NRC Letter to CIA Declining Evaluation of Remote Viewing Studies (1995)
This one-page CIA readingroom document is a letter dated May 5, 1995 from Barbara Boyle Torrey, writing on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC) Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, addressed to the CIA's Office of Research and Development at the Ames Building in Washington, D.C. Responding to a CIA request to evaluate its remote viewing studies, Torrey points to the NRC's prior 1988 report 'Enhancing Human Performance: Issues, Theories and Techniques,' which included a section titled 'Scientific Assessment of Remote Viewing.' She quotes that report's conclusion that, after roughly 15 years of claims and controversy, the remote viewing literature produced 'only one possibly successful experiment that is not seriously flawed,' offering only marginal evidence for ESP, and that the case for remote viewing was 'virtually nonexistent.' Torrey states that mobilizing the NRC committee process to evaluate a limited set of studies did not seem warranted so soon after the last report, and expresses hope that the recent report would help guide the agency's own assessment. The letter was approved for release in 2003 and copied to John Swets, Sandy Wigdor, and Dan Druckman.
Description
A May 5, 1995 letter from Barbara Boyle Torrey of the National Research Council's Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education to the CIA's Office of Research and Development, declining to convene a formal NRC committee to evaluate the agency's remote viewing studies and referencing the NRC's 1988 report 'Enhancing Human Performance.'
Claims
The NRC declined to convene a committee to evaluate the CIA's remote viewing studies, deeming it unwarranted so soon after its prior report.
95%The NRC declined to convene its committee process to evaluate the CIA's limited set of remote viewing studies so soon after its prior report.
90%The NRC's 1988 report concluded that after ~15 years the literature on remote viewing produced only one possibly successful, not-seriously-flawed experiment, providing only marginal evidence for ESP.
90%The NRC report concluded the scientific case for remote viewing is 'very weak' and 'virtually nonexistent.'
90%After ~15 years of claims and controversy, the remote viewing literature produced only one possibly successful experiment not seriously flawed in methodology, offering only marginal evidence for ESP.
85%By scientific and parapsychological standards, the case for remote viewing is very weak and virtually nonexistent, according to the NRC's 1988 report.
85%
Events
May 4, 1995
NRC letter declining formal evaluation of CIA remote viewing studies
Torrey responds to CIA's request, citing prior NRC findings and declining to convene a committee.
Dec 31, 1987
Publication of 'Enhancing Human Performance'
NRC report including a 'Scientific Assessment of Remote Viewing' section concluding the evidence was virtually nonexistent.
Apr 17, 2003
Approved for release
Document approved for public release by the CIA.
May 4, 1995
NRC letter declining remote viewing evaluation
Torrey responds to CIA's request that the NRC evaluate its remote viewing studies, declining to convene a committee.
Dec 31, 1987
Publication of NRC 'Enhancing Human Performance' report
NRC study reviewing paranormal phenomena, including a section scientifically assessing remote viewing.
Apr 17, 2003
CIA declassification/release
Document approved for release.
Dates mentioned
Keywords
Entities
Organizations
Phenomena
Extracted text (OCR)
Approved For Release 2003/04/18 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100170001-9 NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL COMMISSION ON BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AND EDUCATION 2101 Constitution Avenue Washington, D.C. 20418 | OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TELEPHONE: (202) 334-2300 FAX: (202) 334-2201 May 5, 1995 Office of Research and Development, CIA Ames Building, Room 846 Washington, D.C. 20505 SG1I Fax: | SG1I Dear| | We appreciate your thinking of the National Research Council (NRC) in terms of evaluating your remote viewing studies. As you know, we did a very thorough look at a number of paranormal phenomena in a study entitled Enhancing Human Performance, Issues Theories and Techniques published by the National Academy Press in 1988. One section of that’ report was entitled "Scientific Assessment of Remote Viewing" beginning on p. 178. The report reviewed the major studies and concluded: "In summary, after approximately 15 years of claims and sometimes bitter controversy, the literature on remote viewing has managed to produce only one possibly successful experiment that is not seriously flawed in its methodology - and that one experiment provides only marginal evidence for the existence of ESP. By both scientific and parapsychological standards, then, the case for remote viewing is not just very weak, but virtually nonexistent. It seems that the preeminent position that remote viewing occupies in the minds of many proponents results from the highly exaggerated claims made for the early experiments, as well as the subjectively compelling, but illusory, correspondences that experimenters and participants find between components of the descriptions and the target sites." The comparative advantage of the NRC is in evaluating a field of research. To put the machinery of the NRC committee process into place for the evaluation of a limited set of studies does not seem warranted so soon after the last report. What I hope is that our recent report will be helpful in guiding your own assessment of remote viewing studies. Please let me know if I can be of help. Ba pong Barbara Boyle Torrey ce: John Swets Sandy Wigdor Dan Druckman The natpRroved. £9 E, Release 2003 /04/ hd GIARDEAS 0072 aR 990100 12909 Mi EMrincering to serve government and other organizations
Related files
Connected through the network
SF-2026-001021