1

Dissertation 

Presented By

Alan Starkie

Of

Liverpool Hope University

In fulfilment of the module requirement for

Degree of Bachelor of Science

Of Liverpool Hope University

April 2009

Original

  2

Declaration of Originality 

I declare that this is an original study based on my own work

And that I have not submitted it for any other course or degree

Signature……………………………………………………………..

  3

Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................. 6

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 7

Precognitive Habituation ............................................................................................................................. 10

Affective habituation .................................................................................................................................... 11

Mere exposure effect ..................................................................................................................................... 11

The RH2S Protocol ......................................................................................................................................... 15

Hypotheses ...................................................................................................................................................... 17

Method ................................................................................................................................................................. 17

Participants ..................................................................................................................................................... 17

Design .............................................................................................................................................................. 17

Apparatus/Materials ......................................................................................................................................... 17

Software .......................................................................................................................................................... 17

Security............................................................................................................................................................ 18

Materials .......................................................................................................................................................... 18

Hardware ......................................................................................................................................................... 18

Screen refresh rate ........................................................................................................................................ 18

Experimental procedure ............................................................................................................................... 19

Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 20

Outliers ............................................................................................................................................................ 20

Hypothesis 1, fear trials ................................................................................................................................ 20

Hypothesis 2, negative trials ........................................................................................................................ 20

Hypothesis 3, positive trials ......................................................................................................................... 20

Hypothesis 4, neutral trials .......................................................................................................................... 21

Predictive measures ...................................................................................................................................... 21

Exploratory analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 21

Sex differences ............................................................................................................................................... 21

Age differences ............................................................................................................................................... 21

Mean reaction time ....................................................................................................................................... 22

Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................ 22

Future research .............................................................................................................................................. 24

References ........................................................................................................................................................... 26

Ethics application form ................................................................................................................................. 29

Appendix II .......................................................................................................................................................... 30

  4

Supervisor contact sheet .............................................................................................................................. 30

Appendix III ......................................................................................................................................................... 31

Measures and forms ...................................................................................................................................... 31

  5

Abstract 

Background: Precognition is at the heart of an emerging field of Psi research that investigates time-reversed phenomena. One such procedure was devised by Daryl Bem called Precognitive Habituation (PH), described as the ‘Holy Grail’ of Psi research: a simple demonstration of Psi that could be run on any standard computer and replicated by any competent person (Bem, 2003). Recent studies provide support for the hypothesis, across six studies; the hit rate is significantly above 50% on negative trials (52.6%, p = .0008) and significantly below 50% on erotic trials (48.0%, p = .031) (Bem, Precognitive Aversion, 2005).

Objectives: The present study aims to solve the ethical problems of PH and improve its effectiveness by replacing gruesome and pornographic stimuli with Pictures of Facial Affect (Ekman & Friesen, 1975).

Methods: Fifty participants 32 female, 18 male (M = 32, SD = 13) used a modified version of the PH protocol: RH2S. Results: were not in the predicted direction however they were statistically significant for fear trials 44.6% (SD = 19.1), (t(48) = -2.00, p = .051, d = 0.29) and a small but not significant effect was found in negative trials 47.4% (SD = 10.2), (t(48) = -1.75, p = .087, d = 0.25). Conclusions: The unexpected directional results are consistent with studies of the amygdala using facial expressions. The RH2S protocol successfully demonstrated retroactive habituation with fear expressions and greater effects exhibited by females, participants <=38 years old and individuals who score highly on the PANAS-X basic positive affect scale.

  6

Acknowledgements 

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Christine Simmonds-Moore for inspiring me with unwavering faith and patience during this project and for her infectious enthusiasm for the subject.

I am also pleased to thank Professor Matthew Smith for his down-to-earth advice and the interest expressed for this study.

To the various staff and students of Liverpool Hope University for agreeing to become willing participants in this study – thank you.

Special thanks are also given to Martin Guest and Bob Hewertson for making my visit to the New Labs at the Hope Park Campus so enjoyable.

This is also a great opportunity to express my respect to Professor Daryl Bem, for his excellent work on the RH2S protocol and without whom this study could not have taken place.

Finally, with thanks for endless cups of tea and the capacity to listen and offer advice, James. For sustenance, patience, sympathy and understanding without any complaints at all, thanks to my wife, Anne, to whom I dedicate this paper.

 

    

7

                                                        

Retroactive habituation: Exploring the time reversed amygdalar response to pictures of facial affect 

Alan Starkie Department of Psychology, Liverpool Hope University, 2009

Introduction  

The ancient oracle said that I was the wisest of all the Greeks. It is because I alone, of all the Greeks,

know that I know nothing1

For more than a millennium, people travelled from all over Ancient Greece and beyond to

consult the Pythia, the high priestess of Apollo at the Oracle of Delphi. Farmers would

consult the priestess on matters of planting and harvest and world leaders such as

Alexander the Great consulted on matters of war and conquest. It is not known whether the

Pythia’s cryptic premonitions were due to precognitive abilities or intoxicating vapours

from the Castalian Spring that surrounded her, but her prophecies had the power to change

nations. Although the voice of Apollo no longer resonates at Delphi, the idea that the future

can be predicted continues to intrigue.

The ability to foresee future events, or precognition, has long been of interest to

parapsychologists. Precognition is perhaps the most common form of extra sensory

perception (ESP), a term often used to describe this and other similar anomalous

phenomena such as clairvoyance; the ability to perceive objects or events that are not

immediately present to the senses, telepathy; that signifies mind-to-mind communication,

presentiment; where information about future events may be experienced physically or

emotionally and psychokinesis (PK); not a form of perception but the ability of the human

mind to influence objects over a distance and even time; retro-psychokinesis (RPK).

Contemporary texts collectively describe these as “Psi phenomenon” (Radin, 1997, p. 15).

Precognition was first described in the classic ‘An Experiment with Time’ by J. W. Dunne in

1927. In what was called The Theory of Serial Time, Dunne proposed that time exists in

dimensional layers, each of which can be observed in different perspectives from different

layers. In the 1930s, Joseph Banks Rhine and Louisa Rhine began systematic research of

precognition at the Parapsychology Laboratory at Duke University. Rhine’s initial quest was

 1 Socrates 470 BC-399 BC 

  8

to prove the existence of telepathy but his experiments revealed psychokinesis (PK) and

precognition, the latter becoming part of an ongoing research project (Guiley, 1991).

Precognition may be thought of as an intuitive process, one that manifests itself as an

unconscious physical response but also as an uneasy or feeling of foreboding before a

significant event. Stanford’s Psi Mediated Instrumental Response (PMIR) theory suggests

that a person uses Psi to fulfil certain needs, even though the person may not realise they

have such needs (Stanford, 1974a, 1974b). Stanford proposed:

“The organism nonintentionally uses psi to scan its environment for need-

relevant objects or events or for information crucially related to such events,

and when obtained, the organism tends to act in ways which are instrumental

in satisfying its needs in relation to the particular object or event in question.”

(1974a, p. 35).

Such environmental scanning is demonstrated in a well-known study from 1956. American

parapsychologist W. E. Cox carried out a survey of passenger statistics and observed that on

days when train crashes occurred, fewer people travelled by train than on previous control

days. Cox asserted that unconscious precognition resulted in alternate travel choices on

such days (Cox, 1956).

Precognition is at the heart of an emerging field of Psi research, one that investigates

temporally reversed cause and effect, or time-reversed phenomena. Such research takes a

conventional psychological paradigm and runs it in reverse to see if information from the

future can reach back in time to influence behaviour. This idea was originally inspired by

the work of Holger Klintman of Lund University Sweden who performed a Stroop

experiment and discovered what he described as temporal feedback loop (Klintman, 1983).

The Stroop effect is a robust and widely adopted tool, used in clinical practice and

investigation, devised by John Ridley Stroop in 1935. If a word, such as ‘red’ is printed using

ink differing from the semantic meaning of the word (for example, the word red printed

with blue ink), the reader will experience a relative delay in processing the word when

compared to congruous (same colour word and ink) words.

Klintman first exposed the participants to stimulus 1(S1) followed by a brief time interval,

then stimulus 2 (S2). If the semantic meaning of S1 is different from S2, the reaction time

(RT) to S2 varies because of cognitive interference. Normally, only the RT to S2 is measured

but in order to establish baseline timings, RT to S1 was also recorded. Klintman observed an

  9

unexpected anomaly: As predicted, RT to S2 was affected by S1 as a result of cognitive

interference but there seemed to be a second type of interference where S2 affected the RT

of S1. Since the computer randomly assigned S2 after accepting S1, Klintman had

discovered a temporally reversed Stroop effect and coined the term ‘Time Reversed

Interference’ (TRI) (Radin, 2000).

TRI is a direct challenge to the classical view of causality - the relationship between one

event, the cause and the other event, the effect. Max Born states: "Antecedence postulates

that the cause must be prior to, or at least simultaneous with, the effect” (as cited in Sowa,

2001). Admitting that Psi exists means accepting that not everything in nature can be

explained in physical terms and in some quarters is considered scientific heresy. Psi

research is far removed from mainstream science because much of the current research,

including the present study, concentrates on gathering evidence for the existence of Psi

while accepting that existing theories cannot explain their existence. Albert Einstein once

remarked: “If the facts don't fit the theory; change the facts” a rather depressing

observation. If Psi does exist and can be successfully demonstrated, the pressure should be

for mainstream science to reconsider accepted theories and accept the facts.

Presentiment; a form of precognition, can be described as an unconscious, anomalous

prestimulus response, resulting in physiological changes that can be measured using skin

conductance, heart rate, electroencephalography (EEG) and functional Magnetic Resonance

Imaging (fMRI). Presentiment takes advantage of the Orienting Response, characterised by

physiological changes that take place when an organism is faced with a fight or flight

situation (Radin, 1997). The Orienting Response is not exclusive to aversive stimuli but

applies to any novel or unexpected stimuli. The Orienting Response can easily be elicited,

for example, by showing a person an emotionally shocking picture. The initial exposure

generates the greatest Orienting Response that quickly diminishes after each successive

exposure to the same stimulus, due to habituation.

In a typical presentiment experiment, the participant is presented with sequence of low

affect pictures (calm target) on a computer screen; each followed by a blank target or

resting period, designed to allow the physiological responses to stabilise. In each trial, the

computer will randomly select and place an emotional picture (emotional target)

somewhere within the sequence. During this time, the participant’s skin conductance is

measured (electrodermal activity) using fingertip electrodes along with a second device

used to monitor heart rate and blood pressure. Biological data is recorded on the computer

along with timings of the presented stimuli. Data analysis reveals that for certain

individuals, electrodermal activity will rise before the target has been shown and is

markedly higher directly when an emotional target has been shown (Radin, 1997). Figure 1

shows the participant’s biological responses predict the display of the emotional target;

even before the computer’s random number generator (RNG) has decided to display the

emotional target.

Figure 1. Stimulus presentation starts at sample 37 and demonstrates the galvanic skin response of emotional

vs calm stimuli. From Bierman, D. & Radin, D. I. Anomalous unconscious emotional responses: Evidence for a

reversal of the arrow of time. In Tucson III: Towards a Science of Consciousness. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

Precognitive Habituation Daryl Bem devised a procedure called Precognitive Habituation (PH), described as the ‘Holy

Grail’ of Psi research: a reliable and straightforward demonstration of Psi that could be run

on any standard PC or Mac, by any competent person, using a standard software package,

requiring no more than a t-test to interpret the results (Bem, 2003). A simplified Psi

experiment would be of considerable value to researchers, students and even skeptics who

frequently allude to a variety of methodological flaws, inadequate controls,

overcomplicated setups and even fraud as reasons for successful Psi studies. PH is described

as a time-reversed mere effect procedure but the term Precognitive habituation is something

of a misnomer because PH draws on both affective habituation and the mere exposure

effect.

  10

  11

Affective habituation Affective Habituation describes the unconscious ability to quickly classify extreme stimuli

from background information. For example, in a crowded room, a single smiling or fearful

face may go unnoticed consciously but it is likely that an unconscious evaluative system will

be at work, assessing potential dangers and triggering physiological changes. The dangers

associated with facial expressions of fear or anger is obvious but smiling faces are less

straightforward; do we perceive the face of a friendly stranger or the face of the laughing

assassin? A study by Dijksterhuis & Smith (2002) explored affective habituation by exposing

participants to six extremely positive and six extremely negative, randomly assigned words.

The participants were then asked to rate the valence of 24 words, 12 of which were the

original words (six positive, six negative). The results revealed that for words that

participants were previously exposed to; positive words were rated as less positive and

negative words were rated as less negative. Affective habituation is an effective

unconscious background evaluation system that utilises the Orienting Response and quickly

categorises and prioritises incoming stimuli, preventing us from “being overwhelmed by

love or eaten by lions” (Dijksterhuis & Smith, 2002, p. 212). Affective habituation has been

demonstrated with a variety of affective stimuli, including words, pictures, facial

expression, sound and other extreme affective stimuli.

Mere exposure effect The second component of PH for stimuli rated as ‘neutral’ is the mere exposure effect, a

robust psychological phenomenon that explains why an individual will express a preference

to a repeatedly exposed stimulus over a novel one (Zajonc, 1968). The mere effect has been

successfully demonstrated with a wide variety of stimuli including words, faces, Chinese

characters and abstract shapes. The mere effect is not dependent on conscious awareness of

the stimuli and the effect may be stronger when stimuli are presented unconsciously

(Bornstein & D’Agostino, 1992). In a standard time-forward study, the participant would

first be exposed (masked subliminal technique) to an image (called the habituation target).

Next, the participant is shown an image pair (of equal positive affect) consisting of the

original habituation target plus a novel image of equal valence (the non-target) and asked

to make a preference choice. The theory predicts that the image chosen will be the one to

which the participant has been repeatedly unconsciously exposed (the habituation target).

This is because mere exposure will result in a preference for that image, rather than the non-

target. For an image pair of equal negative affect, the choice is also likely to be habituation

target because it will be perceived as having less impact than the non-target due to

habituation. The PH protocol uses a range of affective stimuli from positive to negative. Fig

2 shows the relationship between emotional valence and the habituation type, e.g. affective

habituation or mere effect.

Figure 2. Extreme positive and negative stimuli result in affective habituation effects. Neutral stimuli result in

mere exposure effects.

In PH, it is useful to regard habituation and the mere effect as a single system of behaviour

that vigilantly scans the environment for signs of threat or reward. Amygdalar response to

repeated exposure to extreme negative stimuli (without negative consequences), rapidly

diminish to allow discrimination of new threats. Conversely, repeated exposure to extreme

positive stimuli (without reward) also diminish with preference given to novel positive

stimuli. Repeated neutral stimuli are preferred to novel stimuli as a result of mere exposure.

In PH, the preference task is presented to the participant before the habituation target is

displayed. The participant is first exposed to a valence matched pair of positive, negative or

neutral arousing images on a computer screen and asked to express a preference for one of

the images. The computer then randomly selects one of the two images (the habituation

target), and displays the target using a subliminal, backward masking technique, several

times. If the participant chooses the future target, this is considered a hit.

The rationale behind the PH hypothesis is that the participant will have been exposed to

the habituation target several times in the future, thus rendering negative (violent) targets

less negative and positive (erotic) targets less positive. The hypothesis predicts that the

participant will be more likely to choose the target on negative trials and the non-target on

positive trials. The mean hit rate expected by chance is 50%. Recent studies have provided

support for the hypothesis, across six studies; the hit rate is significantly above 50% on

  12

  13

negative trials (52.6%, p = .0008) and significantly below 50% on erotic trials (48.0%, p = .031)

(Bem D. J., 2005).

