The SAIC Study That Looked Stronger on Paper

Introduction

Wiseman and Milton’s recheck of SAIC Experiment One became one of the most influential follow-ups to the 1995 review of the US government’s remote-viewing programme because it challenged one of the studies that both major reviewers had initially regarded as comparatively well documented. Rather than arguing that the reported statistical effect was impossible, Richard Wiseman and Julie Milton asked a narrower methodological question: could independent researchers reconstruct the experiment closely enough to verify that ordinary explanations had truly been excluded? Their answer was that they could not. They argued that missing procedural details, together with plausible opportunities for unintended information transfer, reopened conventional explanations that the original review had assumed had been controlled.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

The importance of the recheck lies less in disproving remote viewing than in illustrating a broader scientific principle. A statistically significant result is only as persuasive as the documentation showing how alternative explanations were eliminated. In the case of Experiment One, Wiseman and Milton concluded that the published record left too many unanswered questions for the experiment to carry the evidential weight placed upon it during the 1995 assessment.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

Why Experiment One mattered to the 1995 review

The 1995 evaluation commissioned for the US government concentrated heavily on a series of remote-viewing experiments conducted at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), especially ten experiments from the early 1990s. Compared with earlier work at Stanford Research Institute, these studies were regarded as more carefully designed and better documented. Experiment One, in particular, was often presented as an example of improved laboratory practice.[CIA]cia.govAN EVALUATION OF THE REMOTE VIEWING PROGRAM' One statistical flaw found in early studies of remote viewing, for example, was due to fa…

This mattered because the debate between Jessica Utts and Ray Hyman did not centre on obviously flawed early experiments. Instead, both reviewers considered the later SAIC work to represent the strongest available evidence. Hyman nevertheless argued that even these studies required greater independent scrutiny before supporting claims of paranormal perception. Wiseman and Milton’s later analysis effectively tested that concern by attempting to reconstruct one of the programme’s flagship experiments from the available documentation.[CIA]cia.govAN EVALUATION OF THE REMOTE VIEWING PROGRAM' One statistical flaw found in early studies of remote viewing, for example, was due to fa…

The reconstruction problems Wiseman and Milton found

Wiseman and Milton’s principal criticism was not based on discovering a single fatal mistake. Instead, they argued that the published descriptions omitted enough operational detail that outside researchers could not confidently determine whether key safeguards had actually been implemented.

Their analysis identified several methodological uncertainties, including:

• incomplete descriptions of exactly how targets were prepared, stored and presented;
• insufficient documentation of the physical arrangement of people and materials during testing;
• uncertainty about whether all possible information pathways had been blocked;
• ambiguity about procedural steps that would have allowed an independent laboratory to reproduce the experiment precisely.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

For Wiseman and Milton, these omissions were not minor editorial issues. They argued that when an experiment makes an extraordinary claim, missing protocol details become scientifically important because they prevent readers from evaluating whether subtle biases or ordinary cues were genuinely excluded. Their paper concludes that reconstructing important aspects of the study proved unexpectedly difficult, undermining confidence that the original protocol was as secure as later summaries implied.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

Why possible sensory leakage weakened the result

The most significant issue raised in the re-evaluation concerned possible sensory leakage—the inadvertent transmission of ordinary information through conventional means rather than paranormal perception.

Wiseman and Milton did not claim to have demonstrated that leakage definitely occurred. Their argument was more cautious: because essential procedural details were unavailable or unclear, they could not rule out realistic leakage paths. Two of the potential flaws they examined, they argued, were capable in principle of explaining the reported success without invoking remote viewing.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

This distinction is important. Scientific methodology does not require critics to prove that leakage happened. Instead, researchers making an extraordinary claim must demonstrate convincingly that such possibilities were prevented. If documentation cannot establish that point, then the evidential value of the experiment is reduced even if the statistical outcome remains unchanged.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

The concern also echoed earlier criticisms of remote-viewing research, in which apparently minor procedural details had later proved capable of transmitting unintended information. Wiseman and Milton argued that Experiment One risked repeating this broader methodological problem because its documentation did not allow independent readers to verify that comparable cues had been eliminated.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

The dispute with Edwin May

Edwin May, the principal investigator associated with the SAIC programme, rejected Wiseman and Milton’s interpretation. He argued that the suggested leakage routes could not realistically account for the observed results and defended the integrity of the original procedures.

Wiseman and Milton subsequently published a detailed reply maintaining that May’s response still failed to resolve the central issue. Their position remained that independent readers should not have to rely on personal assurances or unpublished laboratory knowledge. If the safeguards were essential to the interpretation of the experiment, they argued, those safeguards needed to be documented clearly enough for outsiders to evaluate and reproduce.[Richard Wiseman]richardwiseman.comRichard WisemanExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · Cited by 11 — In this paper, we counter May's assertion th…

This exchange illustrates a recurring divide in parapsychology. Supporters often argue that experienced investigators understand procedural protections not fully described in published reports, whereas critics maintain that undocumented safeguards cannot contribute to scientific confidence because they cannot be independently inspected or replicated.[Richard Wiseman]richardwiseman.comRichard WisemanExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · Cited by 11 — In this paper, we counter May's assertion th…

What the recheck changed

Wiseman and Milton’s re-evaluation did not demonstrate that remote viewing was impossible, nor did it prove that SAIC Experiment One’s findings resulted from sensory leakage. Its lasting contribution was methodological rather than statistical.

