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%80787R000400100014-4 swith the purpose of th ‘ace of ISP. * psychology classes were stipposed 0 Clasily hi oimplete the AVSV. The and subjects receiving b {be theoretical subjeus CONGHUPING REMARKS fowns which were made jects. i revween the mean scores Usiguificant wonsidered, the as great a the difference From this review of the pertinent data of most of the ESP-Personality im the table, it appears | studies, it seems that some progress has been made towards determining become lerger he ihe * the personality characteristics of groups of high- and low-scoring ESP marked; the P values subjects. AS a gencralization, we might judge that subjects who arc tr highly suygestive,'Ihe _ sorpewhat extraverted, secure, temperate, well-adjusted, who are favour~ tee increasing emphasis ably disposed towards ESP, and who have a high theorerieal value system Tresponding Aerease or tend to: score high, while’ subjects who possess opposite characteristics . tend to score low. ary is too small for such Tt was stated at the beginning of this monograph that it seemed 2 Tiree eateyorics (90 or "propriate to review the FSP-Personality research in two sections. TI © considered as discrete Meet baste approaches of Humphrey and Schmeidler differ in, twa re- “99, 100), as they should, spects; on the one hand, in type fof measuring instrument uscel, on the e differences in. scoring tiher in the consistency’ of the results achieved her in Ue SHaapiaey made her personality assesments by means songs of Hm & ngewe eee eo eran | a in Geawings Tey results were wsually not repeatable Rank on Theoreieal aa Mie or by ole experimenters working along scar lines, ures) ‘though she did have some repeated success with the E-G rating de~ _-ARRPEGAne ESP material sel, and partial success with the Bern- rte aa ie Sua Ines Tonto ok es | THE a iy ccognized that the «ystionnaire method has severe Pilla lini Reged of the stability of the fotor tel and it must Sore Avessone_P fiat Ret hae Tlamphrey was largely ccmcerncd with transitory, to doers iike examsioncompresion, sscuritpinsecurty, the reangig fnatmument eit is subject to. ivelevant, sflucnors whic ree ease to spurious measuremenes. In selerating scales, there fs wie enGurmhat effet, and the amouatof halo” in such scales ag reeen ee usiord-Mavtin, tb ennsderable, ‘The. sttong general fren a tne atitude of the subject to the experimental situation may Tondiion hes sesponses to'a considerable desres. Teen tacts the temporary 100d of the subject. ‘This has been ee ona on he Rernreuter seal and it probably exerts se aiiience on securigyinsecurity ascents, Tt would seem to Fee eer co eke cxpansionseoinpresion ratings, Judging fom Fee arsenite subjects fated by one judge were found o change 2 theoreiieal orientation from expansive to compressive in the one experimental session, and ‘auhees on the 1000 cee eee ciate from day to day. An additonal source of Seen a eee tmelatglah ea 1 chet that ratingsby to judges onthe same st neon Teeuwen drayinge played nota grt del of consistency” The second factor we seigeoupe, the ime ‘grab da expansion Uae nonsepentiey of the LC sts ‘cores does not stand ‘with such scales as the Maslow and Bernreuter, however, the first, more a tn merece pproved {103707 = CIR-ROPSE80787R000400100014-4Approved For¥élease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%%0787R000400100014-4 _asinsemenontetsnda men sinnammeninrnie tis knmentmanar samen Na ee eee ste Schmeidler generally used attitude classifications and proj ctive sabinations permitted techniques. She obtained consistent results, and her experiments were» These combinations, Ter ee ne ena Ne ame ease Noe mere we a Serssd, however the quation Females of presely what femora arc theepegoat actidinal che Solved in this diferentiation, In the frst place, ist possible for a subjne the steep-gout ats we've ta ‘unenuivecl atmwer te teraction of Recanace one; feat reaionsip berween parapsychology, which is a multidimnensional subject? THe may acco, « SHEMES vere mate for gr0 tne. aspect of psi (clepathy, for example), and tect another (cae | POM MS) "One must fapanee Tor changin? ih Bach a cate citrendaton at abst « tnusering 19). Oe man es lr Llc thom tonne of BSP ner ace sch emifene, noes {a the experiment, and willingness to co-operate might be concernal | SER. ee is ae ee at Ge ec taltina eeraecine Ok malo owas the uj anawer might merely weet much deeper imukiphoie | Oa sn of success reported is 10 1 ioe onc, os prombin Sie final ovaruationy i © gnique factors in a subjects Concerning the personality measurements obtained from projective tesis, iC is generally agreed that the factors measured on Rorschach and the P-I Scale are basic fundamental aspects of personality structure. Beeause of the endurance of this structure, one would expect eet rked tendencies repeatability of differentiation in terms of Rorschach and P-F crt poseerses mares eutiony i providing the rests themselves are reliable. When we describe separa _ Sumulated Te core nd, tion in terms of Rorschach or P-F variables, we aredescribing a somewhat PRESIDE