The PH protocol fulfilled the promise of straightforward demonstration of Psi that could be

conducted with a standard desktop computer, using simple statistical tests. The programme

was written in true BASIC and used images from the international affective picture system

(IAPS) (Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1999). IAPS provides one of the most widely used static

image sets based on the dimensional model of emotion and include valence matched

pictures depicting mutilation, insects, snakes, accidents, contamination, violence, eroticism

and many more (Mikels, Fredrickson, Larkin, Lindberg, Maglio, & Reuter-Lorenz, 2005). The

PH protocol uses three categories of stimuli; positive, negative and neutral. Positive stimuli

use various erotic and pornographic imagery, negative stimuli consist of aversive stimuli

such as snakes, mutilation and accidents. and neutral stimuli consists of landscapes, tables,

chairs and other neutrally valenced imagery.

The PH protocol offers great potential for Psi researchers and yet is fundamentally flawed

in its primary objective – replication. University ethics committees must balance scientific

research against the moral standards of the institution and consider the well being of its

student population – they are often the participants in such studies. Undergraduate

students are adult students but young people nevertheless. Any reasonable person would

feel uncomfortable exposing undergraduates to extreme stimuli, particularly pornography.

The obvious solution is to retain the PH protocol but use a more acceptable form of stimuli.

One such solution was found in a replication by Savva, Child, & Smith, (2004) where such

ethical difficulties were recognised: “This adapted PH methodology therefore provides

parapsychologists with an ethically less problematic tool than that developed by Bem” (p.

227). Positive (erotic) targets were removed and negative targets (gruesome images) were

replaced with images of spiders, based on earlier study where spider stimuli had replaced

conventional ‘extreme’ stimuli (Savva & French, 2001) and argued that the reaction to

spider stimuli by the spider-fear group would be similar to violent images shown to

‘normal’ participants. Participants were categorised into spider-fear and no fear groups.

It was hypothesised that participants with a fear of spiders were more likely to select a

target picture, when the picture was a spider rather than a low affect picture. The spider-

fear group was more successful than the no fear group on anticipating the spider stimuli

(54%, p = 0.51, one tailed), the overall hit rate was 51.3% and not significantly above chance

  14

(p = ns) (Savva, et al., 2004). The results were encouraging but the success of the study was

limited only to participants who identified themselves as being fearful of spiders.

The use of IAPS images may not be the most efficient way to elicit negative affect,

particularly fear responses, according to Hariri, Tessitore, Mattay, Fera, & Weinberger,

(2002). The amygdala is activated by scenes of mutilation, attacks and explosions but it

shows a stronger response to facial expressions, especially fear and anger. Facial

expressions and emotional scenes are similarly rated according to their valence (the

attraction or aversion shown towards the stimuli). In a paper by Britton, Taylor, Sudheimer,

& Liberzon, (2006), data suggests that expressive faces predominantly involve emotion

recognition and IAPS type pictures elicit emotion evocation; a differential pattern of

activation was detected in the superior temopral gyrus, insula and anterior cingulate, with

more activation to expressive faces than to IAPS pictures. Sex differences in the processing

of affective faces have also been observed in an fMRI study using Blood-oxygen-level

dependent (BOLD) technique according to Goldenring Fine, Semrud-Clikeman, & Zhu, (In

Press), females activated more to negative faces but males activated more to positive faces,

however; activation of the medial frontal gyrus, a brain area indicated in decision-making is

the same in both females and males.

The amygdala has been shown to rapidly habituate to repeated exposures of emotional

faces, particularly expressions of anger and fear. Expressions of anger, may represent a

direct and immediate threat (i.e. the face of the agressor), however, an expression of fear

represents an unknown threat/aggressor and result may result in higher amygdalar

response in anxious individuals (Ewbank, Lawrence, Passamonti, Keane, Peers, & Calder,

2009). Fearful faces are processed faster than any other facial expression according to Yang,

Zald, & Blake, (2007), with happy faces being the slowest to process, suggesting that the

brain has evolved mechanisms to quickly discriminate and detect environmental threat.