The recheck showed that one of the most respected experiments from the CIA review depended on procedural assumptions that could not easily be verified from the published record. As a result, the experiment no longer functioned as an example of a result whose ordinary explanations had been convincingly excluded.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

Within the broader discussion of Ray Hyman’s replication concerns, this case became a concrete example of why documentation matters as much as significance testing. A result may remain statistically unusual, but if independent researchers cannot reconstruct how potential sources of bias were prevented, the evidence is less persuasive than it first appears. Wiseman and Milton’s analysis therefore reinforced Hyman’s broader argument that remote-viewing claims required not only positive outcomes but protocols detailed enough to withstand independent re-examination.[Hertfordshire Research Profiles]researchprofiles.herts.ac.ukexperiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re eHertfordshire Research ProfilesExperiment One of the SAIC Remote Viewing Programby R Wiseman · 1999 · Cited by 24 — The paper demonstrate…

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to The SAIC Study That Looked Stronger on Paper. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Book

The Demon-Haunted World

By Carl Sagan

Explains why replication and methodological rigor matter.

See on Amazon

Book

Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic Spies

By Jim Schnabel

First published 1997. Subjects: United states, department of defense, United states, central intelligence agency, Parapsychology.

See on Amazon

Book

The Art of Statistics

By David Spiegelhalter

First published 2019. Subjects: Statistics, Popular works.

See on Amazon

Book

Reading the Enemy's Mind : Inside Star Gate

By Paul H. Smith

First published 2005. Subjects: United states, central intelligence agency, Parapsychology, Military intelligence.

See on Amazon

Browse more on Amazon:The Demon Haunted WorldRemote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic SpiesThe Art of Statistics

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

eBay marketplace picks

Marketplace Samples

Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.

Shop location

UsingUSA USA USAUKCanadaAustraliaIreland

Example eBay listing

Boulevard Of Lights At Dusk Eiffel Remote View Wall Home Decor - POSTER 20x30

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Photo:Steele Missouri 1938 Children Viewing Movie Posters Outside Theater

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Remote Viewing Framed Art Print Framed Wall Art Poster Canvas Print Picture

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Retro REMOTE VIEWING Wall Art, Psychic Telepathy Medium Empath UFO Occult Poster

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Browse more oneBay.co.uk

Example items shown for inspiration; availability and pricing can change. Branchoria may earn a commission if you purchase through outbound eBay links.

Endnotes

1. Source: researchprofiles.herts.ac.uk
Title: experiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re e
Link:https://researchprofiles.herts.ac.uk/en/publications/experiment-one-of-the-saic-remote-viewing-program-a-critical-re-e

2. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200180005-5.pdf

3. Source: Wikipedia
Title: Sensory leakage
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_leakage

4. Source: richardwiseman.com
Link:https://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/SAICreply.pdf

5. Source: richardwiseman.wordpress.com
Link:https://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/research/parapsychology/

6. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Richard-Wiseman-2163512760/publications/5

7. Source: youtube.com
Title: Edwin May, [Psychic Spying]({{ ‘psychic-spying/’ | relative_url }}) (Remote Viewing, Star Gate Program)
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPvrOsEXBbE

8. Source: youtube.com
Title: Ray Hyman
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8VAOzcXGc4

Additional References

9. Source: koestlerunit.wordpress.com
Link:https://koestlerunit.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/wiseman-milton-1998.pdf

10. Source: proquest.com
Link:https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/experiment-one-saic-remote-viewing-program/docview/1292174027/se-2

11. Source: psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk
Title: spr.ac.uk [Meta-Analysis]({{ ‘meta-analysis/’ | relative_url }}) in Parapsychology
Link:https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/meta-analysis-parapsychology/

12. Source: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Link:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10275521/

13. Source: youtube.com
Title: Inside Operation [Stargate]({{ ‘stargate/’ | relative_url }}): The CIA’s Psychic Spy Experiment
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oasTnsLw_n8

14. Source: metabunk.org
Title: page 3
Link:https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claim-remote-viewing-is-a-scientifically-proven-technique-that-utilizes-a-natural-human-ability-to-enable-access-to-hidden-information.13057/page-3

15. Source: youtube.com
Title: Remote Viewing and Statistical Validation
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrwAiU2g5RU

16. Source: youtube.com
Title: World’s Most Fun Psychologist Shares Insights
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTGBHcPnJXo