Exploratory Token Object Tests with a “Sensitive”

Reprinted from the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research Volume LIX — July 1965 — Number 3 EXPLORATORY TOKEN OBJECT TESTS WITH A “SENSITIVE” BY W. G. ROLL AND CHARLES T. TART

Exploratory Token Object Tests with a “Sensitive” A Study from the Psychical Research Foundation, Inc. W. G. Rout ano Cuarves T. Tart? INTRODUCTION Throughout the history of psychical research, certain “sensitives” have claimed the ability to get “impressions” from objects, these im- pressions constituting information about the owners and past histo- ries of the objects other than what could be inferred from their known physical properties. Such claims, supported almost exclusively by anecdotal material, have been cult to evaluate insofar as deciding whether some form of ESP must be postulated to account for the results. In the last two decades, however, there has been an important methodological advance in assessing the significance of token object tests, namely, the introduction of the Pratt-Birge method (2, 4, 5,6), although it has not yet been widely used (3, 8). In June of 1963, the opportunity arose to out some exploratory tests with a subject, Mrs. Marie Hazen,*? who felt that she was “sensitive” and able to get impressions about the owners of objects through the use of some form of ESP. This series of exploratory experiments was helpful in allowing us to try out some new techniques for using and appraising i object reading abilities consistent with a theoretical position outlined below. The experiments also illustrated how parapsychological testing pro- cedures may be adapted to fit the particular needs and abilities of the subject—adaptations which are, unfortunately, rare in para- psychological research. The primary purpose of the present paper is to describe the techniques employed in the hope that they may be of value to other researchers. The theoretical position underlying the present riments has been outlined elsewhere by W.G.R. (7). Very briefly, the theory postulates that every material object possesses a “psi field”; that events in the history of the object leave traces in its psi field; that with the subject; W. the arrangements for experimentation G.R. and CTT jointly fame ee and C.T.T. ces constitute stored information which is retrievable, periph co conditions, by certain sensitives, using some form these traces give an object “psychic distinc- to a sensitive in direct proportion to the distinctiveness nsity of the (owners) and events which have been d with the object's history. Informal observations of some 3 by C.T.T. and the “folklore” of psychical research re ee cialegrapte, in particular, have traces associated with De or events depicted in the photograph. No conjectures the nature of psi fields, or the mechanism whereby in- ion is retrieved from them, will be made at this time. ‘theoretical position is quite sketchy and undeveloped at _ but it does generate several predictions which are testable, that a sensitive should be able to do better at discriminating of objects which have each belonged to a rather unique than at discriminating a set of objects which have essen ‘ical and bland histories (e.g., new ESP cards, which all have tory of simple mechanical processing). While the theory is plicit enough to predict exactly what sorts of histories uce maximal psychic distinctiveness to a sensitive, it is possible we sensitives themselves as criteria for this: if we allow a tive to pick out several objects which he feels are distinctive ipsbohically from a larger sample of objects, he should be eplicate his selections or classifications at a later date more than if he had been asked to discriminate among a ically bland objects—objects which produced no strong e » for him. This was the rationale underlying the experi- is deecribed below. oi. ay) In preparation for the first experiments, Mrs. Hazen (M. eo he asked to pick out a number of photographs which were psychically } to her, i. e., photographs which gave her distinct “psychic si as she handled, but did not look at them. ¥ P otogaphic sem on "x aa were obtain from hic service of the Dahan lorning Herald. These ele person photographs taken ie a 4 Socal commentary Riectaces the newspaper, “Curbstone Comments.” Each picture was placed in an opaque (to the eye) yellow envelope approximately j * x 74”. The envelopes were closed by tucking the flaps inside, ‘Not sealed. The sixteen envelopes’ were placed on a table in = aj serene” will hereinafter always mean an envelope with a photo- “STRENGTH oF VisraTions” Experiments (I-IV)

228 Fournal of the American Society for Psychical Research front of M.H. and she was asked to pick out the ones which gave her distinct “vibrations” (her term for her impressions). The experimenters (Es) left the room while she did this in order to put her at ease.* When the Zs returned, M.H. had sorted the envelopes on a quantitative basis rather than picking out several which seemed qualitatively distinct to her, as the Zs had expected. She had selected five envelopes as giving her “strong” vibrations, another five as giving weak” vibrations, and six in an intermediate cate- gory. As M.H. did not feel that she could make further qualitative distinctions among the sixteen envelopes,® it was decided to use her strong-weak classification for testing. After M.H. left the room, the six envelopes in the intermediate category were discarded; the strong envelopes were numbered 1-5 and the weak envelopes 6-10 by means of a lightly penciled numeral on one corner of each envelope. Throughout experiments I-IV, the yellow envelopes were always enclosed by another covering during testing in order to prevent the identifying numbers from being read. This outer covering for each envelope was a folder of thick gray cardboard, 6” = 13”, sealed with masking tape on the two long sides and one short side. The envelopes were always inserted far enough down into the folders to make it impossible to see the envelopes without removing them from the folder, something which M.H. never attempted to do. In all the experiments reported here, the following procedure was used for randomizing the placement of the envelopes within the folders: Prior to cach run, the Zs carried the ten envelopes and ten folders to a room other than the one M.H. was in and, out of sight of each other, W.G.R. hand-shuffled the envelopes (with the identifying numbers face down) and C.T.T. hand- shuffied the folders. C,T.T. then gave the pile of shuffled folders to W.G.R. and moved so that he could not observe W.G.R., who inserted the shuffled envelopes into the folders in serial order (top envelope into top folder, down through both piles). The pile of folders (containing the envelopes) was then given to C.T.T., who hand-shuffled the whole pile, again out of W.G.R.’s sight. The end result of this procedure was that neither of the Zs had any knowledge of the order of the envelopes inside the folders, and so could give no clues to M.H. Object Tests with a Sensitive 229 The pile of folders was then given to M.H. and, in the presence of both Es, she again sorted them into “strong” and “weak” piles. When she had finished her sorting, the two piles were taken to ano room by the Es, the envelopes removed from the folders, and M.H.’s choices recorded. Throughout all the experiments reported in this paper, both Es made independent records; on later checking it was found that these records never disagreed with each eer. M.H.'s original sorting into strong (1-5) and weak (6-10) ‘was used as the criterion against which these later sortings were evaluated: thus, if envelope 4 was put in the strong pile in a later sorting it was a hit, etc." Zz ry Experiments I and II ; eae I was determined in advance to consist of four runs by M.H., each run consisting of sorting all ten folders (containing envelo Nead strong and weak categories. Experiment II, planned after the | 's knew the results of Experiment I, was also determined in advance to consist of four runs. ‘Since the a priori probability of any folder being strong or weak is one half, one would expect twenty hits in four runs by chance alone. In Experiment I, M.H. scored sixteen hits and in Experi- ment II twenty hits, so the results were not significantly different from chance (Table 1). M.H. was not told the results of these experiments, nor of any of the others until all the series were completed, although she was often encouraged by being informed that the results were “interesting” (as indeed they were). Experiment III It was noted that in the eight runs of Speco I and Il combined, env 4 had always been classified as strong (as it had been originally), suggesting that this envelope was indeed a ically distinct” to M.H. She was not informed of this finding, but in Experiment III was asked (after the randomizing described above, had been completed) merely to select pee gah the enconed svelope) we gave —— a) ” feeling. She pi envelope 4 as the strongest, that there was a feeling of peace connected with it. When the ee Zenones from its folder end opened, “ope that of a young Negro man. There were two other pictures of Negroes in the set of ten photographs. “The folders were also given identifying numbers (on the bottom surfaces) these numbers recorded with the other dat; since we discerned od no seni

230 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research Taste 1 Call Distribution, Experiments I and II* EXPeRIMENT Run | Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Called Called Called Called Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak 7 * 2 2° 9° 4° 1 2° 8° 6 1 6 3 7 s* 4° 5 5* 3 10 1 9 10* 6 i 8 10° 7 5 $* 3 10 4° 4° 2° 39 7 8 6 Exrmument II Run | Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Called Called Called Called Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak 7 9° 1 he 8* 8 10* 10 2 8 2 10 3 ae 2 7 8* $* 6* 7 6* 6 1 3° | 4° 3 9 5 9 7” 4° 9* 10 2° 4° 314 4° s* s* * The asterisks indicate correct classification, « hit. Experiment IV In the same initial session in which she had sorted the sixteen aes Ea portraits into strong, weak, and intermediate cate- gories, M.H. had also been given a pile of forty-five large (approxi- mately 8” x 10") photographs of mi news events (people, accidents, club meetings, etc.). These photographs were not enclosed in envelopes, but simply presented in a pile, face down, with the same instructions to sort them on the basis of 4 ic distinctiveness,” while the Es were out of the room. .H. reported that she had not looked at the faces of the photo- graphs.’ When the Es returned, she had sorted these large photo- phs into four categories: “very strong,” “fairly strong,” “me- jum,” and “weak.” She could not elaborate er on these distinctions. The Es later examined the four category piles to see j ean nt Sek tet BET cous have: looked ot the photogrephe at this point “ m Object Tests with a Sensitive 231 ent of the photographs; C.T.T. noticed nA E ted cy be toes with mens le in them, r t was happening in the scene (Table 2). This suggested that e people in a photogaes ve a stronger impression to M.H. ough she was not told of this hypothesis, the following experi- Taste 2 Data of Experiment IV* S's Categorization Very Strong Fairly Strong Medium Weak il 3 4 1 3 3 0 1 2 6 0 0 4 2 1 0 0 2 0 15 12 16 2 S's Categorization Very Strong Fairly Strong Medium Weak 12 5 2 0 6 1 1 0 4 4 1 0 5 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 29 12 4 0 "© Entries in bodies of tables are the number of photographs the S placed into each strength category. wt “Each of the forty-five photographs was enclosed, face down, in a standard 9" x 178” cae (to the eye) manila file folder, and fastened shut with a paper clip. The folders were thoroughly hand-shuffied and then presented to M.H. with instructions to sort em into the same strength ca ries she had used before. Both ; remained with her during this task, and she did not attempt © turn over any folder or to it. The results did not confirm the hypothesis, although they were : a same direction (Table 2). The distribution of photographs in

232 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research the several strength categories changed in that most of the folders were rated in the stronger categories. Matcuine Experiments (V-VI) In the following two experiments, the ten photographs used in Experiments (itl were each cut in half along a diagonal. One half of each photograph was returned to its yellow envelope, while the other halves, numbered for identification by a lightly penciled number on the back, were randomly placed within the gray folders. The stack of ten envelopes (containing halves of photographs 1-10) and the stack of ten folders (containing the matching halve of photographs 1-10) were randomized according to the procedure described above, except that the envelopes were not inserted into the folders. W.G.R. then left the room to get M.H., and while he was gone C.T.T. spread out the folders and envelopes (with identifying numbers down) in two parallel rows. It should be noted that this procedure left the Es, as well as M.H., totally ignorant of which folders and envelopes contained which photographic ves. After M.H. entered the room, she was asked to place each envelope on top of the folder which she felt contained the matching half of the photograph. She was allowed to touch the back of the folders, but never to pick them up; she could pick up the envelopes to move them, but was not permitted to turn them over.* Both Es were with M.H. at all times during these matching tests. It was hoped that this matching task would be an easier one for M.H. than the earlier ones, which carried an implicit require- ment that she maintain an internal standard of “strong vibrations” and “weak vibrations” against which she compared each folder. The matching task, on the other hand, required only that each folder-envelope pair be judged same or different, and not any specific impression of the quantitative or qualitative nature of the photographs themselves, It would also have been desirable for each of the ten photographs to have been qualitatively distinct to M.H., but, as mentioned above, she felt unable to make such distinctions.” * Even if M.H. had turned the en over and seen the 3 See Oe hae aide bee it sam ae Ere nei dueien te location proper ma photographic halves in © gray folders. * The rationale for this “hot’ i test was worked out by one of us (C.T.T.) and Dr. Henry Puharich in 1957, but actual use of the procedure was quite limited due to practical problems extrancous to the method itself. The adjective ‘'hot” is used because the material was selected to be meani , usually in an emotional Token Object Tests with a Sensitive 233 had been planned to have M.H, carry out five runs of matching ps Ghotogriphic halves. Her procedure was to compare the “vibrations” from each envelope with the “vibrations” from each folder by touching an envelope with one hand and a folder with er hand. It was found, however, that this was so time- Boning and tiring to M.H., despite rest periods between runs, that only three runs could be completed. In each of the three runs, M. H. scored zero matches (Table 3). The probability of zero matches in a single run is .3678 (1). As this outcome came up in three independent runs, and could only happen in one way, the multiplicative rule of probability gives P = (.3678)* = .0498 for the three runs of Experiment V, a value suggesting that psi-missing was taking place. Tantz 3 Results of Matching ‘Ten Photographic Halves, Experiment V* Dice 1 3 6 8 5 9 2 7 Folders 10 5 8 9 6 1 7 3 2 Run 2: velopes 7 6 8 4 5 1 10 9 2 3 Foe 2 10 9 ! 8 6 7 4 3 5 Run 3: . Envelopes 3 4 7 6 1 9 $ 1 Folders 3 ; 2 1 10 3 4 8 7 6 * Numbe: resent the ordering of photographic halves in the yellow envelopes Se ceo aren folders ot the conclusion of each run. Examinatio data(‘Table3)also suggested some interest- ing patterns pride in ae oP MH. earlier classification of the photographs into strong and weak categories. Tht eae was difficult to evaluate objectively, but on the basis ot sae impressions the Es decided to use some of the photographs in smaller matching set. This also had the advantage of producing a task which was not so tiring to M.H. in a single run. Experiment VI The same matching test was used as in Experiment V, except d 9) were to that the halves of only four photographs (1, 4, 8, and 9) ' be matched. Five runs were planned ag abe and carried out.