A recent study by Li, Zinbarg, Boehm, & Paller, (2008), utilised subliminal affective priming

using surprised faces preceded with subliminal happy or fearful faces as primes.

Participants rated surprised faces primed with fearful faces more negatively than those

primed with happy faces and participants with high trait anxiety demonstrated increased

affective priming. According to to Matsumoto & Willingham, (2009), facial expressions may

be hard-wired into our genes and are autonamous processes mediated directly by the

amygdala without conscious awareness (see also Calder, 1996; Morris, et al., 1996; Williams,

et al., 2006).

  15

The RH2S Protocol The present study aims to broaden the scope of the time-reversed paradigm by

investigating whether emotional responses can be elicited using a conceptual adaptation of

Bem’s PH procedure. The study will replace IAPS stimuli with Pictures of Facial Affect

(Ekman & Friesen, 1975). The reasons for this are:

1. Ethical issues in using IAPS and other erotic stimuli.

2. Individual differences, e.g. some individuals are more affected by aversive stimuli

(IAPS) than others.

3. The amygdala is universally hard-wired to detect facial expressions.

Retroactive Habituation 2 Starkie (RH2S) is a procedure based on the PH protocol and was

developed in association with Daryl Bem. The original IAPS positive, negative and neutral

pictures were replaced with Pictures of Facial Affect, consisting of 110 greyscale images.

Happy facial expressions are used for positive trials. Negative trials consist of fear, anger,

disgust and sad facial expressions and neutral facial expressions are used for neutral trials.

The term Precognitive Habituation has been replaced by the term Retroactive Habituation

(RH), reflecting developments in PH and similar time reversed experiments by Bem (Bem,

2008).

The original Ekman image set was insufficient to provide the required number of stimuli for

each category; so additional facial composites were created using Abrosoft FantaMorph

software and Adobe Photoshop. The use of commercial morphing software allowed the

creation of novel faces while maintaining appropriate facial expressions. The use of

artificially created and modified faces is not new in amygdalar research. For example, no

difference was found between the use of schematic (line drawings) or human faces in the

activation of the amygdala and fusiform gyrus (Britton, Shin, Feldman Barrett, Rauch, &

Wright, 2008; Marsh, 2005), and the use of modified photographs and exaggerated fear

poses (Thomas, et al., 2001). Additionally, visible picture reference numbers and borders

were removed; images were resized to 500 pixels wide and converted to jpeg file format.

The quality of the Ekman pictures varies considerably and final processing using Adobe

Photoshop corrected exposure and contrast to acceptable levels suitable for display on a

computer monitor. Figure 3 shows a finished composite image and the two original Ekman

faces from which the composite image was derived.

  16

Figure 3. A novel composite face, created by morphing images 078 and 017 from the Ekman series. (Ekman &

Friesen, 1975)

Image 078  Image 017 Composite 

The RH hypothesis predicts that the habituation target (if negative), will appear less

negative and the habituation target (if positive), will appear less positive. Neutral targets

will appear more positive due to the mere exposure effect.

The original PH protocol relied on a number of individual measures regarded as predictive

of Psi performance (Ni and Na scale). These have been retained within the RH2S protocol.

Based on the following questions, these are:

“In general, how intense are your emotional reactions to movies, videos, or

photographs that are violent, scary, or gruesome?” (Ni) and “In general, to

what degree are you aware of, attuned to, or in touch with your emotional

reactions to images that are violent, scary, or gruesome?” (Na),

(Bem, 2003, p. 7).

Any person who scores above the midpoint on the NiNa scales is defined as emotionally

reactive, all others are rated as emotionally non-reactive. Even though these measures have

been successfully utilised in previous studies, the author considered two points: Firstly, Ni

and Na are somewhat limited in measuring the entire construct of emotional reactiveness.

Secondly, the questions are very wordy and perhaps easily misunderstood. For these

reasons, the decision was made to use an additional pen and paper measure – the Positive

and Negative Affect Schedule extended form (PANAS-X) (Watson & Clark, 1994), providing a

respected and validated measure of affect with high test-retest reliability. A 20 question

measure of basic positive and negative emotion was utilised, based on the “how you feel at

this moment” instruction (Watson & Clark, 1994).

