The American Society for Psychical Research 1941–1985: A Personal View

The American Society for Psychical Research 1941-1985: A Personal View KARLIS Osis This article describes the American Soci i ociety for Psychical Re- search (ASPR) from the so-called “palace revolution” in 1941 until the present. Information has been drawn from the ASPR’s library and archives, from interviews, and from my Own personal notes a recollections of the period following 1962, when I joined the staff. THE ‘“‘PALACE REVOLUTION” In 1936, as editor, Jocelyn Pierson Kennedy opened the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research to reports by experimental parapsychologists such as Murphy, Rhine, and Taves. She was an intelligent woman, astute enough to be able to correct ({[Pierson], 1941) the work of the renowned Oxford histo- rian, E. R. Dodds (1934). And, according to Mauskopf and McVaugh (1980, p. 298), she was one of the leaders of a revolt that has become known as the “palace revolution.”’ The revolution took place because of extreme dissatisfaction with the leadership of the Society, which neglected the modern experimental approach to parapsychology, and instead emphasized seance-room phenomena, the “Margery” mediumship in particular. A new experimentally- minded generation of parapsychologists emerged, having banded together under the Boston Society for Psychic Research. They captured public interest and aroused some attention from the aca- demic community. Although Rhine’s Parapsychology Laboratory at Duke University was undoubtedly the leading center of the new experimentalists, the Boston Society for Psychic Research and the ASPR were also affected. The terms of five ASPR trustees expired in 1941, and all were up for re-election. At the January 28, 1941 election of ASPR officers, William H. Button (a lawyer by profession), who had served as president of the ASPR since 1932, and three other incumbents were defeated. All four candidates from the competing slate won: George Hyslop, Mrs. Laurence Jacob, Gardner Murphy, and John The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research Vol. 79, October 1985

Journal of the A hose terms did not expire resigned Whitehead. Four ie iodla). Another two trustees resigned later (“Notice to Mem ee * 1941b). Jocelyn Pierson (now Mrs. R. L. (“Notice to Members ilison were appointed to the Board on Kennedy) and Ly ‘atrist George Hyslop, son of the s . Psychiatrist : . a ner, Hees Hervey Hyslop, became President, and oun ’ hairman of the Research Commit- oa Murphy became sing to his wife, Lois vey pee see. SS emmuurscation) was strongly concerned that the A be- * : ienti ization. with oe Se eS may changes The ASPR's official ; bide the Margery mediumship ended: The chief inves- a Be kett K. Thorogood, was dismissed, and he was not cx nage Constitution and by-laws were revised, pans fw a mg funct Boston Society for Psychic Research was absor i agen of the ASPR. A new editorial committee was formed, sat the monthly journal was a . quency hij ana 1 ily suspended. Laura Dale full- pd ee wih the title of cad ae a alanahttcany: The Hyslop-Prince Fellowship was establishe alee} : <<. _ Zabriskie, & Kennedy, 1941) and was a . sornig?y Columbia ili caigialencige tes the supervi i Gardner Murphy (Announcement, ; wine dene saheisted of more than just new faces ot a termination of the Margery investigation (by that time, eset “se . Thorogood [personal communication], Margery was 1n | pops and drinking heavily, so that the research was pent a e anyway—she died on November 1, 1941 [Mina Stinson ran nis 1942]). Rather, the entire outlook of the organization pearees pa metamorphosis. The Button group had been running the lee that it would appeal to the lay public. The Society had pea oe seances for its members, published short essays and anne oe mediumistic performances, and did not keep up with re bY search methodology and interests. Murphy, on the other ” ’ pressed for a contemporary scientific orientation with a ee emphasis on the psychology of the paranormal. Button he ty derogatory attitude toward psychologists, as illustrated in the fo lowing remarks from his 1939 presidential address: 502 Any such ideas as those promulgated by Dr. Rhine were not at a acceptable to our psychological friends. They are in the unforunet position of living in a house something like one of the pre dwellings perched on poles in a remote European swamp. They @ nol pleased to be told that a lot of their foundations are becca hence one source of Opposition is that they might have to hire ot quarters, possibly at increased rental, (Button, 1939) merican Society for Psychical Research — The ASPR; 1941-1985 503 These sarcastic remarks were u Rhine were trying hard to recru great stature. In all fairness to Button’s administration, it must be mentioned that reports of Rhine's work were published in the Journal, and the Administrative Secretary was allowed to recruit ASPR members as subjects for an experiment of Murphy and Taves. Button even went so far as to allocate a small sum for Taves’ work: In 1939, he received $50 per month plus expenses for building a testing appa- ratus. Button and John O'Neill (1940), then Chairman of the Re- search Committee, wrote a kind, paternalistic introduction to the Proceedings in which the experiments of Murphy and Taves (1940) were published. Thus, a new parapsychology was taking root in the old ASPR even before Button’s administration was ousted. Overall, the break was not as drastic as is commonly thought. Out of the four officers of the Board, only the President and Secretary were new; the Vice-President and Treasurer continued in their positions after the 1941 election. The Vice-President, Mark Richardson, was one of the core members of the Margery group, and he was reelected in 1942 when the new faction had a firm hold on the organization. The Journal, unlike the strictly experimental Journal of Parapsychology, continued to publish mainly theoreti- cal, often speculative, papers. Reports on mediumistic phenomena continued, although at a reduced rate, and spontaneous cases were frequently reported. Due to her upcoming marriage, in 1941 Joce- lyn Pierson resigned as Editor of the Journal and was replaced by Laura Dale. Nevertheless, a policy change was made public. Hyslop (1941) described the Board's new policy in the Journal as follows: ttered at a time when Murphy and it psychologists, including some of We must again be guided by the original purpose of the Society, a purpose which centered about the collection of information and the investigation of the various phenomena which psychical research has traditionally accepted as being within its province. Equally important is the publication of reports which measure up to the standards required in any other branch of science. (Hyslop, 1941, p. 113) There was, however, something in common between the old, out-voted faction of the ASPR and J. B. Rhine that the Murphy group did not share: a tremendously high expectation for what the acceptance of the paranormal and its implications would mean to humanity. Button’s expectancy was based on the seance-room phenomena and Rhine's on the application of rigorous scientific methodology to research on ESP and PK in college students. Mur- phy’s expectations were more modest and were bent on integrating the paranormal with mainstream psychology and philosophy. Ini-

e $04 Journal of the Am , hope that soliciting criticism, which tially, he and Rhine share Fore research, from leading psycholo- -weorporated in d involvement in parapsy. ould be incorpor’!™ eptance of and | . y gists would 9 wat thoroughly frustrated, in the course ios chology. This events. THE 1940s: REJUVENATION : ho were known d relatively few leaders w The ASPR ee se level outside of the field of parapsy- ata Tee ethers the best known are William James, William chology itself. i Gardner Murphy. The ASPR- has sometimes McDougall, an ch men. This is not to say that i leadership of su flourished unde ys got their way: Even OerLea biovi pes acraerctt strings. Gardner Murphy was the leader of the wi 1 i incapacitated him in the mid-1970s. from the 1940s untyal communication), who witnessed the begin- Ernest Lig wrote me: “As far as I was concerned, Murphy was oa ae This was also true when I joined the staff: Gardner ven we the center of the Society. The ASPR flourished when Murphy lee declined in the 1950s when he was absorbed in he Was Pree spother state, and declined yet again when his poor other work In ano ement. However, Murphy was d his active involv See ee He brought many valuable professionals to the Society n 4 i d them into its functioning. arn his ee obicgraphicel paper, Gardner Murphy (1957) states that in the early 1940s he worked at the ASPR five or six moomnings Pe k (p. 173). Such extensive participation by an intellectual gt he bound to lead to the rejuvenation and growth of the Pabeairssh tion. Out of this period of intensive study came a nenes at cry papers on parapsychology which Murphy was to publis eer in the 1940s (Murphy, 1943, 1944, 1945a, 1945b, 194Sc, fo * well as the sound remarks in his SPR presidential eorelge ( sab vi 1949b). This period also provided Murphy with the bac ae information which later was to be presented in the weer pi Murphy gave to the ASPR in the 1950s through the ear Hed som which also were published in JASPR (e.g., Murphy, 1952, ati 1959. 1962b, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1967, 1969, 1970, 1971a, | ’ Pam: Murphy was an eminent psychologist with an ee wide range of informed interests. He had a genius for seeing thing: in a holistic way. President of the American Psychological Associ- ation in 1943-1944, he was at home in experimental peychology, personality, social psychology, and research on clinical meth 7 He was able to take into consideration the older, prescientlic rican Society for Psychical Research The ASPR: 1941-1985 505 thinking of Europe and Asia, to ether wit in the field. Whenever he walked through i headquarters, I felt the prese he latest developments € door into the ASPR’s nce of a giant who could see further and deeper than could I, Everything he considered was raised to a higher plane, the larger landsca : social touch was warm, COnsidetsee ad ect ‘ie , ’ ing. He shaped the ASPR like a gardener who loved his plants Gardner Murphy tried to involve productive contemr rary re- searchers in the ASPR and in other ways improve the Societ "s status. In 1942, such luminaries as Margaret Mead, J. B Rhine and Henry James (son of William James) were elected to the Board, as was professor of Psychology Bernard Riess. None of them were notably active in the ASPR, and, I was told, they were bored with the nitty-gritty matters which Hyslop often put on the Board agenda. However, Mead was especially insightful, exposing the deficiencies in the experimental methods of the 1940s. The following is a quote from the minutes of a Research Committee meeting in which Mead criticized the bivariate design which was dominant at the time: “Our approach is in error—our approach must be a study of the nature of what occurs in its whole setting, not just a search for the paranormal element in an unspecified context.” She went on to say, “A study of times and circumstances of telepathic experience is necessary. Why and when is there a loss of ability? Anthropological comparisons are indicated, as well as the study of motivation. Our testing procedures are dull. Our methods are a cultural punishment of psychic ability” (“Minutes of Research Committee,” 1947), It is of interest that in the minutes of a 1943 Board meeting it is noted that the membership of a certain C. G. Jung from Kusnacht, Switzerland was suspended. No reason was given, and it might have been a trivial matter such as not paying dues. Nevertheless, it is strange that, although at that time Rhine was able to develop a friendship and exchange of ideas with Jung, a fruitful relation did not develop with the ASPR. As President, George Hyslop seemed oriented primarily toward guarding the treasury and handling the daily administrative and financial affairs of the Society. He was an uninspiring person who had a great interest in small details. In later years, he told me that his main concern had been to maintain the endowment amassed by his father. He said that he watched the fund with the eyes of a hawk, guarding it from abuse. His critics said that he was so narrowly focused on this goal that his hawk eyes did not see the real needs of the Society, Hyslop’s Scottish thrift embittered many, and thrift it certainly was. For example, Laura Dale's first full-time Salary was set at $100 per month; the Board minutes even con-

506 Journal of the f the decision to purchase an electric clock—a ined a mention © ‘ously necessitated careful deliberation weighty Secinn® whe blene the ASPR's annual disburse. by the Trustees: In der $12,000; by 1950, they had reached ap- ments were kept un The endowment was indeed preserved, and it proximately $14,000. r. 1 do not have exact information on what increased year oe ye of Murphy's group, but it certainly was this did to the plans rowth and expansion, Gulliver was, once counterproductive (© © ding to Hyslop’s presidential report, only ain, held down oe there readiness to sponsor research by utiliz- in the late cary Macha . 1959), The budget became a little more ing the rs ; ihe ‘ast year Hyslop held the presidency: The nl ex i ure, including the publication of the Journal, oe ned 10 an astonishingly low $25,000. However, no matter See eee might be said of him, George Hyslop showed his caeoate through the arson time he volunteered to the Soci- i Vv . = real : SS tnd a har worker for the ASPR since those early days of the Murphy era, was Laura A. Dale. The ASPR publics: tions of those days reflected a very positive attitude towar - wide of research, such as experimentation on ESP and P » Sur vent and individual case studies, work with mediums, a review of the survival research of J. F. Thomas (Dale, 1941), thors papers. Laura Dale's enthusiasm and productivity as a pratt in this early period was very high; as she herself implied, she ‘ a “Midas touch” (Taves & Dale, 1943, Taves, Dale, & Murphy, 1943), The 1943 annual report of the Research Committee sone lists three studies with mediums: Eileen Garrett, Chester Gra ly, and a “Philadelphia group,” in all of which Laura Dale was in- aT isd, Ernest Taves had an office at the ASPR and collabo- rated closely with Dale and with Joseph L. Woodruff, who was at City College and was holder of the Hodgson Fellowship fom. Harvard (Allison, 1958, p. 42). Taves published a number of meth- odological and experimental papers in the Journal, but as an vo perimenter, he lacked the ‘Midas touch,” as one can see from t ‘ unimpressive results of his joint research with Laura Dale (Taves Dale, 1943: Taves, Dale, & Murphy, 1943), Eventually, he became disappointed, lost interest, and went on to a career as a psychia- trist. Another successful experimenter, Gertrude Schmeidler, became interested in parapsychology when she attended a summer course on the subject given by Murphy at Harvard University. Some of her papers about her now-famous “sheep-goat™ studies were pub- lished in JASPR (Schmeidler, 1943a, 1943b). In 1946, she was ap- American Society for Psychical Research — pointed Research Officer of the Soci tas experiment with Lydia Allison dice fr ace), # Joint , (Schmeidler & Allison, 1948). How- ever, with Murphy's help, Schmeidler soon obtained a teaching position at City College of New York and conducted research under their auspices instead of those of the ASPR. Nevertheless Schmeidler continued her involvement with the ASPR as a trustee, as a member of the Research Committee, and later as the Society's president. Joseph L. Woodruff, who had bee ; n trained in para hol , Tarkio College and at Duke, parapsychology at also obtained a teaching position at City College. Dale and Woodruff (1947) conducted a successful PK experiment, which replicated Dale's (1946) replication of the dice-throwing research of Rhine's lab, and a study of experimenter-subject relationships (Woodruff & Dale, 1950). Woodruff was a member of the ASPR Board for several years, but his interest in parapsychology waned, and in the 1960s he retired to Florida. In 1947, Laura Dale resigned as editor of JASPR in order to devote full time to research (Allison, 1958, p. 43). Allison was made head of publications, and under her direction the Journal became a lively forum for a much wider variety of parapsycholog- ical approaches than Rhine's Journal of Parapsychology. Murphy's broad horizons were partly responsible. However, the Journal shrank in size. Before the “revolution,” it had contained close to 400 pages annually; now it was reduced to just under 250. The content of the Journal, however, was much improved. Short, in- adequate reports on mediumistic sessions were pruned, giving way to papers by the best available authors: theoretical papers by Mur- phy, Rhine, and G. N. M. Tyrrell; experimental reports by Dale, Taves, and Schmeidler; spontaneous case reports by Dale: and accounts of successful sittings with mediums by Allison herself. Several papers were also published on various aspects of the sur- vival question. Membership in the ASPR had declined during the later years of Button’s administration: It dropped from 826 in 1935 to 448 in 1940. The first four years under the new leadership did not improve this situation. Only in the mid-1940s did a slow upswing begin. Mem- bership reached the 600 mark in 1947 and stabilized at approx- imately 800 during the period from 1953-1962. A membership sur- vey by Allison (1944) showed that the new experimental slant of the Murphy team aroused the interest of only a minority of mem- bers. The majority were intelligent laypersons, not scientists and psychologists who could understand the need for modern sophisti- cated techniques. In 1948, something radically new emerged at the ASPR: the

he American Society for Psychical Research 508 Journal of aS ‘cal Section” (‘The Medical Section,” establishment of 2 ighly intelligent and creative psychiatrists de- 1948). A group . approach to parapsychology. From this group, veloped a nn ee Fisenbud, and Montague Uliman emerged, all Jan Ehrenwal ‘ Geures. Although Rhine had championed and won very influentia ~ the quantitative experimental approach, the the dominance romulgated the qualitative methods of clinical Medical neat i empted to integrate them with quantitative test- case studies we theories were brought to bear on the paranormal. wo ee ik has called himself “a card-bearing Freudian, was Eisenbud, ih 0 j-conducive person whose patients provided a re- et caer vance of ESP in the therapeutic situation. Others in markable a och as Geraldine Pederson-Krag, also presented many = arte cussion (see some of the papers in Devereux, 1953; cases for ice ""}951). There was a lively cross-fertilization be- aerial as psychological approach and this new breed, which tween fe ecipomned to parapsychology. Although the majority of retort id not share Murphy's broad horizon, his metatheoreti- the Be stations of psi, or his interest in survival, they did have a cal ago in the application of depth psychology to pst. Later eos 1950s when Eisenbud relocated in Denver, Colorado, the acti ities of ‘the Medical Section declined and eventually ceased. Nevertheless the impact of the ASPR’s Medical Section was semi- a Ullman’s epochal dream experiments and the many book and journal publications of Ehrenwald, Eisenbud, and baa Sen become an integral part of wages Hee ee Leelee Soke ce 1975, for an overview and a bibliography Vv Ehrenwald ‘ald and Eisenbud, among others. Since then, Ehre and Esenbod have published additional books [Ehrenwald, 1978; Eisenbud, 1982, 1983)). THE 1950s: REORIENTATION in 1950-1951, Gardner Murphy left the United States in eae © spend a year in India, and in 1952 he relocated in pomeg sigs wes ing Director of Research at the Menninger Foundation in aie Even though he continued to participate in the Society fro . distance, his absence was strongly felt. Although extensive 7 perimentation was going on at the ASPR, fewer positive results occurred. In 1949-1950, the “Midas touch” had flared up at Harvard, where two students, S David Kahn and Ulric W. Neisser, carried out an innovative ESP experiment using a computer (Kahn, 1952). Ded tive results were obtained from students in a basically skepuca The ASPR; 1941-1985 509 psychology department. Accordin tion), Laura Dale, representing the ASPR, b. ; . became so int i their work that she assisted him with some of the evihuetioae dad in writing the report. Then Dale attempted a replication of the Kahn-Neisser experiment using students at Hunter College. The a gave Kahn and Neisser summer Stipends to carry out an- other repetition on its own premises (Research i Both replication attempts failed. ee ne In the 1950s, Kahn continued to Participate in well-designed ex- periments at the ASPR conducted jointly with but the Midas touch did not return. , Dale and Ehrenwald, Ullman and Dale conducted an ex telepathy, which created the impetus for the famous Maimonides project, but the results were not conclusive enough to merit inde- we anruenny et are described, however, by Ullman and rippner, » Pp. 13-27, and by Ullman, Kri , wi 1973. pp. 57-72), y Krippner, with Vaughan, In the mid-1950s, Gardner Murphy turned the ASPR’s focus to spontaneous Case investigations, where experimenter effects would not matter, and which he hoped would provide a richer source of information on the nature of psi than did the then current exper- imental research (Murphy, 1953, 1955). In 1955, the Society for Psychical Research organized and the Parapsychology Foundation sponsored a conference in Cambridge, England on spontaneous case research (“The Cambridge Confer- ence,” 1955). Gardner Murphy played a prominent role in organiz- ing the conference, and he and other ASPR officers attended (Lydia Allison, Laura Dale, and Brown philosopher and ASPR trustee C. J. Ducasse). As a result of the conference, a vigorous plan to study spontaneous cases was developed and put into action at the ASPR with the support of a modest grant from the Parapsy- chology Foundation. Several methods for soliciting cases were tried, but most were not successful. As Dale, White, and Murphy describe it: & to Kahn (personal communica- Ploratory experiment on dream The circulation of questionnaires worked out jointly with our British colleagues played some part in preparing us for such studies, but, having found that most of the usual methods of appealing for spon- taneous case records, such as individual appeals, round robins, mail inquiries, newspaper advertisements, and public opinion sampling, were bringing almost no returns either in Britain or in the United States, we determined upon a somewhat more radical method. . . . (C]ontact was made with one of the editors of This Week Maga- zine. . . . One of their staff writers came to visit G.M. in Topeka and conducted a series of intensive interviews. . . . Ina “box” published in connection with each of the three newspaper articles which ap-

ican Society for Psychical Research. | of the American 510 Journa : vs... we asked readers to send ac. sete) successive Sine American on taal Psychical Re. ‘ oat : sack Oalee White, & Murphy, 1962, PP ‘ re received. Dale classified the incoming. “orade A” cases. Although the maga- reports and eet Pe Dale, she felt that all the oe ae venient cave handful of worthwhile reports. — poli ur- had netted only nd insufficient funding, this won ia on Bo phy’s ine was not written up until years later (Dale, & smoothly an s 2). ; 1 Reports Murphy, 1962) ller and smaller; the Annua e sma ; The re aan oo discontent concerning the research and mentione ; agen J. B. Rhine expressing the opinion membership activities. I recall research societies were past their i chical at a staff apace pr from a Texas supporter who called them Seeaeibo nd.” According to the annual presidential reports, the “moribound. irection for its : ing for a change and a new direction fo research efforts. were now willing to consider funding viable plan. The trustees | taken from the Society's growing endowment. Pies ear ere of Hyslop’s Scottish thrift, which strangled the e 2 : <vies end. . asemi959, Laura Dale, the "ASPR’s principal worker, resigned. She n . ® i ing the job of two people: rworked and underpaid, doing serine pobeot: and conducting experiments on oye of : satancos cases. She also had to cope with th es poate dence and the never-ending stream of visitors to ocare, where her desk was. She moved to Long Island, =e foe as more space to raise her prize boxers, and took a positio i ditor. : , whe. & creative paransyohorogies Dade been sans i hology Labora ’ by Rhine at the Duke Parapsyc ee ceilakirated tee ale’s place. White and Dale closely c saree and ‘rriends. A psychologist, mene’ Nolaierotalie : esti’ A it ite hired part-time to do joint interviews W net bares : ipi effort to cast light on psy spontaneous case percipients in an ipo egg i si gress in finalizing chology of the psi process. White made p f Rees "S ce Dale, White, & Murphy, ’ report of the ASPR’s case survey ( ; ae rcated Ga Bclee tet rimarily because after a year at the office she in : writing and editorial work at home where she was hapten ven stant interruptions. She succeeded well as editor, and s se ves ducted several classroom ESP experiments with the berg a f of a friend who was a guidance counselor on Long Island (White ? Angstadt, 1961, 1963a, 1963b, 1965). However, White found herse About 1,200 replies we The ASPR; 1941-1985 ‘i working 70 hours a week for a subsistence w ‘ : . oF a find a more productive means of earning a living ammnee herself {0 think about parapsychological problems in a hug, y She resigned in 1962 and enrolled in the sh way. ; Pratt Instit , Library School while also doing research on ESP po eresorin THE 1960s AND 1970s: DecAapes OF Procress From 1962 on, the Journal was firm! sha its hi . dards maintained by Laura Dale. The resetach tenn orev unsolved, but the ASPR was now ready for action. First came the engagement of Fraser Nicol, who had previously worked with Rhine and then had been Supported by the Parapsy- chology Foundation. In 1961 and 1962, he was employed as the ASPR's Research Associate. He had pioneered multivariate meth- odology in parapsychology and loved the history of psychical re- search. However, instead of the expected thrust forward with re- search projects, Nicol wanted to remedy a grave error of the past: The ASPR's publications did not have a cumulative index, thus access to their contents was difficult to accomplish. Nicol set out to index the Society's publications. He did more work than he had initially promised, adding short abstracts of each item indexed. This was monumental, painstaking work for which Nicol found a publisher. Inadvertently, he Stepped on some toes: Dale opposed the publication of Nicol’s work, indicating some slight errors, and there was concern over the ownership of the work, if published. A committee was established to consider the matter, and finally the project was dropped. I watched this development with cold shiv- ers, seeing how easily good, painstaking work done over a period of years could be buried in the ASPR files. The ASPR’s tide turned in 1962 when Gardner Murphy took over the presidency. Once again, he was decisively and devotedly spending much of his time in parapsychology. He began his ad- ministration with a published statement to the Board in which he expressed his goals for the ASPR: to “do solid work in the nurture, encouragement, and training of research scientists in the prosecu- tion of research, and in the establishment of an intelligent public attitude toward psychical research in this generation and those that are to come” (Murphy, 1962a, p. 204). Murphy had received a large grant from the Ittleson Family Foundation for his work on creativ-

rnal of the American Society for Psychical Research $12 Jou determined to kindle flames in many places, the ASPR. Later that year, he invited me to ity and ESP. He was rker in his old, beloved place. I was including his old love, ai as the new wo F ° “Di join the Sa metic, forward-looking title of Director of Re- given t t time, there was no one to direct but . ha a vere which I later changed. myself, a on this will be an insider's report. | have the advan- eer; rowing this period firsthand and very well, but I also have a ppaatage of no longer being a detached, neutral observer. | Os in the thick and thin of it, immersing my life in that of the SPR ise days, we had a posh address—880 Fifth Avenue—a residential area of well-to-do New Yorkers. However, everything else about the place looked poor and inadequate. There were two ood-sized rooms and an alcove between them for the desk of the ‘Administrative Secretary, Adele Wellman. Oh, you survived the weekend,” she would greet me—with a faint smile that could not hide the suffering of a thoroughly disillusioned person. Both rooms were lined with dusty library shelves, and one room contained my desk. There was no lab, no research staff, no equipment to speak of, and no enthusiasm on the faces of the people who walked in, Everything looked out-of-date and run down, except for the excel- lent air conditioner behind me. Rhea White worked on her research project mostly at home and, at the time, also seemed dispirited about the organization, The formerly well-attended ASPR lectures ly drew only 40-60 persons. mal tbe tine it was difficult for me to understand (as I do now) the heroism of Dale and the others who worked to keep the Society going, in spite of the obvious signs of mismanagement. The effect of the Scottish thrift was evident in every corner. I took this as a challenge and was determined to help Murphy turn the tide. In retrospect, it would have been wiser to have been less ego involved and to have paid more heed to continuity, thus enabling me to keep on more friendly terms with the old guard. Murphy basically gave me carte blanche and warm help whenever needed. He urged me to immediately start raising funds for our research program. A second survey on the deathbed obser- vations by physicians and nurses was on my agenda as a Carry-over from my work at the Parapsychology Foundation (Osis, 1961). Murphy had backed the earlier project and showed no less support for it now. We also had several ESP research projects in mind: ESP in relation to space and time, and the relation of ESP to states of consciousness, mood, and attention states, all of which seemed 2 be promising directions. | was attracted to Murphy's broad views, which integrated research problems with the larger outlook The ASPR; 1941-1985 ers disconnected research probl me hy: ents: 0). t af seemed unattractive to us, like th ickityclac time coming from technicians’ worksho © atickity-clack noises Fund-raising was the number on could not afford a plane ticket I too : , k a bus an i ys rshegih pigs " shabby bus station. There eoteecnt, Z ihe cerenetteanen SS Dorris that fascinated me: their melding of gether with hat philosophical, and empirical aspects of ny ha psig Murphy, one could breathe the ‘saat ai which arose cultural horizons; with the Carlsons. it was ihe a ’ expe- riential immediacy which stru i tered states as conducive to sed cae, tone reat oeegrined intensive meditation, and they scileved t Sias nae rae “ rye _ the psychic in the house, whereas Chester colleagues. However gale been jem a nes pytichres | » he nd enough t i Piette clagaans with him. He made 7 wane in thet ving room, while she was in their i trying to match his with a drawing of h Sho anevtone similarities, which the skeptical physicist eplsmed weg oe : m Plical physicist explained away. Ac- one ne. Ig ran on one try, she came downstairs apologizing. ral 7 : couldn't get it; I just got the hind part of our rain ii erry Out to be exactly what Chester had r. That did it: From then on, ° visced of tip tua ct n on, Chester was con se Carlson himself became deeply interested in parapsy- Ology, read the journals, and gave financial support to several oe centers. He was an ASPR Board member from 1964 to , and he regularly financed our projects from the beginning of