234 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research The Es expected, on the basis of the results of Experiment V, that some sort of psi-missing would again occur. M.H. made zero hits in all five runs (Table wi ite single run there are twenty-four possible permutations of the photographs, of which nine will give zero matches, thus giving P = 375 for zero hits in a single run. As this result occurred in five independent runs, and could only happen in one way, the multiplicative rule of probability gives P = (.375)° = .0074 for the results of Experi- ment VI. Taste 4 Results of Matching Four Photographic Halves, Experiment V1* Run 1: Run 2: =e A ae a all is a Run 3: Run 4: fn 8 oS fae ot 8 88 Run 5: a a ; Numbers represent the ordering of photographic halves in the yellow envelopes and the gray folders at the conclusion of run, This was the last experiment carried out with M.H. as she had to ite Durham. She was informed of the results of the experiments at this time. Discussion In terms of results, the most interesting findings of the present study are the consistent classification of photograph 4 as “strong” by M.H. over nine independent trials in Pepornents I-III, and the evidence for psi-missing in Experiments V and VI. The results do not constitute a testing of the theoretical position taken, of course, although they are consistent with it. Note that there is an assumption implicit in all the experiments that each photograph maintains its unique configuration of psi traces. It is possible, however, that some photographs did change as a result of proximity to each other and/or handling by M.H. and the 2s, and this might account for the apparent psi-missing in the later experiments. Token Object Tests with a S In terms of fin ome it lly significan peters fn Woek eo cru res ts are encouraging, : , study was to develop and g -techniq for exploring token object rea study was quite successful. sorting on the basis of “stre matching—are both more s technique (5) = thus are ke also be somewhat more conve | lating other experimental variak order ti their effect. The techniques were od but could easily be a mechanical device for randomi: e order It should also be noted that } cn ; that the Zs were adapting their experimental tech) to be an cnporan. ae cepiny at a very high lev ; is uchaioues presented here are, of course, OR ee ber finding subjects who have some gt ee reading. If such subjects can be locate and worked wi —_ sively, not only can the value of these techniques be pe y assessed, but a number of Cte Rie ae ot be investigated retical position as imp ; theo pos pee os important could vayo. Oasys ~ e.g., the amount an contact between objects and owners. 1. Fetter, W. An Introduction to ility and its Applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1950. ie _N.E. “On Multiple Matching with One Variab , “onlay Br of Mathematical Statistics, Vol. 15, 1944, 432- 3. Nau, C. B. “Psychometry Tests of a Medium.” Indian fournal of Parapsychology, Vol. 2, 1960, 180-182. ais RATT, J. G. “Methods of Evaluating Verbal Material. Journal of Parapsychology, Vol. 24, June, 1960, 94-109. eens 5. Pratt, J. G., and Birce, W. R. “Appraising Vere val Material in Parag ae Journal of Parapsychology, Tr, : bf sp 6. eG. “Designs for Tests with Free Response Material. Journal ASP.R., Vol. 56, October, 1962, 184-195-

236 journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 7. ———. “The Psi Field.” Presidential Address read at the seventh annual convention of the Parapsychological Association, Oxford, England, 1964. 8. ScumerDer, G. R. “Analysis and Evaluation of Proxy Sessions with Mrs. Caroline Chapman.” Journal of Parapsychology, Vol. 22, June, 1958, 137-155. The Psychical Research Foundation, Inc. Box 6116, College Station Durham, North Carolina 27708 Department of Psychology Stanford University Stanford, California 94305 PRINTED IN BRUGES, BELGIUM, BY THE ST CATHERINE PRESS, LTD.