Ws SN tion gross estimate in cach case, and it scems reasonable enough to assume Te actariaties possesctl hy th that the Rorschach estimate of adjustment and the P-T estimaces of, characteris posto extrapunitiveness and intropumitivencss, in their gross evaluation, arc | Sunline ip Mme es ter reliable enough measures. Sinee there has heen repeated success in dis. | ADVE, CN Oe ably Criasinating high and low scorers on the basis of these esteriay-we imply Werefore, HEN Tor that there isa relationship beaween these deeper factors and FSP. the charact dhe major probke Te must be remembered that in all ESP ‘experiments, the role of the 9, Be ON OF experimenter is a vital one. A. factor which might contribute 10 ana af the pose consistency or lack of it in any seties of ESP experiments is the delicate _ intensive S00 ME on experimenter-subject relationship. ‘The effect of such a factor is very eet te te ilfcult to estimate, as it involves the personalities of the experimenter and the subject, and their interaction. In considering this problem of Consistency of sults, owever, cognizance should be taken ofthe poste 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 @ group than on an individual basis. Certainly the greatest amount of re- search effort has been directed towards differentiation of scoring levels i ‘on the basis of single personality measurements. This is a gcparation in terms of dietion rather than amount of deviation, anda such, gencrally not discriminating enough for the purposes of in’dividual pre- Giction. For example, though Schmeidler’s poorly adjusted group, a3 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 dle ‘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 H-C and Interest ratings, and -C: and Sceurity-Insecurity ratings, by Schmeidler with combinations of sheep-goat and adjustment criteria, shecp-goat and. “absence of seven signs” criteria and sheep-goat and value ratings and by Nicol and Tune phrey with a combination of confidence and emotional stability factors. [48] aT OO CSG ee eee Semmens Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4Approved Forélease 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96%0787R000400100014-4 enn iene cations and projective avons and. prdietve yyeqe combinasons, permited gre8eT differentiation than any of the her cppeaments were | pensures, used i alagon iy‘what facors arc |, Seam ey Mion gg further step in this, direction, Ones posibleforasubjes; » be, sheep gat AVSY, sty sfeaion. was known, there SPREE “Wt Rie auimade toweak linear reladonship ‘ittween ESP scoring level and degree ‘of theoretical ooijeet Tie nay wears orientation. Although Pe Fer individual predictions were made, or Meitaade for groups which in W reject another (clans | predietio ome cases Were Payne mt pote out that che PrOsresson fdaton mst obviowiy + emnbering 1+ Nitin must obviowty + EN heoretial, orientation Met 8 Eo ae it appears; these jt in addon to he Elan notwithstanding tis wey FS se at contibution in Mee might be concernal SANA : snal factors are involve, isa smportance s the audy by, Humphtey Nicol reporting ich deeper multiphasg + some success in predicting individual PSP scores ‘from a knowledge of : sane cy ratings, wing mullple env analysis, Although he PesPaf success reported is not bigh, the ethod is a valuable onc, ad tained from projecti rojetie Diained from projective "the approach mont proms of personality structor gmproncly kt ovr appcars clear that sommes e ot ef personality srwct aigue facrg 9 8 LICE tp i for example, Be or it easly gue factors JF fendencics towards, social arlene possesses, na eCmpetiton, it i= posible, wilse Te formation im saat feo cdrecton, and c9 ouch [OSes Sere? no aroun ¢ of redieing the oie queaion stil rama ae personality SP devine, qguakon by the rare individual METS Fabjeet are characteris Posse porcesed by groups of ube Eo ‘tightly sins ip Bod vector tbe sate ee evel, abou Chantyc reaonably be acibuted (0 diteroe im amount of therefore, ms posse or to moKivatonal ees “This appears the chance major problems inthis arca of POP ersonality research. tp be one of ths gel come from wo) souFecs 2, 96 FA handy from he anaer Ay orsnalty nakcup of tne et sub seh ant PP ies ten we dsctibe separa: se dcsribing a tomer Table chough to assume td the Pe estimates of 4 gros vations te “repeated nucease ia de ee criteria, we imply actor and ESP. ty the role ofthe ‘contribute to “peinonts is the delicate such a factor is very pues alirece comparison with what Heer fof the characteristics 4s of the expevimente AREplayed by groups of subjects who Score portively, as & grou, ands sidering this problem, of dept eedher, from evelopment, of bette Peperimental and. statistical dl be taken of the posible on, the Go for selecting intviduals and presictng their probable scoring : fecbplonfeay on the basis of measurements on & number of personality and assessments. 'SP-personality resear sts eee ee eposes of in’dividual pre- sun has resulted from the aterest ratings, and E-C - with combinations of (49) emenesserunAPPFOV ee — /echEpg,Release-2001/0S107 ~ CIA-RDP96-00787R000400100014-4