R.D. Nelson et al- FieldREG Anomalies in Group Situations

8/3/2019 R.D. Nelson et al- FieldREG Anomalies in Group Situations

1/31

Journal o f Scientific Explorat ion, V o l . 10, No. 1, pp. 111 -141, 1996 0892-3310/96 1 9 9 6 Society fo r Scientific Exploration

FieldREG Anomalies in Group SituationsR. D. N E L S O N , G. J. B R A D I S H , Y. H. D O B Y N S , B. J. D U N N E , A N D R. G. J A H NP r i n c e t o n E n g i n e e r i n g A n o m a l i e s R e s e a r c h , S c h o o l of Engineer ing/Ap p l ied S c i e n c e ,P r i n c e t o n Universi ty , P r i n c e t o n , N J 08544

Abstract Portable rando m event generators with software to record an dindex continuous sequences of binary data in field situations are found toproduce anomalous outputs when deployed in va rious group environments.These "FieldREG" systems have been operated under formal protocols in tenseparate venues, all of which subdivide naturally into temporal segments,such as sessions, presentations, or days. The most extreme data segmentsfrom each of the ten applications, after approp riate correction for multiplesampling, compound to a collective probability against chance expectationof 2 x10-4. Interpretation remains speculative at this po int, but logboo k notesan d anecdotal reports f rom participants suggest that high degrees of atten-t ion, intellectual cohesiveness, shared emotion, or other coherent qualities ofth e groups ten d to correlate with th e statistically unusual deviations from the-oretical expectation in the FieldREG sequences. If sustained over more ex -tensive experimen ts, such effects could add credence to the concept o f a c o n -sciousness "field" as an agency fo r creating order in random physicalprocesses.Introduction

All of the b e n c h m a r k R E G e x p e r i m e n t s in the P E A R p r o gr a m h a v e be en p e r-fo rm ed w ith a very sophist ica ted microelectronic b inary genera tor tha t in cor-pora tes elaborate fa i lsa fes , redundancies , a n d con t ro l s to gua ra n tee its n o m i -n a l ra ndomic i ty a n d protect ion f rom i n t e r n a l a n d exte rna l b ia s (Ne l son ,B ra d ish , a nd D ob yns , 1989). With the basic character o f the o pera tor-re la teda no ma l ies we l l established on th is e la b o ra te dev ice ( J a hn , D un n e , a nd N e l son ,1987), however , i t became c lear tha t our p rogram, as wel l as o thers , wouldbenef i t f rom m u c h si m p l e r R E G mo dul es tha t cou l d ena b l e a broader spec-t rum of app l ica t ion s of the essen t ia l exp erimenta l con cept . For exa m ple ,these m ore com pa c t a n d less exp en sive devices cou ld serve as sources fo r a va -riety o f second an d th i rd genera t ion experiments in o u r o w n l abora tory , fa c i l i-ta te var ious rep l ica t ion and extension experiments in o ther l abora tor ies , andenable a n u m b e r o f field studies outside of the laborato ry settin gs. Su chportab le R E G devices have been designed, con structed , a n d place d in to ser-vice in n u m e r o u s ex p e r im e n ts in o u r o w n l abora tory , an d several direct rep l i-c a t i o n s a n d extended a pp l ica tions un der ta ken e lsew here (N e l son , B ra dish ,an d D oby n s , 1992). In a l l o f these, th e basic hyp othesis tha t h u m a n i n t e n t i o nis an essentia l factor in establ ishment of the digital anomalies h as been re-

111


2/31

1 1 2 R . D . N e lson e t a l .tained, an d this parameter has been treated as the pr imary correlate in theanalyses of the exper imenta l data .This portable technology also permits another potent ia l ly impor tan t genreo f exper iment , n a m e l y th e passive mo ni to r ing o f e n v i ro n m e n t al b a c k gr o u n d sin selected sites a n d situations w h e r e h u m a n consciousness might conce iva b l ybe alter ing o r organizing a sur rounding "field" o f po ten t ia l i n fo rma t ion , mos tbroad ly construed , w i t h o u t specific in tent ion o r direct attention to the experi-menta l device by any o f the part ic ipants . Examples that suggest them selvesinclude religious o r secular ceremonies an d rituals, individual o r group thera-py sessions, busin ess mee tings, sporting events, professional conferences, oran y other group con v oca t ion s tha t might include p er iods of unusual ly cohe-sive cognitive in teract ion, creative enthusiasm, or other fo rms o f emot iona lintensity.This po ssibility the establishment of a discern ible "consciousness field," has been widely proposed in m a n y contexts, by scholars f rom var iou s dis-ciplines (Basham, 1959; D u r k h e i m , 1961; James, 1977; Sheldrake, 1981). Itgains some credence f rom th e in formal testimony of ou r laboratory operators ,w h o f r e que n t l y speak of achieving a state o f "resonance" wi th th e device dur-in g successful operat ion, an d f rom some of the details of their experimenta lper formance . Fo r example , hin ts of the possible importan ce of subcon scious,collective, an d environmental aspects of the anom alous pheno mena , whereinexplicit intention is relegated to a secondary o r subtler role, arise in the ubiq-ui tous series position effects, in the observed deviations o f non- in ten t iona lbaseline data f rom ch a n ce behavior, in an assortment of gender differences inper fo rmance ( D u n n e an d Jahn, 1995), in the superior performance o f some op-erators w h e n n o t directly addressing th e machines, and in the unusually largeeffect sizes o f co-operator bonded-pairs ( D u n n e an d J a h n , 1993).In a systematic a t tempt to explore this regime, w e have deployed FieldR EGsystems, com prisin g a portable R E G an d a notebook computer with appropr i -a te sof tware , a s passive background monitors in a var ie ty o f group assemblysituations where u n u s u a l collective dyn amics might ensue. In these applica-t ions , data a re taken in con t in uo us segmen ts, with a time-stamped i ndex iden-tifying scheduled o r unscheduled periods o f particular interest. T he behavioro f th e system overnight o r during extra-session intervals in the meeting sched-ules provides a form o f on-line control data. All data are subsequent lysearched fo r prolonged segments of unusua l behavior, as indicated by extremeshifts in the output m e an s o r protracted periods o f steady deviation. Thesean om alies are hypo thesized to be indicative of some change in the prevailinginformation en v i ron m en t associated with th e collective consciousness of theassembled group . In a sense, th e n a m e "FieldREG" thus acquires a double en -tendre: i. e., the device has been deployed in a "field" situation , to moni to rchanges in a con sciousness "field."


3/31

Fie ldREG Anomal ies 113Equipment

T he por t ab le R E G which is the heart of the Fie ldREG system consists o f apr in ted c i rcui t board a n d p r e cisio n c o m p o n e n t s m o u n t e d i n a 5 x 7 x 2 inch casta luminum b o x . T he r andom even t sequence is based on a low level micro-electron ic w hi te noise source which is amplif ied, limited, an d ultimately com-pared with a precisely adjusted D C reference level. At any ins tan t of time th eprobability o f the ana log signal equa l i ng or exceeding the re fe rence thresholdis precisely 0.5. This white noise signa l is sampled 1000 times per secon d, andth e o u t p u t o f a c o m p a r a t o r stage is clocked in to a d igi ta l flip-flop, yie lding astream o f bina ry events, 1 o r 0 , each with probabi l i ty 0.5. This unpredictable,c o n t i n u o u s sequence o f bits is t h e n c o m p a r e d with an al te rnat ing templa teusing a logical XOR in ha rdwa re , a nd the ma tches a re coun ted , thus precludingfirst-order bias of the mean due to short o r long-term drift in a n y analog c o m -p o n e n t values by invert ing every second bit. Th e resul tin g seque n ce is then a c-cumulated as bytes that are transmitted to a serial por t of the computer , wherethey are read and converted to R E G data by dedicated software. T he digitalan d analog circuits are isolated f rom each othe r spatially an d electrically, an dth e geometry is fixed by the prin ted circuitry. To avoid electrical cross-talk,digital transmissions are no t performed during th e analog sampling. Power toth e circuits is supplied by an external D C adapter to min imize effects o f asso-ciated t ime-varying ma gnetic fields. In applications w h e r e n o l ine voltage isavailable, p o w e r i s provided by a ba t tery p a c k , with th e entire system c o n -tained in a small carrying case.Extens ive calibrations o f a large n u m b e r o f these p o r t ab le R E G devices in -dicate that a ll per form a s n o m in a l r a n d o m sources, with distr ibution parame-ters tha t are indistinguishable f rom theoretical expectations, or f rom those o fth e m ore elaborate benchmark R E G .