514 Journal of the Am the ASPR until his untimely death in 1968. Then Sid Cuslece continued the same level of support through 1972. Carlson supported several kinds of causes, parapsychology being just one among them. His wife was basically centered on the spiritual and also the paranormal. So far as I can tell, she seemed to have swayed and supported his interests in these directions, Carlson left a legacy of about one million dollars to the ASPR—the main source of its endowment. much more than financial: He helped me in Carlson's help was } | envisioning projects. We used to brainstorm at his home before funding was decided. search designs. His sty hy's, but he, too, was concerned a parapsychology, such as the essential nature of ESP, its relation- ship to physical He supported our metatheoretical issues. brainstormed all day in my physicist, Edward Samson. as well as Western thought for insights on the ormal le and manner were different from Mur- office with another spiritually minded Carlson searched Eastern philosophy spiritual and the Contact with the Carlsons put me on the spiritual path of med- on. It was personally very rewarding and I feel made me a . itati better parapsychol colleagues both wit of getting across to me the qua processes, which was a great designing and conduc Proper space for research work was necessary. In 1963, we ogist, but it also alienated me from some of my rented three rooms on East 73rd Street, which provided office — space for three persons and housed our first experimental equip- ment, including a first-generation small computer. As our work progressed, we began searching for a town house. In 1966, our — present headquarters was on the market, but the Board decided against the building. I then arranged for Carlson to see the house. Along with an architect who was on the Board, we entered the building with flashlights: The shades were closed, there was no electricity, and dirt and dust were everywhere. Carlson thoroughly inspected the house. The debris did not seem to bother him; he saw the place with eyes that looked to the future of the ASPR and its growth potential. Suddenly, he turned toward me and said, “Karlis, you need something like this for your work. I will double my pledge to the building fund.” Because all the divergent factions of the Board understood that language, we purchased the building. erican Society for Psychical Research These long sessions often improved our re- d about metatheoretical issues in — and spiritual dimensions, and the survival issue. — projects designed to investigate these Just three days before his death, we hin and without the ASPR. Dorris had a knack litative side of spiritual and psychic help for my work, especially when ting our experiments on ESP and meditation. | af The ASPR: 1941-1985 S15 The growth of the ASPR, as way. Equipping the laboratory with the appropriate apparatus w : as not Carlson had envisioned it, was on its contained reports about conditio knew. of course, that the veridical hallucination wae snasey Ne modality of spontaneous ESP. Therefore, we asse 7 as a primary to condition hallucinations which could serve as 7 ny gpa We did not get any clear extrachance results Ag hy wisi aa psychophysiological indicators’ of pal, honieg pad a pocrick in states and induce them through biofeedback methods. mam Gulliver was tied down; “We don’t need a pol : reaee again, consensus of the Research Committee. However, M hy en couraged me to order one if I could find outside mo wi it. I raised some of the needed funds from friends in Texas, ” Pen vt venle. etc., but I was still $500 short. Murphy then got out his own eckbook, and the polygraph was ordered. I was moved to se y this gesture, and sympathized when he had to face sare Board session because of it. The polygraph later babies nih oe terpiece for recording lab data from specially designed e scirennek ei ion papecaesd research. It has been the pride of the ASPR: saat pene elevision crews have filmed the red ink wriggles of its Research Projects Early in the 1960s, with the support of a t Family Foundation and later the Scaife adhe had iar cigar phy set out to explore the similarities between creative and ESP processes, funding several researchers under his program, myself included. He saw in both processes the greater play of the uncon- scious when conscious control was de-emphasized. He favored investigating relaxed, dissociative states, whereas I proposed that we explore the highly aroused, intensive states which artists, musi- cians, and writers use for their peak achievements. Murphy was intrigued by this idea. I conducted in-depth interviews with 29 artists, asking questions for about four hours each. Their state- ments were carded, cross-indexed, and evaluated by qualitative and quantitative methods. Through her literature research, Marian Nester assisted by supplying statements by and about well-known sensitives and mediums in regard to their experiences of psi and

he American Society for Psychical Research f the Journal 0: 516 r material with that provided by the Itered states. hice ene sesults were mor ots sh ome alte 1 interviewed. sp, which interested Murphy He tik at oar Creativity and ewe us chapter by ae eed the ne worked it ove wit ae years bpbr pasha the book dig ever, OV ° su book. ete Both eet Nonsiderable srt the Board alia way. Despite nuscript their financial alt Niner me sige ae to give the pomine in the files, as ha favented in the refus of work got Il percentage of the sum vn e noone ony, - oye the book over the hump, an Personally abs eede ; If. a t afford to rhe aeathned observations a. Ahr and My first survey abe at the Parapsychology santied eves to the s was conducte was started there an , +0 the nurse The second oOrey SPR staff. It was a large-scale statistica| AsPR when I joined rriodies Todd helped rie Lit Benes ic study. which later a atage: Clear con Teuton could be obi computer eva retation, emer ieence of expectations based on sal in : Se peneret, by pid vo belief systems ano, Woe religious beliefs. print for effective nether culture where dis. Jewish) were too - phenomenon in ae aia was chosen as the investigate the sam resent. Northern In Carlsons, as well as b si ilar beliefs were P as supplied by the Car hat d y target country. Funding which consisted of manes t wcise eri rg a Kidd erie to survival research. (A f the Kidd hind ted miner bequeatnes a substantial pele F undation]. That sation, the ASPR mage the Psychic al aise the ASPR in [one-third was lanes Four television crews ork itself was difficult was a national eer court decision.) bine: Closely with me on the the first week after dur Haraldsson worke = d many helpful intro- and long. Dr. SS lan Stevenson provi ‘wan carried out in the Indian survey, an atry. The data collection ork, At the Hour of ductions in that the book based on oa ldsson 1977); 12 foreign early 1970s, a tiched in 1977 (Osis & Hara Death, was Pe subsequently pulaiaers of the link between perci- editions were |, that is, the natur had interested both The ESP channel, eived, was an issue that d by this question pient and object Le * I had also been aman ny dissertation Murphy and Car sin Munich when I was or Whately Carington’s many years before | hy tended to favor d that w P (Osis, 1950). Murp 2b, 1973). I proposed that we on ESP (Os heory (Murphy, 1962b, | by doing long-distance ote Ee the hypothetical ESP channel by gather data on +e cee d (or did not have) : hat if distance ha : hypothesized t experiments. | The ASPR: 1941-1985 517 an effect on ESP while other factors. ¢. “+ PSychologie; constant, distance-related variations could. atrioaiear7e Rape channel. Carlson sponsored this Study, and Murphy agreed to an all-out effort. Statistician Malcolm Turner helped to design and evaluate these investigations. Our first step was a literature Search cover; that had been published in English (Osis, 1965). We found tically significant decline in ESP efficiency with distance. How- ever, this decline was much Smaller than the inverse Square law of known energies. It seemed evident that this _SMall voice” of the distance effect was embedded in the louder “NOise™ of such psy- chological variables as Personality, altitudes, ang Subjects’ beliefs moods, and attention states, We gradually developed a multivariate design which, we hoped, would enable US tO unscramble the influ- ence of distance effects from the multitude of factors comprising the psychological noise. ; We conducted four experiments (Osis, 1976. Osis & Turner, 1968; Osis, Turner, & Carlson, 197}: Turner, 1965). In the first of the series, stimuli were Presented by three Collaborators in New York, Los Angeles, and Australia: ence seemed to influ- ence the scores. We then conducte Periment in which one person exposed the stimuli during StOps on a trip around the world: such complex Statistical evaluations aS multiple regres- sion and canonical correlation revealed distance effects. This trend was opposite from the dominant beliefs in Parapsychology at the time. The complexity of this work _Was puzzling to those Colleagues who were not well-versed in multivariate design and Statistics; our results were challenged. The analysis was then reviewed by an d found to be correct. heir pres d an ex Various different locations thousands of miles away from the Percipients, appeared to affect subjects scores On clairvoyance tasks as strongly as did the moods of the subjects themselves (Osis, Turner, & Carlson, 1971). The effects of the moods of bystanders (those who were in the vicinity of the targets) were later explored in a specially designed experiment (Osis & Carlson, 1972). Murphy's investigations on the Subject of Creativity and ESP revealed the importance of altered States in psi functioning (Mor- iarity & Murphy, 1967; Murphy, 1966). One Way in which to induce altered states was meditation. Murphy, Carlson, and | were ready to probe this matter even further. Meditation seemed to release transpersonal or spiritual factors Which are said to be relevant to psi functioning. The experience of oneness OF unity, as described in

518 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research ienti editation literature, seemed to Suggest an ease of ie iow. We again developed a multivariate design to explore the effects of meditation on ESP scores. It was difficult to segregate the many factors involved, but we succeeded in iden- tifying the ingredients active in the meditation experience. Ed Bok- ert, Mary Lou Carlson, and I worked closely together and pub- lished this work both in the ASPR’s Journal (Osis & Bokert, 1971) and in the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology (Osis, Bokert, & Carlson, 1973). Our work was frequently cited by others in the meditation literature, and the psychological scales we developed to measure dimensions of the meditation experience were often used by other researchers. ; In the 1970s, we organized and carried out the Indian portion of the aforementioned survey on deathbed and near-death experi- ences, and we developed methods for experimental and survey research on out-of-body experiences (OBEs). The OBE experiment was designed to measure psychophysiology, visual perception, and physical indices of the ostensible OB presence. We chose a posi- tive approach: to test aspects of the experience which could indi- cate that something of the personality could act independently of the physical body. At the time, a negative, reductionist approach to the OBE was fashionable, such as testing variables such as imaging skills and peculiarities of dreaming in the hope of reducing OBEs to a product of these and other psychological functions. With the help of many staff members and consultants, we developed new procedures and equipment to tackle the problems involved in OBE research. We obtained highly pertinent results (Osis, 1978), chiefly with Alex Tanous and Ingo Swann (Osis & McCormick, 1980; Osis & Mitch- ell, 1977). Donna McCormick assisted in most of these experiments, and Boneita Perskari and Janet Mitchell assisted in some. Our re- search attracted international interest from the media. On the other hand, we received stiff opposition from many of our colleagues. Membership Before Gardner Murphy took over the presidency in 1962, our membership had plateaued at around 800. However, under Mur- phy’s leadership, various efforts were devoted to recruit more desirable members and to actively involve them in the ASPR. Lecture attendance more than tripled by 1965, each lecture av- eraging well over 200 people. Small group activities were instituted. Our research projects used the talents of our members, e.g., 500 members were pretested for our long-distance experiments, and about 200 participated in transcontinental experiments. In 1965, @ The ASPR:; 1941-1985 519 day-long ASPR forum was held, aimed at attracting academics in the New York area. Faculty members and researchers from 34 institutions Were in attendance. Marian Nester, Eloise Yerger, and Frances Kish served as Membership Secretaries, part-time positions supported by dona- tions from Arthur Twitchell and W. P. Bentley, were the driving wedge of the membership campaign. The position was abandoned later, and Executive Secretary Laura F. Knipe took over most of its functions. Rhea White updated and improved our library, instituting a new cataloguing system to provide better access to the book collection. By 1965, membership reached over the 1,200 mark, and this was doubled by 1968. Marian Nester launched the ASPR Newsletter in 1968. This greatly improved the contact be- tween the membership and our headquarters. An air of excitement and enthusiasm was present and felt by the members during that era; this atmosphere helped to build a new ASPR. Part of the success can be attributed to the strong effort that was made to bolster the Society's membership activities, as well as to the efforts of the research staff and volunteers. It was aided also by the changed cultural climate, initiated by the subculture of the 1960s, which included interest in ESP and the search for a new meaning of life. We at the ASPR had all hoped that an increased membership would improve the financial status of the ASPR. However, the expenses for services and administration increased more than the income from dues. Moreover, only the activities of the Research Department were able to attract substantial financial support. Education In 1963 and 1964, Frederick C. Dommeyer and Rhea White (1963a, 1963b, 1963c, 1964) published a 122-page survey on **Psy- chical Research in Colleges and Universities.” In 1970, Robert McConnell came up with the potent idea of organizing a campaign to have courses on parapsychology taught in institutions of higher learning; to this end, he produced a curriculum guide. Marian Nester seized this idea and established an Education Department at the ASPR. Her intention was to compile reading lists and other materials for would-be teachers of parapsychology and their stu- dents, as well as to provide them with advice about curriculum. Later, a directory was compiled entitled Courses and Other Study Opportunities in Parapsychology. \t contained information about college-level opportunities for studying parapsychology, for both credit and non-credit. The directory was arranged geographi- cally. For each state or country it listed the institutions, the type of

$20 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research course or program, the instructor(s), and any additional details of interest. The directory revealed some surprising information: About 150 institutions of higher learning had courses on parapsy- chology. ; } It was not easy to provide students with material that was in- teresting enough to motivate them in an elective course, while simultaneously being scientifically sound. Many instructors greatly appreciated the information that the ASPR was able to supply. However, as time progressed, many other organizations and indi- viduals flooded the field with competing publications and services; the ASPR’s previously exclusive role as provider of educational information was over, but the department still continued. Journal As the 1950s drew to a close, the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research was at a low ebb as measured by the amount of qualified publishable material; the annual volumes were slim, totalling about 180 pages. When Rhea White took over the Journal in 1959, she was required to split her time between research, answering the ASPR mail requests, and editing JASPR. She managed to turn the tide despite that: The Journal grew to 208 pages by 1962. When Laura Dale returned in 1962, she became editor on a full-time basis, which is an understatement, as she usually volunteered an extra 20 hours per week to the task. For Dale, JASPR became a magnificent obsession, her life's work. Her. dedication was evidenced by the growth and quality of the Journal. It increased to over 300 pages annually in 1964, to over 400 pages in 1966, and to over 500 pages in the peak-time of the early 1970s. — 3 From then on, JASPR stayed around the 400 figure, which was the same as in the period prior to the “revolution” in 1941. Dale's editorship brought with it a shift in JASPR's contents from a predominance of theoretical papers to a clear majority of experimental ones. In the 1940s and 1950s, theoretical and philo- sophical papers dominated experimental ones by a rough ratio of 3:1. The change in emphasis was gradual, but by the 1970s, JASPR completed the shift to a dominance of experimental and technical reports, as in the tradition of the Journal of Parapsychology. Al- — though theoretical and philosophical papers diminished in number, book reviews held their ground. Thus, Laura Dale’s editorship made a deep impression on the course of parapsychology from 1963 through 198]. In the 1970s, the conservative wing of parapsychology dominated both of the major American journals in the field, JASPR and the Journal of Parapsychology. The journals provided a generous The ASPR; 1941-1985 521 forum for the conservatives, but the i Cont were less frequently publishe more liberal-minded authors n d. This may be one of why the student interest, which reached enormous cba i the 1960s and 1970s, did not take root, i professional careers. There was no forum avaincbie Seino discon sion of those subjects which excited students (as well as the liberal wing of parapsychology). Yet such a forum is essential for the aon and concretization of ideas. {his new conservatism also hampered the which was engaged in work that epuniea to bo tabad eee cates of the hard line in parapsychology. In the 1960s, Murphy had intervened and secured the publication of our work by evaluating rejected papers and making Suggestions for improvement, which Pi watiry worthy of publication. In the 1970s, however, the research was communicated primarily at conventi i 1974, 1975, 1979; Osis & Haraldsson, 1976) through private ae outs (Osis & Perskari, 1975), and in one article in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research (Osis & Mitchell, 1977). Only one ene report was published in JASPR (Osis & McCormick, THE YEARS AFTER GARDNER MURPHY The years after 1975, which marked the end of Murphy's active leadership, although he lived until 1979, seem more appropriate for a discussion of the contemporary ASPR, rather than of the history of the Society. I shall, therefore, touch upon these years in a cursory manner, mainly to accentuate Murphy's role in the history of the ASPR. In the light of his advancing years, Gardner Murphy's strength was admirable. Serious health problems set in around 1970, and by 1975 he was severely incapacitated. In 1971, Murphy stepped down from the presidency in favor of Montague Ullman, his trusted friend and colleague. Ullman greatly respected Murphy. He con- sulted with him and maintained his ASPR policies. Thus, the change in the leadership of the Society resulted, not in an abrupt discon- tinuity, but in the gradual decline of Murphy's influence. Gardner Murphy's absence was strongly felt. Although the Board and the staff were the same, a change nevertheless set in. We lost Carlson's support; the purchasing power of our endowment de- creased to half of what it had been; and priorities shifted from research to education and the Journal. Membership also slowly declined, as did lecture attendance, which dropped from over 200 to about 60, The enthusiasm which had once been evident and necessary for growth was nowhere to be seen, What did the ASPR

522 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research lose along with Gardner Murphy? The following is my own, per- sonal interpretation, which of course, Is far from infallible. Gardner Murphy had a mountaintop view of cultural history, but, at the same time, he had a warm concern for that which blossomed in the valley. He was an authority on the history of psychology (Murphy, 1949a), as well as on prescientific philosophy, which was evident in his books, e.g., Asian Psychology (Murphy & Murphy, 1968) and Western Psychology (Murphy & Murphy, 1969). Murphy — a had a talent for discerning good, positive achievements and poten- tialities, and for a much wider variety of contexts and areas than would be true of most other people. In the book of Genesis, a single line is repeated again and again, “And God saw that it was good.” Murphy's sight was not that unconditional: He clearly dis- cerned inefficient methods, views, and research, but he did have an eagle eye for seeing the good. That included people. And that is what made our organization a unified whole. Those of us who did not make the mountaintop, but camped on its foothills, could not see as far as Murphy did. That which lies in the valley in front of one may be seen clearly and look good, but usually that which is hidden from one’s sight is construed as illus- ory or as sheer nonsense. When the giant on the mountaintop left, the unifying power of his sight also departed. The Board and staff split sharply into two factions, each perched upon its own hill and holding fast to the truth of singular, narrow landscapes. More often than not, Murphy had been able to reconcile widely divergent perspectives. Within the areas of legitimate research, he brought together those with reductionist views (i.e., reducing all phenomena to ESP, PK, or chance), and those who wished to conduct legitimate research into such problems as survival, OBEs, and psychic healing. The post- Murphy differences in the ASPR were not reconciled, but were manifested in fights between factions and in behind-the-scene poli- tics. Although Murphy trusted people and delegated some of the Board's decision-making power to others, after he was gone the power was misused or even revoked, and the number of trivial topics addressed by the Board increased. Of course, Murphy was not always right, nor could he always get his way (remember my simile of Gulliver tied down?). Sometimes disputes occurred, and, when they did, he was saddened by them. But Murphy was successful on enough occasions to lead the ASPR to a lengthy period of growth. In the absence of a giant, a new style of leadership and a line of command needs to be developed, one which subordinates the views from individual vantage points to the larger prospect provided by the ASPR’s goals for parapsychology. The ASPR is The ASPR; 1941-1985 523 still a viable, funded organization, and it has the potential f rebirth into another century of happy, productive ot srcoei 7] REFERENCES ALLISON, L. W. (1944). Results of questionnaire. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 38, 58-60. ALLISON, L. W. (1958). The American Society for Psychical Re- search. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 52, 39-44. Announcement. (1941). Journal of the American Society for Psy- chical Research, 35, 177-178. BuTToN, W. H. (1939, January 3). President's report. Bulletin to the Voting Members of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, ASPR Archives. Button, W. H., & O'NEILL, J. J. (1940). Editorial comment. Proceedings of the American Society for Psychical Research, 23, i-iv. The Cambridge conference on spontaneous phenomena (1955). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 49, 157-160. Date, L. A. (1941). Dr. John F. Thomas (in memoriam). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 1-8. DALE, L. A. (1946). The psychokinetic effect: The first A.S.P.R. experiment. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 40, 123-151. Date, L. A., Wuite, R., & Murpuy, G. (1962). A selection of cases from a recent survey of spontaneous ESP phenomena. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 56, 3-47. Dace, L. A., & WooprurF, J. L. (1947). The psychokinetic effect: Further A.S.P.R. experiments. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 41, 65-82. DEVEREUX, G. (ED.). (1953). Psychoanalysis and the Occult. New York: International Universities Press. Dopps, E. R. (1934). Why I do not believe in survival. Proceed- ings of the Society for Psychical Research, 42, 147-172. Dommeyer, F. C., & Wuite, R. (1963a). Psychical research in colleges and universities, part I: Institutions in the United States, introduction. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 57, 3-31. Domneyer, F. C., & Wuite, R. (1963b). Psychical research in colleges and universities, part Il: Institutions in the United States, conclusion. Journal of the American Society for Psy- chical Research, 57, 55-105.

$24 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research DomMEYER, F. C., & Waite, R. (1963c). Psychical research in colleges and universities, part III: Institutions in English- speaking countries other than the United States. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 57, 136-162. Dommeyer, F. C., & Waite, R. (1964). Psychical research in colleges and universities, part IV: Institutions in non-English- speaking countries. Journal of the American Society for Psy- chical Research, 58, 79-103. EuRENWALD, J. (1978). The ESP Experience: A Psychiatric Vali- dation. New York: Basic Books. E1senBuD, J. (1982). Paranormal Foreknowledge: Problems and — : Perplexities. New York: Human Sciences Press. EIsENBUD, J. (1983). Parapsychology and the Unconscious. Berk- — 4 eley: North Atlantic Books. Hys op, G. H. (1941). Statement by the President of the Society. r 5 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 113-114. Hystop, G. H. (1959, January 20). ASPR Bulletin XVIII, ASPR — Archives. Hystop, G. H., MurpHy, G., KAEMPFFERT, W., ZABRISKIE, E., & ¥ KENNEDY, J. P. (1941). The Hyslop-Prince Fellowship. Journal _ of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 115-117. KAHN, S D. (1952). Studies in extrasensory perception: Exper- ¢ iments utilizing an electronic scoring device. Proceedings of the _ American Society for Psychical Research, 25, 1-48. Mauskoprr, S. H., & McVauGu, M. R. (1980). The Elusive Sci- ence: Origins of Experimental Psychical Research. Baltimore, a MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. The Medical Section of the American Society for Psychical Re- search. (1948). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 42, 81-82. Mina Stinson Crandon. (1942). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 36, 2. Minutes of Research Committee. (1947, December 6). ASPR | Archives. Moriarity, A. E., & Murpuy, G. (1967). Some thoughts about prerequisite conditions or states in creativity and paranormal experience. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 61, 203-218. Murpny, G. (1943). Psychical phenomena and human needs. Jour- nal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 37, 163- 191. Murpny, G. (1944). Removal of impediments to the paranormal. Siege of the American Society for Psychical Research, 38, { nr ie ee The ASPR: 1941-1985 525 MurPHY, G. (1945a). Difficulties confronting the survival hypothe Poe pis of the American Society for Psychical Nesdinely 39, Murpuy, G. (1945b). Field theory and survival. American Society for Psychical } Recerch 30, prion ac Murpny, G. (1945c). An outline of survival research. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 39, 2-34. i onl G. Spire py drs research and the mind-body rela- ion. Journal of the American lety chi 40, 199-207, Society for Psychical Research, Murpuy, G. (1949a). Historical Introduction to Modern Psychol- ogy. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. MurpuHy, G. (1949b). Psychical research and personality. Pro- ceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 49, 1-15. Murpny, G. (1952). The natural, the mystical, and the paranormal. andor of the American Society for Psychical Research, 46, Murpny, G. (1953). The importance of spontaneous cases. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 47, 89-103. MurpuHy, G. (1955). Plans for research on spontaneous cases. oa of the American Society for Psychical Research, 49, Murpny, G. (1956). Integration of experimental research with in- vestigations of spontaneous cases. Journal of the American So- ciety for Psychical Research, 50, 147-150. Murpny, G. (1957). Notes for a parapsychological autobiography. Journal of Parapsychology, 21, 165-178. Murpnuy, G. (1959). A comparison of India and the West in viewpoints regarding psychical phenomena. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 53, 43~49. Murpny, G. (1962a). Presidential remarks. Journal of the Ameri- can Society for Psychical Research, 56, 202-204. Murpny, G. (1962b). A qualitative study of telepathic phenomena. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 56, 63-79. Murpny, G. (1963). Creativity and its relation to extrasensory perception. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 57, 203-214. Murpny, G. (1964). Lawfulness versus caprice: Is there a “law of psychic phenomena”? Journal of the American Society for Psy- chical Research, 58, 238-249. ‘ Murpny, G. (1965). Body-mind theory as a factor guiding survival research. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 59, 148-156. Murpny, G. (1966). Research in creativeness: What can it tell us

$26 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research about extrasensory perception? Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 60, 8-22. ; Murpny. G. (1967). Direct contacts with past and future: Ret- rocognition and precognition. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 61, 3-23. ; Murpny, G. (1969). The discovery of gifted sensitives. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 63, 3-20. Murpny, G. (1970). Are there any solid facts in psychical re- search? Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 64, 3-17. a Murpny, G. (1971a). Frederic Myers and the subliminal self. Jour- nal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 65, 130- a 143. meh e F Murpuy, G. (1971b). The problem of repeatability in psychical research. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 65, 3-16. Murpny, G. (1973). A Caringtonian approach to Ian Stevenson's Twenty Cases of Reincarnation. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 67, 117-129. Murpny, G., & Murpuy, L. B. (Eps.). (1968). Asian Psychology. New York: Basic Books. Murpny, G., & Murpuy, L. B. (Eps.). (1969). Western Psychol- ‘a f ogy. New York: Basic Books. Murpuy, G., & Taves, E. (1940). Tests of extra-sensory per- ception among A.S.P.R. members. Proceedings of the American Society for Psychical Research, 23, 3-33. Notice to members. (1941a). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 29-30. Notice to members. (1941b). Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 85-86. Osis, K. (1950). Hypotheses of Extrasensory Perception. Doctoral dissertation, University of Munich. (In German) Osis, K. (1961). Deathbed Observations by Physicians and Nurses (Parapsychological Monographs No. 3). New York: Parapsy- chology Foundation. Osis, K. (1965). ESP over distance: A survey of experiments pub- lished in English. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 59, 22-42. Osis, K. (1974). Perspectives for out-of-body research. In W. G. Roll, R. L. Morris, & J. D. Morris (Eds.), Research in Parapsy- chology 1973 (pp. 110-113). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. Osis, K. (1975). Perceptual experiments on out-of-body experi- ences. In J. D. Morris, W. G. Roll, & R. L. Morris (Eds.), Research in Parapsychology 1974 (pp. 53-55). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. The ASPR: 1941-1985 527 Osis, K. (1976). Channel characteristi 3rd International Conference of C adadtere ommanant — 23-27). Toronto, Canada. meHORE SDD: Osis, K. (1978). Out-of-body research at i : Psychical Research. In D. S. Rogo (Ed), Mind Ban Society i The Mystery of ESP Projection (Pp. 162-169). New York: ~, guin Books. : ie Osis, K. (1979). Insiders’ views of the OBE: A questionnaire sur- vey. In W. G. Roll (Ed.), Research in Parapsychology 1978 ( 50-52). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. ts Osis, K. & Boxert, E. (1971). ESP and changed states of con- sciousness induced by meditation. Journal of the American Soci- ety for Psychical Research, 65, 17-65. an sae opto E., & CARLSON, M. L. (1973). Dimensions of ' =e er experience. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, eri wi 7 ery: i na (1972). The ESP channel—Open or closed? Journal of the Ameri i i pope eerie erican Society for Psychical Re- Osis, K., & HARALDsson, E. (1976). OOBEs in Indi is: Sathya Sai Baba and Dadaji. In J. D. Morris, W.G. Roll, & R. L. Morris (Eds.), Research in Parapsychology 1975 (pp. 147- 150). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. Osis, K., & HARALDsSON, E. (1977). At the Hour of Death. New York: Avon Books. Osis, K., & McCormick, D. (1980). Kinetic effects at the ostensi- ble location of an out-of-body projection during perceptual test- ne revi of the American Society for Psychical Research, 74, Osis, K., & MitcHeLt, J. L. (1977). Physiological correlates of reported out-of-body experiences. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 49, 525-536. Osis, K., & Perskari, B. (1975). Perceptual tests of the out-of- body experiences. Report distributed by the Chester F. Carlson Research Laboratory, ASPR. Osis, K., & Turner, M. E., Jr. (1968). Distance and ESP: A transcontinental experiment. Proceedings of the American Soci- ety for Psychical Research, 27, 1-48. Osis, K., TURNER, M. E., Jr., & Cartson, M. L. (1971), ESP over distance: Research on the ESP channel. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 65, 245-288. PEDERSON-KRaG, G., (1951). The Medical Section: The first three youre. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, , 1IS-116.

528 Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research ). Old books on psychical phenomena, Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 35, 74-81. Research Committee. (1953). Note on attempt to repeat the Kahn-Neisser IBM results. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 47, 83. ; ; SCHMEIDLER, G. R. (1943a). Predicting good and bad scores in a clairvoyance experiment: A preliminary report. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 37, 103-110. SCHMEIDLER, G. R. (1943b). Predicting good and bad scores in a clairvoyance experiment: A final report. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 37, 210-221. ia ScHMEIDLER, G. R., & AtLison, L. W. (1948). A repetition of Carington’s experiments with free drawings. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 42, 97-107. Taves, E., & DALE, L. A. (1943). The Midas touch in psychical research. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Re- search, 37, 57-83. Taves, E., DALE, L. A., & Murpuy, G. (1943). A further report on the Midas touch. Journal of the American Society for Psy- chical Research, 37, 111-118. Turner, M. E., Jr. (1965). Appendix: A statistical model for examining the relation between ESP and distance. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 59, 43-46. ULLMAN, M. (1975). Parapsychology and psychiatry. In A. M. Freedman & H. I. Kaplan (Eds.), Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry (2nd ed.) (pp. 2552-2561). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins. ULLMAN, M., & Krippner, S. (1970). Dream Studies and Tele- pathy; An Experimental Approach (Parapsychological Mono- graphs No. 12). New York: Parapsychology Foundation, ULLMAN, M., KrippNer, S., WITH VAUGHAN, A. (1973). Dream Telepathy. New York: Macmillan. Wuirte, R., & ANGSTADT, J. (1961). A résumé of research at the A.S.P.R. into teacher-pupil attitudes and clairvoyance test re- sults, 1959-1960. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 55, 142-148. Wuirte, R. A., & ANGSTADT, J. (1963a). A second classroom GESP experiment with student-agents acting simultaneously. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 57, 227-232. Wuirte, R. A., & ANGSTADT, J. (1963b). Student preferences in a two classroom GESP experiment with two student-agents acting simultaneously. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 57, 32-42. Wuire, R. A., & ANGsTADT, J. (1965). A review of results and [Prerson, J.]. (1941 The ASPR: 1941-1985 529 new experiments bearing on teacher-sel “White hi Ner-selection meth i Anderson White high school experiments. Journal of psy the can Society for Psychical Research, 59, 56-84 ¢ Ameri- art J. "a & Date, L. A. (1950). Subject and experimenter attitudes in relation to ESP scoring. Journal of the A Society for Psychical Research, 44, 87~\ |) American American Society for Psychical R 5 West 73rd Street esearch New York, New York 10023