Computer SoftwareT he FieldREG data acquisition program r u n s o n a DOS-based compute r ,usually a laptop portable, an d employs many features of the laboratory experi-ments in order to maintain an alytical compatibili ty with them. For exampleth e sof tware reads th e serial port a n d assembles 25 consecut ive bytes as a 200-sample trial, f rom which data are recorded as a sums of 200 bits, with expecta-tion 100, var iance 50. The program then generates a data file of consecutivetrials, a nd a corresponding index that contains a ne w l ine printed every hour .

Interstitial lines record th e t ime, trial n u m b e r , and o ther in format ion corre-sponding to an y preset o r concurren t marks made using defined funct ion keysto indicate events such as the beginning an d e n d o f sessions. A custom analy-sis pro gram al lows specification of the beginn ing and end o f the da ta sequen ceto be analyzed, an d generates a full statistical analysis of its distribution . Acorresponding graph sh ow s th e cumul a t ive deviation of the specified data se -quence from expectation, marked with a vert ical l ine at each poin t where a


4/31

114 R . D . N e lso n e t a l .f unc t i on- ke y code w as entered (see Figure 1 ). Ea ch such m a r k is a ccompa n iedby a 5 percen t c on f ide nc e parabo la tha t s ta r ts at the c u r r e n t height o f th e c u m u -lative trace, al lowing a visual assessme n t of t rends correspo nding to the identi-f ied events or t ime periods.

ProtocolThe tw o essential requirem en ts for a credible pro tocol are standardized pro-cedures for specification of po tentially interestin g periods or events, an d well-defined statistical criteria fo r establishing an y no n-c ha nc e characteristics ofth e corresponding data. T he fo rmer necessarily depends to some degree o n th eparticular application, but at a minimum m ust specify th e criteria that objec-tively identify sessions or events, and the m e a n s by which these criteria areimplemented , e.g., c o nc u r r e n t notes o r marked index lines. For exam ple, pre-se t event markers in the index may be k eyed to logbook descriptions of theevents; prescheduled events , such as conference talks, field observation peri-

ods, o r meeting sessions, w i th o r w ith out markers in the i nde x , m a y b e identi-fied f rom comprehensive , time-stamped notes.Given an objective identification protocol , th e analysis of any apparen t lyunusua l o r devian t data subset within a given application can be handled byc o m m o n statistical tests applied to the in terva l of interest, appropriately cor-rected via B o n f e r r o n i adjustments fo r the p revai ling multiple opportunities. Ingeneral, to obtain anestimate of the likelihood that a particular segment isevi-

Fig. 1 . ICRL: Pilot Study; Vertical lines mark events.


5/31

Fie ldREG A n o m a l i e s 11 5dence fo r a n anomalous interact ion , a B o n f er ro n i adjustment to the in dividua le v e n t probabil ity, p , o f the form p B = 1 - ( 1 - p ) n m a y b e appl ied , w h e r e N de-n otes the appropriate n u m b e r of similar oppo r tun i t ies o r events .

In m ost appl ica t ions , it is also possible t o app ly a canon ica l test fo r i n -creased v ar ian ce across all of the subsets within the appl icat ion , using a sumo f squared Z-scores, t o c ompare with the x 2 dist r ibut ion (Snedecor andC o c h r a n , 1980). This latter test accurate ly summarizes th e accumula t ion o fe vide nc e fo r ano malous deviat ions across al l of the data subsets within the ap-pl ica t ion , whereas th e B o n f e r r o n i adjus tment treats a selected segment as astand-alone anomaly. Thus , in a n y application w h e r e an u nu su a l deviation isexhibited in m ore than on e segmen t , the B o n f e r r o n i proc e dure will yie ld a rel-atively conserva t ive estimate o f the degree o f ano maly , comp are d with the x 2test.Example Applications

Forma l FieldREG exper iments have so fa r been per formed i n 10 varied situ-ations, including large an d small professional meetings, group gatherings fo rreligious rituals, an d certain investigation s of unusua l sites. T he selected datasubsets within these databases were chosen on the basis of evidently strongan d consistent t rends, an d their analysis t hus requires consideration of thenumb er of similarly defined datasets (e.g., sessions or presentations) tha tmight also have been selected. In al l cases, this has been done by adjusting th eintrinsic probabil ity of the mean-shif t using th e Bon fe r ron i c a lc u la t ion de -scribed above. In a f e w exa mpl es the x 2 calculation is also given fo r compa r i -son.T he first exploration of the FieldREG approach w as unde r t ake n a t a meetingof th e International Consciousness Research Laboratories (ICRL) in April ,1993, albeit wi thou t th e cu r ren t Fie l dR EG sof tware . Although this datasetcann ot be included in the formal analysis because th e recording fo rmat and thec o n c u r r e n t documenta t ion d o n o t conta in adequate i n f o r mat i on , it served tosuggest th e potential v a l u e o f a careful ly implemented protocol. T h e IC R Lgroup comprises several senior scholars f rom various scientific disciplinesw h o meet se mi-annua l ly to exchange research progress, plan collaborativeprojects, an d discuss th e role o f consciousness i n p h ys ic a l processes. T he firstof tw o recorded segments was an af ternoon session tha t consisted primarily ofpresentations of on going research, much of which w as deeply engaging for thegroup, a n d the Fie ldRE G da ta show ed a steady t rend culminating in a signifi-c a n t deviation during th e first three hours of this period. T he second day'ssegment, recorded during pragmatic business discussions in the af ternoon ses-sion, showed essentially random behavior throughout . Figure 1 display s thetotal database o f a pp roxima te l y n ine h ours , with tw o o f th e vertical lines em -phasized to m ark particular points; th e first is near the end of the three-hourperiod described above, an d the second segregates the tw o days. (In a l l o f the


6/31

1 1 6 R . D . N e lson e t a l .subsequent ex am ples all the vertical lines h a v e been removed with th e excep-tion o f those marking the data segments chosen fo r fur ther analysis.)

ICRL IA c o n t i n u o u s Fie ldR EG reco rd ing using th e fu l ly developed protocol a n dsof tware w as ma de at a three-day I C R L meeting in March 1994. Figure 2a dis-plays the en t i re data sequence , which inc ludes n o t o n l y meeting t imes, butbreaks an d overn ight periods. A vertical line m a r k s th e b eginn ing of the thirdday, anecdotally described as distin ctly pro ductive an d satisfying. For m ost ofthis day, the tren d w as stron gly posit ive (Figure 2b), an d achieved a Z-score o f2.187, corresponding to a B onfe r ron i -co r rec ted p-value o f p B= 0.084 fo r theselected day 's excurs ion , suggesting a m odestly unusua l deviat ion , even aftercompensat ion fo r multiple sampling opportuni t ies .ICRL II

A FieldREG recording of one day of an I C R L meeting in December , 1994, isshown in its entirety in Figure 3a with the segmen t chosen fo r fur ther analysismarked. Interspersed with various informal discussions an d group exchanges,there were three p lanned, fo rmal presentat ions o f about an hour 's dura t ion,an d the last of these (Figure 3b) showed a rather steady trend culmina t ing in ameanshif t with two-tailed p-value o f 0.061. T he B onfe r ron i -co r rec ted va lu ein this case is 0.172, indicat ing that, given the mul t ip le opportunities fo rchance f luctua t ions to p ro duce suggestive excursions, i t is n ot highly devia n t .Fu r the r exa mina t ion o f Figure 3a sh ow s other segments tha t exhibi t strongtrends, but these do n ot correspon d to prespecified or objectively identif iableperiods, according to the FieldREG protocol. Thus, a l though they look u n u s u -al , they cannot be distinguished f rom chance f luctuations an d hence c a nno tc on t r ibu te to ou r understanding.D M H I I

A group o f a b o u t a dozen researchers in a w ork ing g roup o n Di rec t M e nta lan d H e a l i n g I n t e r ac t io n s (D M H I ) me t fo r several da ys in Decemb er , 1993.T he FieldREG e q u i p m e n t operated fo r a b o u t 35 h o u r s throughou t most o f themeeting, pr imari ly during th e active meeting times bu t with several una t tend-ed periods be tw e e n sessions w h e n a ll participants w e r e elsewhere (Figure 4a).In th e aggregate, these data look l ike calibration s of a w ell-behaved r andomevent generator, as is typically th e case for the FieldR EG app licat ion s. H o w -ever, there appear to be isolated segments with unusua l ly strong t rends tha t areassociated with particular presentation session s. T he most striking o f these issh ow n in Figure 4b, recorded w h ile o n e researcher spoke fo r over tw o h o u r sdescribing three prom ising high priority projects. This steady high-going t rendhas a te rmina l Z-score o f 3.05, correspon din g to a two-tailed p-value o f 0.002.Over the course of the f o u r days, Fie ldREG recorded 1 2 presentations o f


7/31

Fie ldR EG Anom al ies 117

Fig. 2a. ICRL I: Three-day meeting; last da y marked.

Fig. 2b. I C R L I: Marked day.


8/31

118 R . D . N e lson e t a l .

Fig. 3a. I C R L I I : Oneday; selected session marked.

Fig. 3b. I C R L II: Marked session.


9/31

Fie ldREG A n o m a l i e s 119

Fig. 4a. D M H I I: Four-day meeting; selected session marked.

Fig. 4b. D M H I I: Marked session.


10/31

1 20 R.D. N e lson e t a l .roughly e q u i v a l e n t l ength , l eading to a B o n f e r r o n i co r rec t ion tha t increasesth e selected session's probabi l i ty to 0.027.D M H L IIFigure 5a shows a four-day, c o n t i n u o u s FieldREG recording made of theD e c e m b e r , 1994, D M H I w o r k i n g g rou p meeting, i nc lud ing breaks an dovernight per iods. This meet ing w a s no t b roken into defined sessions, but in -stead w as a free ran gin g discussion focused o n research programs. Fol lowingan overn igh t period at the start, th e F i e l d R E G t race show s a consisten t u p w a r dt rend dur ing all of the first 12-hour day,c u lmina t ing in a p-value o f 0.014 fo rth e m eansh i f t (Figure 5b). T h e B o n f e r r o n i correction to compensate fo r se-lecting o n e part icular day f rom th e f o u r leads to an estimate o f p B= 0.055 fo rthis t r end to h ave occu r red by c h a n c e .C U U P S I

A F i e l d R E G system w ith battery p a c k w a s provided to a chap te r o f theCovenan t of Un itar ian Universalist Pagans (CUUPS) to be used at their ri tualgatherings, beginning i n D e c e m b e r 1993. U n d e r PEAR guidance , th e pro-gram w a s in t roduced to a group o f a b o u t 35 participants w h o w e r e told t ha t th eFie ldR EG record ings a re in tended to explore more systematica l ly the occa-sional occur rence o f a n o m a l o u s t rends in ra n dom data t h a t appear to be corre-lated with group coherence, excitement, enthusiasm, etc. This database in -cludes Fie ldREG records fo r s ix o f their r i tual gatherings, e a ch n o m i n a l ly a nh o u r long, but with moderate variations in actual length (Figure 6a). Somesessions appea r to h a v e u n u s u a l , strong trends with reversals during th e r i tualperiods. T he e x a m pl e shown in Figure 6b w as a ful l m o o n ritual, attended byth e co re memb ers w h o comprise a b o u t a third o f the fu l l group . It shows a sig-n i f i can t negat ive t rend (Z = -2.557), which , w h e n corrected fo r the mult ip leopportunities, yields a p-value of 0.062.

T h e x2 procedure , men t ion ed earlier, that evaluates the statistical var i ancef rom expecta t ion across al l the sessions m a y b e par t icular ly appropriate fo rthis CUUPS example , since all the gatherings are designed r i tuals with th ecommon purpose of celebrating specific occasions, and may be consideredequivalent samples f rom a particular statistical popula t ion . Summing th esquared Z-scores yield s x 2= 12.604, with 6 df, a nd a p-value for the x 2 o f 0.050.A n o t h e r estimate fo r the comb ined probabil i ty c a n b e obtained f romX 2 =E-2 ln pi.

where p i denotes the individual ri tual session probabilities, with degrees o ffreedom equal to tw o times the num ber of cases (R osen thal, 1991). This yieldsx 2= 21.823, on 12 df , and an estimated p-value of 0.039.


11/31

Fie ldREG A nom al ies 121

Fig. 5a . D M H I II : Four-day m eet ing; selected day marked.

Fig.5b. DMHI II: Marked day.


12/31

122 R . D . N e l s o n e t a l .

Fig. 6a . C U U P S I: Database for six ritual gatherings; selected session marked.

Fig. 6b. CUUPS I: Marked Session.


13/31

FieldREG Anomalies 123C U U P S II

D a t a were collected in the same m a n n e r in a second group o f n i n e C U U P Ssessions over the period f r o m J u n e , 1994, to J a n u a r y , 1995 (Figure 7a). T h emost extreme excurs ion (Figure 7b) achieved a Z-score of -2.962, and theBonferroni-corrected p-value is 0.027. In the alternative calculation based oncontributions f rom th e f u l l database, the sum of squared Z-scores for all ninesessions results in x 2= 20.901, wi th 9 df , p = 0.013.A c a d e m y

Th e Ac ade my o f Consc iousness Studies, a two-week mul t i-d iscip l ina ryw o r k sh o p f o r some 50 scholars invo lved in consc iousness studies, w as held inPrinceton during J u n e a n d Ju ly , 1994. The ten days o f presen ta t ions an d dis-cussion offered about 60 sessions f r o m w h i c h F ie ld R E G se q u e n c e s could beselected. One ful l day is shown in Figure 8a; it includes the most extreme de-viat ion of any session in the 10-day reco rd. This hour- long data sequence ispresented in Figure 8b , and cor responds to a discussion, described by severalparticipants as deeply engaging, of the pervasive presence of r i tual in h um a nactivities ranging f rom everyday ha bits, to religion, to science. Th e calcula tedintrinsic p-value for this segment is 0.00005, yielding a B o n f e r r o n i correctedva lu e o f 0.0028.H u m o r Conf e r e nc e

Based on a n informal hypothesis tha t humo r may have a strong tendency toestablish coheren t g roup consciousness, th e FieldREG system was used torecord the 10th a n n u a l C o n f e r e n c e o n H u m o r an d Creativi ty, in April , 1995.There w e r e approx imate ly 1000 par t ic ipan ts , an d over th e three day per iod(Figure 9a), there were five "Keynote" presentations attended by the wholegroup . A m o n g these, the mo st ex t reme deviation w a s generated during a par-ticularly engaging evening session tha t ended with a stan ding ovat ion followedby an encore. This full session, shown in Figure 9b, had a Z-score of 2.276,and a two-tailed p -value o f 0.022, which yields p B= 0.105.The conference also included a number of concurrent sessions, thematicbreak periods, an d other pre-defined segments, attended by smaller n u m b e r so f part ic ipan ts in separated parts of the c o n v e n tio n c e n te r . For the 20 definedeven ts, in cluding the Keyno te presentations, the x2 is 38.995, with 20 degreesof f reedom andpB- 0.007, indicating tha t the Fie ldREG recorded significantlymore extreme deviations during these scheduled periods than expected for ar a n d o m sequence , a n d tha t th e effect of th e group e n v i r o n m e n t w a s n o t limitedto the selected Keynote session.S S E C o u n c i l

T h e Fie ldREG system w as taken to a meet ing of the govern ing Co unc i l o f


14/31

124 R . D . N e l s o n e t a l .

Fig. 7a. CUUPS II: Database fo r n i n e ritual gatherings; selected session marked.

Fig.7b. CU U PS II: Marked Session.


15/31

FieldREG Anomal ies 125

Fig. 8a. A c a d e m y : On e ful l day,o f ten; selected session marked .

Fig. 8b. Academy: Marked session.


16/31

126 R . D . N e l s o n e t a l .

Fig. 9a . H u m o r Confe rence : Three days; selected session marked .

Fig. 9b . H u mor Con fe rence : Mark ed session.


17/31

F ie ld R E G A n o m a l ie s 1 27th e Society for S c ien t i f ic Ex p l o ra t ion (SSE) in D e c e m b e r , 1994, w h e re it s p u r -pose w a s described in a shor t i n t roduc t ion , and i t w as deployed in a d e m o n -stra t ion appl ica t ion . Th e se ve n-h our meeting (Figure 10a) h a d n o fo rma l ses-sion structure, but the agenda, together with no tes o f times allotted to ma jo rissues, allowed the definit ion of 12 topica l segments va ry ing in length f rom 1 5to 50 minutes. The m ost ext reme deviat ion exhibited a m on g these w as dur inga 20 mi nut e discussion o n th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a World Wide Web h o m e p a g efor SSE and it s journa l (Figure 10b). T h e associated probabil ity w as 0.052,but th e Bonfe r ron i ad ju s tm ent raises this to p B= 0.473, indicat ing the devia t ionw as not unusua l given the numb er of opportunities present in the database.Com put ing th e x 2 fo r th e 12 segments f u r t h e r c on f i rms th e ra ndom charac te ro f these data , yieldin g x 2= 10.175, with 1 2 df, an d p = 0.601.Mar fa Lights

In addi t ion to g roup appl icat ions like those jus t show n, the F ie ldR EG sys-t em may be useful as a b a ckgroun d mon i to r in other e n v i r o n m e n t s o f interest.In o n e such example , three ICRL researchers inc luded a Fie l dR EG system a spart o f the i ns t rume n ta t ion t a k e n t o t h e B i g B e n d area o f western Texas torecord a variety o f physical parameters tha t m ight correspon d to the appear-ance o r activity of the anom alous "Marfa lights" reported in t h a t area. On sixsuccessive nights, recordings o f approximate ly tw o ho urs durat ion were taken(Figure 11a), one o f w h ich showed a consistent t r end (Figure 11b) with an as-sociated Z-score of 2.031. Although there w e r e no co r respon d ing a n om a l ouslight p h e n o m e n a , th e logbook notes describe a "deep an d occa siona l l y humo r-ous conversat ion" tha t took place while th e researchers sheltered from in -c lemen t weather . T h e B o n f e r r o n i correct ion yields a probabil ity fo r this ses-sion o f p B= 0.228.Combined Results

In attempting an y concatenat ion of the individual experiments listed aboveinto an overall statistical likelihood, it is first necessary to acknowledge tha ttw o categories of selection have been invoked in several of the applicat ions,i.e., the session o r presentation, a nd the da y . Again, a fo rm o f B o n f e r r o n i cor-rection may be applied, yielding a scale-corrected p -va lue o f 1 - ( 1 - p B) 2 fo rthose appl ica t ions where b o th scales o f analysis were avai lab le . T h e resultsfo r all 10 applications are summ arized in Table 1. The composi te va l ue acrossall these app lication s, calculated from2

x= S-21npB,with 2N degrees o f freedom (Rosenthal, 1991) yields X2= 50.008, with 20 df,an d a correspon ding composite p-value o f 2 x 10-4.T he accumulat ion o f modest but consistent correlat ions with group d y n a m -


18/31

128 R . D . Nelson e t a l .

1620Fig.10a.SSE Council: Busi ness meeting; selected session marked .

Fig. 10b SSE Council: Marked session.


19/31

FieldREG Anomal ies 129

Fig. 1 la. Malfa Lights: Field investigation, six sessions; selected session marked.

Fig. 11b. Marfa Lights: Marked session.


20/31

1 30 R.D. Nelson e t a l .ic s seen in the F i e l d R E G data should be compa red with a p p r o p r ia t e c o n t ro ldata, as wel l as wi th th e theoret ical c h a n c e expectation. Ideal ly these shouldbe generated in the same or similar circumstances to those of the active data.H o w e v e r , th e fu l l databases fo r o n l y a b o u t half of the a pp l ica t ions presentedh e re i nc lude extens ive subsets f r om break periods a n d overnight recording; th eo the rs consist p r ima r i l y o f active data , e.g., m a n y of the CU U PS sessions h aveon ly a f ew m inu tes b e fo re an d a f te r t he ri tuals, and the C o u n c i l e x a m p l e h asn o extra-session da ta tha t c a n b e i nvok ed fo r contro l purposes . Thus, w e a r eforced to a hyper-conserva t ive approach fo r creating controls, based o n ran-dom resampling of the fu l l databases, a procedure which is likely to in c lude bycha nce some po r t ions o f the active, de vian t subsequences. Specifically, th eful l database in each example is resampled using a single set of r a n d o m incur-sions in to the actual data sequence to generate the approp ria te n um be r o f con-trol "sessions," each of the same length as the active FieldREG segment se-lected f rom that application. Thus, the randomly extracted control dataco r respon d to no par t icular events or t ime periods, w h e r e a s the F ie ldR EG dataare del inea ted by the start a n d e n d p o i n t s o f specific sessions. T he most ex -treme devia t ion f o u n d a m o n g th e several control segments generated fo r eacho f the ten applications w as identified, an d p B w a s calculated, using the sameprocedures as for the actual data. Table 2 shows th e results, to compare withthose in Table 1 . (Parentheses a r oun d th e application names denote calibra-tion data.)Although several of the randomly drawn con t ro l subsets have lo w intrinsicp -values, as might be expected given th e selection of the most deviant seg-ments f rom a large n u m b e r o f random sequences, th e B o n f e r r o n i adjustmentrenders m o s t o f these cases unimpressive . T h e X2 for the composite of the con-trol applications is 19.950, with 20 df, corresponding to a p-value o f 0.461.In a less conservative a l terna t ive contro l procedure, the same resampl ingprocess w as appl ied to data generated by a portable R E G device undergo ingcalibrations in the laboratory. Table 3 s h o w s these calibration-based controlresul ts in the same f o r mat as the active data a nd the ra ndom resampl ing con-trols. Again , the selected segments show small p-values, bu t after correction,mo st of these are moderate, and the x 2 for the composite of the cont ro l exam-ples is 26.476, with 20 df, cor responding to a p -v a l u e o f 0.151.In Figure 12, the x 2 values for the individual appl ica t ions (solid line ) as wel la s th e r a n d o m controls extracted f rom th e f ield data a n d f rom th e laboratorycalibrations (dashed lines) a re plotted a s cumula t ive sums over the ten inde-p e n d e n t examples. T h e f igure also inc ludes smooth dotted lines t h a t representth e c h a n c e expectation for this sum as wel l as the locus o f a signif icant depar-ture (p = 0.05) f r om that expectation. While both sets o f control data deviateo n l y by small a m o u n t s across the accumu lation of the ten datasets, the ac tualdata show a clear t rend that culmina tes in a highly significant devia t ion, with


21/31

FieldR EG Anom alies 131T A B L E 1Active FieldREG D a t a

1 .2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10 .

Appl icat ionI C R L II C R L IID M H I ID M H I IIC U U P S ICUUPS IIAcademyH u m o r C o n f .S S E C o u n c ilMarfa Lights

Trials3674524019922496294136390536744825137812194

Cases3312469605126

Extremep0.0290.0610.0020.0140.0110.0030.000050.0220.0520.042

Bonf.p B0.0840.1720.0270.0550.0620.0270.0030.1050.3820.228

Scale-Corr. p B0.1610.3150.0540.0550.0620.0270.0060.1050.3820.228

T A B L E 2Cont ro l Data from R a n d o m Resampling

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.

Applica t ion(ICRL I)(ICRL II)( D M H I I)(DMHI II)(CUUPS I)( C U U P S I I)(A cademy)(Humor Conf.)(SSE Counci l )(Marfa Lights)

Trials367452401992249629

4136390536744825137812194

Cases3312469605126

Extreme p0.3520.0600.1520.0420.0020.0940.0040.1580.0900.464

B o n f . p B0.7280.1210.8620.2190.0120.5890.2140.5770.6780.976

Scale-Corr.pB0.9260.2270.9810.2190.0120.5890.3820.5770.6780.976

T A B L E 3C ont ro l Dat a f rom Laboratory Calibrations

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10 .

Applicat ion(ICR L I)(ICRL II)( D M H I I)(D MH I I I)(CUUPS I)(C U U P S I I )(Academy)(Humor Conf.)(SSE Counci l )(Marfa Lights)

Trials3674524019922496294136390536744825137812194

Cases3312469605126

E xt reme p0.0040.0020.0230.1680.5410.0740.0070.4480.0160.123

Bonf.pB0.0110.0070.2480.5210.9910.5000.3590.9490.1770.544

Scale-Corr.pB0.0220.0140.4340.5210.9910.5000.5900.9490.1770.544


22/31

132 R . D . Nel son e t a l .

Fig. 1 2. Cumulat ive x2 for ten Fie ldRE G appl ica tions; active data comp ared to controls.

Effect SizeFor the composite database, the n o r m a l deviate, or Z-score, correspondingto th e f i n a l p - v a l u e i s Z = 3.540. T h e striking Academy example (after th eB o n f e r r o n i and scale corrections) has a normalized devia t ion of Z = 2.512.B e y on d such basic statistical figures of merit , it is i l luminating to examine var-ious other indicators of absolute effect size. T he simplest of these is the frac-tion o f bits that have been altered from th e chance expectation of equiparti-tion, most conveniently expressed as Z per bit equals Z /N b 1 / 2 or equivalently,2 x dp w h e r e N b i s t h e n u m b e r o f bits processed, an d dp i s th e di f fe rence of th eobserved p f rom theoretical expectation. In the laboratory R E G experimentsthis effect size is on the order o f 0.0002 for the ful l database of 2 .6 million tri-als, and as large as 0.002 fo r certain subsets. A conservative approximation ofcorrespon ding values for the FieldREG database of 0 .8 million trials, calculat-ed from th e Z-score associated with the B on fe r ron i adjusted p -value and thetotal number of bits across all sessions, yields effect sizes of 0.0003 for thecombined result, an d 0.0004 for the Academy example . T he CUUPS exam-ples both have larger Z per bit effect sizes of 0.0007.We m ay also calculate a somew hat different effect size that enables compar-ison across a varie ty o f di f fe ren t laboratory experiments, by normalizing th esize of the anomalous effect i n te rms o f th e am oun t o f t ime spent a t temp tin g toachieve it (Nelson, 1994). For example, an effect size per h o u r is calculated asE h = Z /N h 1 /2 where Z is the normal deviate corresponding to the p -value , an d N his th e number of hours in the selected session. These time-based effect sizes in


23/31

Fie ldREG Anoma l ies 1 33th e R E G experiments, an d indeed in most of our h um a n / m a c h i n e interactionexperiments , average about 0.2, and range up to a b o u t 0 .8 for bonded co-oper-ator pairs. In the Fie l dR EG appl icat ions , th e average t ime-based effect size isa b o u t 0.3, with th e largest effect size 0 .7 (CUUPS I o r II). T h u s , these effectsizes fo r the group a p p l ica t ion s appear to be similar to those seen i n the labora-t o r y R E G exper iments . W e should n o t e th a t because th e B o n f e r r o n i adjust-m e n t is highly c on se rva t ive , bo th th e Z pe r b i t an d t ime-based effect size esti-mates e r r on the smal l side, b y a b ou t 10 pe rcen t to 30 percen t , with larger e r ro ra s th e database size increases.

DiscussionThese Fie l dR EG data comprise a con sisten t em pir ica l indica t ion o f a n o m -a l o u s b eha v io r of a rando m p hysical system located in the presence o f groupso f people engaged in shared cognit ive o r emot iona l act ivi ty. All but one of thete n app l i ca t ions (the S S E C o u n c i l meet ing) ma ke positive con t r ibu t ions to thehighly significant overal l deviat ion f rom expectation. Five of the ten appl ica-t i o n s independen t l y achieve deviat ions a pp roa ch ing o r exceeding t he conven-t iona l p < 0.05criterion fo r statistical significance, despite th e conservativeB onfe r ron i a d jus tment . Because this research pro toco l is new and the data

sparse, an y mecha n ist ic interpretat ion is risky at this p o i n t , bu t some implica-t ions for more incisive fu ture research are evident. In p ar t icular , a n umber oftechnical, phenomenologica l , a n d philosophical quest ions me r i t fu r the r c o n -sideration, among th e m :

1 . Wha t is the relat ionship o f t hese n on -in ten t ion a l group effects to thoseobserved in the standard laboratory-based R E G experiments, w h e r especified individua ls deliberately endea vor to i n f l ue nc e machine out-puts in accordance with pre-stated in tent ions?2. D o e s th e direction of an anomalous response t ren d have an y physical orpsychological implications?3. Are the anomalous segments attributable to the experimen ter, o r to spe-cific individua ls in the group , or is the effect intrinsically collective inna tu re ?4. W h a t emot iona l , intellectual, or p hysical characteristics of the group en-v i r o n m e n t contr ibute to the effect?5. Is the con cept of a "consciousness field" viable an d testable?6. Can an effective theoretical mo del be developed?7. What other applications o f FieldREG might be product ive?8. What are the broader scientific an d cul tural implicat ions of the p h e n o m -

en a represented by the FieldREG results?Clearly our p resent FieldR EG database is far too limited in scope an d scale toal low any defini t ive response to these questions at this time. R e p l ic a tio n o fthese and similar exper iments b y o the r investigators is needed a nd ha s indeedbegun (Radin, 1996; Blasband , 1995), but much more data covering a broader


24/31

134 R. D. N e l s o n et al.r ang e o f g rou p situations wil l be requi red before th e f u n d a m e n t a l character o fthese effects is l ikely to emerge. N o n e t h e l e s s , a little modest speculation o nthese issues e v e n a t this ear ly stage m a y help to def ine m o r e i ll umi na t ing e x-p e r i m e n t s a n d m od els , a n d m a y e n c o u r a ge o t h e rs to join in study of t h e prob-l e m :C o m p a r i s o n w ith L a b o r a t o r y R E G S t u d i e s

B y far the largest b o dy o f R E G data acqui red in o ur laboratory has been g e n -erated by individua l op erators located prox imate to a sophisticated microelec-t ronic R E G , attempting to inf luence th e mea n of its b ina ry o u tpu t distributiont o w a r d higher o r l ow er va lu es than th e baseline, calibration, o r theoretical val-u e s , in accordance with pre-recorded c o n s c i o u s intentions. T he scale o f theseresults, th eir operator-specific character, their dependence on second a ry para-meters, and their internal s t ruc ture have been t h o r ough l y established, replicat-ed, and documented (Jahn, et al., 1987;N e l s o n , et al., 1991). But the technol-o g y , pro toco l , an d analysis of the FieldREG exper iments differ from thesebenchmark exper iments in a n um be r o f potent ia l ly impor tan t aspects. First,th e portable R E G s employed here are much simpler devices, unencumbered bymany of the redundancies an d failsafes of the benchmark machine . Althoughthese uni ts have been thoroughly calibrated an d rout ine ly employed fo r m a n yexper iments within th e laboratory and invar iably f o u n d to be comp etent ran-do m sources fo r such studies, indistinguishable in their p e r f o r m a n c e f rom th em u c h m o r e elaborate machine, their simplicity and small size end ow their ex-per imental appl ica t ions with a considerably less exp licit techn ological ambi-ence. Second, the n u m b e r of h u m a n participants involved in the FieldREGstudies usually is much greater than in the laboratory experiments. Althoughw e have some pr io r experience with "co-operator" pairs in the laboratory, an dindeed have f o u n d some in t r iguing results f rom these (Dunne, 1991), w e haveonly a few viable databases encompassing larger gro up s. Perhaps most imp or-tant, h o w e v e r , is the absence of any explicit, or even implicit i n t e n t i o n on thep a r t of the group members with respect to the FieldREG o u t p u t . In most casesth e part ic ipants are only periphera l ly aw are of the ma chine , and have little un -derstanding of its technical operation or purpose.Tw o experimenta l excursion s tha t might i l luminate these distinguishing f a c -tors suggest themselves: 1) A more substantial program of larger group exper-im ents per fo rmed with in the standard labora tory REG protocols; and 2) Field-R E G experiments wherein explicit pre-stated in tent ions are deliberatelyimposed by or on the group. Comparison of the results of such studies withthose reported above an d with the benchm ark data could help focus interpreta-tion of the phen omen a o n t o its mo st salient aspects.D i r e c t i o n of the A n o m a l o u s R e s p o n s e

Al t h ough most of the laboratory-based protocols are expl ic i t ly directional


25/31

Fie l dR EG Anomalies 135in a t r ipo la r f o r m , e.g."high/low/baseline," a few m o r e recent e xpe r ime n ts are,by th e i r n a t u r e or by e xpe r ime n ta l choice, bipolar , e.g.,"effect/no effect ."Th is latter form o f "intention" is i nh e re n t ly mo re p ermissive an d relaxed in n o trequ ir ing a given direction o f response. R a t h e r , in these studies w e search fo ran y extraordinary ex cursions of the distribution m e a n , w ith out regard for di-rect ion . Such protocols are probably more amenable to comparison with th eFie ldREG si tuat ions, an d will be pursue d in ongoing exper iments an d a n a l y -ses. Also possibly instructive are the observed distinction s in polari ty of re-sponse between male and female operators ( D u n n e , 1996). Complemen ta rystudies cou ld a t tem pt empir ica l correlation of th e polarity o f a n o m a l o u s Field-R E G excu rs ions wi th th e g end er mix of the group , as w e l l as with o t h e r tech-n ica l an d subjective indices. In a l l o f this, i t should be b o r n e in m i n d tha t th ep o r ta b le R E G used in the FieldR EG w o r k , like it s b e n c h m a r k predecessor, in -cludes a hardware algorithm that eliminates an y direct correspondence be-tween th e electrical polarity of the sampled noise and the ultimate binaryevents . T h a t is, the o u t p u t polarities relate o n l y to the i n f ormat i on p roducedby th e composite ma chine , no t to the response of i ts physical noise source, p erse.I nd iv id ual vs. C o l l e c t i v e S o u r c e s o f the E f f e c t s

An i m p o r t a n t fac tor to discriminate via f u r t h e r studies is the relative impor-tance o f the group dyn am ic , v is-a-vis a dom ina t ing i n f luence o f o n e o r m o r eindividual participants. F o r e x a m p l e , should a n a n o m a l o u s trace acquiredduring th e course o f a stimulating lecture be attributed to the lecturer, to thetopic, to the collective i nvo lvemen t of the audience, o r even to the experi-menter, w ho clearly has an interest in the acqu isition of interesting data? Sim-ilarly, is the response to a c o m m u n a l ri tual driven by its format , by the in ter-personal resonances i t engenders , or by one or m o r e par t icular ly strongindividual responses to the situat ion ? In an extreme view, o n e might even re-gard th e R E G system itself as a p a r t i c i p a n t in such exercises, capable o f react-in g to diverse stimuli in some characteristic fashion of i ts o w n . Empir ica l dis-crimina t ion a m o n g these concep tua l mode l s will be diff icult a t best, an dpe rh aps f u n d a m e n t a l l y impossible if the processes are intrinsical ly holistic.Shor t of elaborate permutat ion s of part ic ipants a mong m a n y otherwise similarsessions in an a t t e m p t to isolate i nd iv idua l drivers of the effects, few incisiveexper iments suggest themselves, an d this issue m ay have to be left une xp lo re din deference to more readily testable hyp otheses. With regard to the experi-me n ter as source, o ur design al lows i nd iv idua ls no t associated with th e PEARlaboratory (and no t exper imen ters in the strict sense) to in stal l an d opera te th eFie ldRE G equipmen t . For example , the CUUPS appl ica t ions are man aged bya member of that group , with n o direct oversight on the par t o f PEAR la b staffbe yond an in i t ia l tutorial. Their resul ts a re a m o n g th e strongest in the data-base, an d this suggests, at least tentatively, that the nom ina l exper imenter isno t a necessary source o f i n f luence .


26/31

1 36 R.D.N e l s o n e t a l .E m o t i o n a l , In te l l e c tu a l , a n d P h y si c a l C o r r r e l a t e s

In contrast to the p r e v i o u s item, correlations of th e Fie l dR EG effects withindependent ly specifiable characteristics of the g roup compos i t ion , agenda,purpose , tone , context , success, etc., could more readily serve to identify th eeffective factors stimula ting the observed respo nse ano malies. Although man yof these discriminators may be unavo idably subjective, and some of them m ayn o t be specifiable u nt i l th e sessions a re complete, al l could be no ted in someself-consistent fo rma t prior to exa mina t ion of the data.While it is difficul t to use anecdota l observations in a r igo rous way, thesem ay help to formulate specific questions an d hypotheses fo r further experi-men ts. Fo r exa m pl e , i n the Ac ade my session shown in Figure 8b, the steeplyinc l ined central por t ion is associated with a n intense, tw e n ty-minu te discus-sion of the ubiqui tous presence o f r i tua l in everyday l ife, by tw o ind iv idua lsgiving examples that w e r e personally impor tan t but easily acknowledged byother participants. Logbook n o t e s a n d c o n c u r r e n t tape recordings i ndepen-dently confi rm that there was a perceived special qua l ity of shared an d coher-en t attention during this session, summarized in a spontaneous remark by on eparticipant: "I d o n ' t k n o w if others had the same experience, but there w a s avery noticeable change in the energy here . It feels like an affirmation of theimportance o f what 's going on."In th e examples f rom th e CUUPS group , there are an number o f similaritiesin the two independent batches of data. Both of the ext reme sessions wererecorded during ful l moon r i tua ls , th e t rend in both cases is toward lowerscores, a nd the magni tudes of the deviations a re quite similar an d considerablylarger than those in the othe r session s. T he CUUPS group member w ho is re-sponsible fo r the FieldREG project expresses n o surprise a t f i nd ing th e ful lmoon sessions stronger because, "On the w hole , our sabbats a re no t very per-sonal or in ten se, whereas th e moo ns sometimes are."Some insight also may be gained f rom applicat ions in other contexts . Forexample, B lasband (1995) repo rts that a n R E G system present during psychi-atric therapy sessions shows consistent, significant trends of opposite polaritywhen th e data are segregated into categories corresponding to the emotionalresponses o f anxiety o r anger, w hereas segme n ts assoc iated with "just talking"show n o notable or consistent deviation. Similarly, th e relatively bland busi-ness meet ing o f the SSE Counci l is the o n ly application thus fa r t ha t ha s no tyielded a positive cont r ibut ion to the aggregate evidence fo r an effect of thegroup situa t ion on the REG.All o f these examples suggest a testable hypothesis regarding th e depen-dence of the FieldREG response on i ts ven ue of application, n a m e l y : an envi-r on m e n t fostering relatively intense and genera l cogni t ive or emotional en-gagement will yield m o r e vigorous responses than relatively m u n d a n e orpragmatic assemblies.


27/31

Fie ldR EG Anomal ies 137Co n sc io u sn e ss Fi e ld

On e c o n c e p t u a l hypothesis for the group-related anomal ies indicated byF ie ld R E G is t h a t th e emotional/intellectual dyna mics of the in teract ing par t ic-ipan ts somehow generate a coheren t "consciousness field," to which th e R E Gresponds via an a no m a l o u s decrease in the ent ropy of its nomina l ly r andomou tpu t . In principle , on e might at temp t to strengthen this premise by mappingth e spatial an d tempora l dependence of the response amp litude and characterthroughout th e immediate convocat ion area an d possibly beyond , but here w ee n c o u n t e r certain empirical a n d theoretical complications. N ame ly , the w el l-established r e mote database f r om o ur l aboratory R E G e x p e ri m e n ts sh o w s n ostatistically significant d e p e n d e n c e o f effect size on the physical separat ion o fth e operator f r o m the machine, up to global distances, an d likewise n o depen-dence on th e temporal in terval b e tween operator effor t an d actua l opera t ion o fth e target machine , up to several days, p lus an d minus (Dunne an d J a h n ,1992). Therefore, if the group FieldREG effects draw f rom th e same basicphenomena as the laboratory experiments, n o conceptual models based oncurrent ly k n o w n physical fields with their usual 1/r2 dependencies an d verylimited advanced an d retarded signa l cap abilities are likely to suffice.H o w e v e r , th e concept o f a consciousness field need not be complete lyb o u n d by traditional physical constraints. T h e results o f o u r b e n c h m a r k e x -periments suggest that th e basic effects a re analytically t a n t a m o u n t to smallchan ges in the elemental binary probabilities un derly ing the o therw ise randomdistributions ( J a hn , D o b y n s , a n d D u n n e , 1991) a nd the n o n l o c a l effectsdemonstrated in the remote R E G data further indicate that these anomaliesmay be more informat iona l than dynamical in their physical character. As de-veloped in several other references, generalization of the inherent huma n con-cepts of "distance" an d "time" to encompass subjective as well as objectiveaspects can be a profi table, indeed power fu l , strategy fo r representation ofm a n y f o r m s o f conscious experience, both n o r m a l an d a n o m a l o u s (J a h n a n dD u n n e , 1986). In such a generalized perspective, simple ph ysical separat ion isreplaced by some fo rm o f a t t en t iona l o r emot iona l proximity to the device inthe mind of the operator, and the locus an d extent of p hysical time are replacedby some specification of at tent ional focus an d intensity of subjective invest-ment . Thus, an y group consciousness field w o u l d mo re likely be conditionedby such subjective parameters relative to the participants an d their agenda,ra ther than by their p hysical conf igurat ion or by physical t ime.On e test o f this radical hypothesis would be to remove the FieldREG un i tf rom th e assembly area to some remote location while still dedicating its oper-a t ion to the group event. T he recipe fo r this dedication is far f rom clear, but thepro toco l i nvoked in the laboratory r em o te R E G experiments w o u l d seem a rea-sonable first format ( D u n n e a nd Ja hn , 1992). T he goal again would be to seekcorrelations o f th e a n o m a l o u s responses of the r emote ma chine with specifi-cally indexed events in the convoca t ion . Ex tens ion of the tests to "off-time"protocols invoking tempora l as wel l as spatial displacement could also be con-


28/31

1 38 R . D . Nelson e t a l .sidered, but here th e p rob le m of i nde x ing th e o u t p u t traces fo r cor rela t ionswi t h sequent ia l features o f the me e t ing c ou ld b ecome very difficul t .Th e o re t i c a l M o d e l sThe invocat ion of a con sciousness "field" is but on e aspect of the com po si-tion o f a comprehensive theoretical model of the FieldREG p h e n o m e n a . Evenfo r the laboratory based e xpe r ime n ts , th e inescapable ne e d to specify a host o fpotent ia l ly re levant subjective parameters an d incorporate th e m in to viableanalyt ica l formalisms severely strains the usual scientif ic requisites o f stan-dardization an d q u an t i f i ca t ion , well before a n y a p t concep tua l f r am ework canbe specified. At this poin t i n our unde rs tand ing , o n l y f rankly meta pho r ic ,semiquanti tat ive models h ave been assembled, but a few of these have h adsome utility in cataloguing data sets, verbalizing conceptual distinctions, an dguiding subsequent experiments . On e such model (Jahn an d D u n n e , 1986), al-though primarily addressed to binary hum an /machine o r h u m a n / h u m a n inter-actions, also lends itself to situations like those addressed in this pap er. Thismodel actual ly proposes group consciousness properties, defined by analogyto var ious statistical physical effects, a m on g them certain na tu ra l group "reso-nances." Whether such subjective specifications of given assemblies will beuseful indicators fo r in terpre t ing o r genera t ing FieldREG effects, or for de-signing f u tu r e exper iments an d interpreting data f rom them, rema ins to beseen.Te c hn ic a l A ppl i ca t ions

If FieldREG is indeed funct ioning as a m o ni t o r of the subjective characterof the group in teract ions to which it has been applied, a broad range of exten-sions suggest them selves, som e o f w h ic h cou ld be ins tructive fo r better unde r-standing of the p h e n o m e n o n , others o f w h ic h could ho ld pragm atic benefi ts.In th e former category, d e p l o y m e n t within a variety o f f o r mal an d informal re-l igious services, large spo rtin g events, and political rallies are ob vious c andi -dates fo r situat ions w ith a t e nde nc y towa rd g roup coherence. Placement incomplex social env i ronments tha t have more chaotic group dynamics, e.g.,sh opping ma l l c rowds o r su b way stations, could provide an ins tructive con-trast. Among th e potent ia l pragmatic benefits , monitor ing of counsel ing orhealing sessions could conceivably correlate with th e efficacy of the treat-m e n t s (Blasband, 1995); applications in business o r industr ial settings mightforewarn of counterproduct ive personnel in teract ions an d suggest improvedconfigura t ions; in educational contexts, the more effective pedagogical tech-n ique s c ou ld be indicated; in mili tary o r emergency service arenas, stress re-duct ion in crisis situations might be facilitated. Realization o f a n y o f thesepossibilities will clearly r e qu i re m uc h better basic comprehens ion of th e fun-damenta l process.


29/31

F i e l d R E G Anomalies 139Scien t i f i c a n d Cultured I m p l i ca t ions

S o m e attempts have been made to assess th e broader impl icat ions of theanomalous phenomena evidenced i n our laboratory-based exper iments an dsuggested b y c o n c o m i t a n t theore t ica l models , within th e three overlappingcontexts of physica l science, appl ied technology, an d personal an d publ ic a f-fa i rs (Jahn an d D u n n e , 1987). T h e F i e l d R E G results an d potent ia l i t ies dis-cussed above p r o m p t some e x t e n si o n a n d r e f i ne me n t o f each category o f thesespeculations:In the domain o f basic science, th e inescapable need to inc lude conscious-ness as a proactive ingredient i n a ny comp rehensive mo del o f physical realityis fu r th e r underscored by the group results that , o n th e o n e ha nd , relax th e req-uisite o f directed intentionality and, on the other , suggest some field-like char-acter for the p h e n o m e n a . These tw o aspects, coupled with n u m e r o u s technicalan d subjective indications f rom our laboratory-based experiments , suggestt h a t this capaci ty o f consciousness is not so m u c h associated with cogni t ivef u n c t i o n s or o th er higher brain activities, as with m o r e primit ive l imbic driverso f o ur behavior . If this is correct , th e imp l ica t ions for i ts understanding an dutilization m ay differ p r o f o u n d l y f rom those fo r m o r e c o m m o n l y recognizedcortically-based capabilities o f consciousness.With respect to the arenas of mo dern technology, th e same concern s for thevulne rab i l i ty o f delicate i n fo rm a t ion processing equipment to disrupt iveh u m a n / m a c h i n e anomal ies th a t originally motiva ted establ ishment of o ur r e-search program must n o w b e extended to encompass larger group effects an dless del ibera te in tent ions . Conversely, the op po rtuni t ies fo r posi tive exploita-t ion o f const ruct ive h u m a n / m a c h i n e interactions fo r m o r e effective engineer-in g systems m ay be e nh anc e d by the group possibilities.Fina l ly , and pe rh aps most impor ta n t l y , b e y o n d a n y scientif ic i m p a c t o r tech-nologica l appl icat ion , clear establishment of a salient role fo r group con-sciousness in the establishment o f reality could hold sw eeping impl icat ions fo ro ur col lec t ive and individual v iews o f ourselves, o ur relationships to others,and to the w o r l d in which w e exist. These, in tu rn , c ou ld impac t o u r va lues ,o u r priorities, o u r sense o f oppo r tun i ty an d responsibil i ty, and o ur e n t i re styleof l i fe .

ConclusionT o recapitulate our p re se n t position, i t app ears tha t suff ic ien t early data h avebeen accumulated f rom FieldREG deployments in a variety of group situa-t ions to establish t ha t these rudimentary, binary electronic information proces-

sors are responding with a n o m a l o u s outputs to some aspects of the prevai l inginterpersonal e nvi ronme n ts . Any a t tempt to specify th e group /ma chine dy -namics th a t mani fes t in these a n o m a l i e s clearly should await m u c h more e x-tensive an d incisive empirical data , but the absence o f directed in tent ional i tyin these app l ic a t ions w o u l d seem to compl ica te fur ther th e formulat ion of vi-


30/31

1 40 R . D . N e lson e t a l .able theoretical models o f a n o m a l o u s h u m a n / m a c hi n e p h e n o m e n a . B e y on dthis, th e ul t imate implications fo r scientif ic epistemology, fo r technologicalappl icat ions, a n d f o r personal a n d collective cu l tu ra l affai rs may ne e d to beb roa dened . Perhaps most con sequen t ia l is the possibility th a t the concep t o f aconsciousness "field," heretofore postulated in various abstract fo rm s byscholars o f m a n y disciplines, m a y n o w b e o n th e threshold o f rigorous scientif-ic demon st ra tion a s a d r ive r o f physical reality.

AcknowledgementsTh e au thors a re indebted to the in dividuals and groups w ho have allowed usto record data dur ing private meetings an d gatherings.T h e Princeton Engineering Anomal ies Research program is suppor ted by

grants f rom M r. La ura nce S . Rockefe l le r , M r. Donald Webster, th e McDonnellFoun da t ion , t he George Ohrstrom F o u n d a t i o n , a n d t h e Fetzer Institute.References

B a s h a m , A. L., (1959). The W o n d e r That Was I n d i a . N ew York: Grove Press.Blasband , R . (1995). Personal commu nica t ion . Also presented at the 1995 conven t ion of the So-ciety for Scien tific Exploration,Hunt i ngt on Beach, CA.D u n n e , B . J. (1991). C o - o p e r a t o r e x p e r i m e n t s with a n R E G d e v i c e . Technical Note PEAR 91005,Princeton E ngineering Ano malies Research, Princeton University, School of Engineering/Ap-plied Science.D u n n e , B . J. (1996). G e n d e r dif ferences in h u m a n / m a c h i n e a n o m a l i e s . Technical Note PEAR96001, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, Princeton University, School ofEngineer-ing/Applied Science.D u n n e B. J. and Jahn, R. G. (1992). Experiments in remote human/machine interaction. J o u r n a lo f Sc ien t i f i c E x p l o r a t i o n , 6, 311.D u n n e B . J . a n d J ah n , R . G . (1993). C o n s c io u s n e s s , r a n d o m n e s s , a n d in format ion . Technica lNote PEAR 93001, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, Princeton University, Schoolof Engineering/AppliedScience.D u n n e B . J . a n d J ah n , R . G . (1995). C o n s c i o u s n e s s a n d a n o m a l o u s p h y s i c a l p h e n o m e n a . Techni-ca l no te PEAR 95004, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, Princeton University,School of Engineering/Applied Science.

D u r k h e i m , E . (1961). Society an d individual consciousness. I n T . Parsons, E . Shils, K . D .Naegele, a n d J. R . Pitts (Eds.), Th e o r i e s of S o c i e t y , Vol. 2, 720. Glencoe, Illinois: T he FreePress.J a h n , R . G . a n d D u n n e , B . J ., (1986). On the q u a n t u m mechanics o f consciousness, with applica-t ion to a n o m a l o u s p h e n o m e n a . F o u n d a t i o n s of P h y s i c s , 1 6, 721.Jahn, R . G ., D u n n e , B . J ., a n d N e ls o n , R . D . (1987). Engineering anomalies research. J our na l o fS c i e n t i f i c E x p l o r a t i o n , 1, 21.J a h n , R . G . an d D u n n e , B . J ., (1987). M a r g i n s of R e a l i t y : T he R o l e of C o n s c i o u s n e s s in the Phys i-c a l W o r l d . N ew Y o r k : H a r c o u r t Brace.James, W. (1977). H u m a n I m m or t a l i t y . Boston: Houghton-Miff l in . (Originally published 1898).Nelson, R . D ., Bradish, G . J ., a n d D o b y n s , Y . H . (1989). R a n d o m e v e n t g e n e r a t o r qual i f i ca t ion ,cal ibrat ion , and analys is . Technical Note PEAR 89001, Princeton Engineering AnomaliesResearch, Princeton University, School o f Engineering/AppliedScience.Nelson, R . D ., Dobyns, Y . H ., D u n n e , B . J . , and J a h n , R . G . (1991). Analys is of va r i a n ce o f RE Gex p er i m en t s : O p e r a t o r i n t e n t i o n , s econd ar y p a r a m e t e r s , da ta ba s e s t r u c t u r e . Technical NotePEAR 91004, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, Princeton University, School ofEngineering/Applied Science.


31/31

Fie ldRE G Anom al ies 141N e l s o n , R . D . , B r a di sh , G . J . , a n d D o b y n s , Y . H . (1992). T he Po r t a b l e P E A R REG: H a r d w a r e a n dSo f twar e D o c u m e n t a t i o n . I n t e r n a l D o c u m e n t #92-1, Princeton Eng inee r ing A nomal i es R e-search, Princeton, NJ.Nelson, R . D . (1994). Effec t size p e r hour: A n a t u r a l unitfo r i n t e r p r e t i n g a n o m a l i e s e x p e r i m e n t s .

Techn ica l Note PEAR 94003, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, Princeton U niv e r -sity, S c h o o l o f Engineer ing/Appl ied Science.R a d i n , D . I. (1996). A n o m a l o u s organi za ti on o f r a n d o m events by group consciousness: T w o e x -p lora t ory exp er imen t s. J o u r n a l of Sci en t i f i c E x p l o r a t i o n , 10, 1 , 143.R o s e n t h a l , R . (1991). M e t a - A n a l y t i c P r o c e d u r e s f o r S o c i a l R e s e a r c h (Revised ed.).N e w b u r yPark, C A: Sage.Sheldrake, R . (1981). A N e w S c i e n c e of Life: T he H y p o t h e s i s of F o r m a t i v e C a u s a t i o n . Lo s Ange-les, CA: J . P. Tarcher , Inc.Snedecor, G . W . a n d Cochran, W . G . (1980). S t a t i s t i c a l M e t h o d s , S e v e n t h E d i t i o n . Ames, Iowa:I o w a State Universi ty Press.

Documents

R.D. Nelson et al- FieldREG Anomalies in Group Situations