  17

Hypotheses Null hypothesis: Psi does not exist and results will be according to mean chance expectation

(50%), H0: μ = .5.

1. Fear targets: There will be a significantly higher than chance (50%) hit rate for fear

expression targets.

2. Negative targets: There will be a significantly higher than chance (50%) hit rate for

negative facial expression targets.

3. Positive targets: There will be a significantly higher than chance (50%) hit rate for

non-targets (RH predicts target misses for positive stimuli).

4. Neutral targets: There will be a significantly higher than chance (50%) hit rate for

neutral facial expression trials.

5. Predictive measures: Participants identified as emotionally reactive as defined by

scoring more than 3.5 on the combined Ni (Intensity of reaction to negative images)

and Na (Awareness of reactions to negative images) will score more highly than

those who are identified as emotionally non reactive.

Method 

Participants Fifty participants (32 women and 18 men) ranging in age from 18-61 (M = 32 years, SD = 13)

were recruited by opportunity sampling from the student and staff population of Liverpool

Hope University and Holy Cross College as well as friends and colleagues of the author.

Participants were informed that the study was investigating how extra-sensory perception

(ESP), specifically, how events in the future may affect our behavior in the present.

Design To assess RH effects, the study used a (fearful, negative, neutral and positive affective

stimuli) x (emotionally reactive, emotionally non-reactive) (4X2) design.

Apparatus/Materials 

Software RH2S is a software application compiled by Daryl Bem is designed to run on a Mac or PC.

The stimuli are presented as pairs of images each 500 x 770 pixels, thus any monitor 15” or

above and capable of at least 1024 x 768 resolution may be used. The program generated a

  18

unique text file for each participant that was later imported into a database engine that

would allow full analysis of the results as well as the ability to filter and manipulate the

variables. Data export to SPSS for further analysis is possible. Since the experiment is

automated, the participant runs the experiment alone, thus minimising potential

experimenter effects.

Security The output generated by the software is recorded in plain and encrypted versions. This

prevents the data from being tampered with after being recorded by the software.

Materials The stimuli used in this study are Pictures of Facial Affect (Ekman & Friesen, 1975),

consisting of 110 greyscale pictures of facial expression including anger, fear, surprise,

happiness, sadness and disgust. The stimuli were organised into three categories: positive,

negative and neutral. Each category consisted of 24 pictures (12 female and 12 male). The

negative category consisted of four disgust, four anger, four sadness and 12 fear

expressions.

Hardware This study used Dell P4 desktop computers 2.2 GHz and Dell E127FP 17” LCD monitors at

1280 x 1024 screen resolution, running Windows XP operating system. For off-campus trials,

a Toshiba L300 Satellite laptop computer 1.9GHz, 15.4” screen was used with a resolution of

1280 x 800, running Windows Vista operating system. The target was selected using the ‘z’

and ‘/’ keyboard keys. These were identified by means of two small self-adhesive, yellow

‘smiley face’ labels. Other keys are disabled during the experiment except for the quit (q)

key. Initial data entry and questionnaire was input by means of the keyboard and a

standard two-button mouse. For audio, Sennheiser HD 280 headphones were used and

retained for the duration of the experiment as they are of enclosed design and offered some

protection from external noise sources.

Screen refresh rate The vertical refresh rate of computer CRT and LCD monitors is typically 100 Hz or less,

resulting in minimum attainable exposures of 10 ms or more. Laptop computers and the

majority of desktop computers use 60 Hz LCD monitors and work in non-interlaced or

progressive mode - displaying one full screen image at a time. The RH2S software has a

default target display period of 25 ms followed by masking stimuli of 83 ms. A 60Hz monitor

will display a full-screen image for a minimum duration of 16.67 ms; thus, each target

  19

stimulus will be displayed for two full screen refreshes, or 33.34 ms. In subliminal

presentations, even short exposures may be ‘seen’ due to persistence of vision. In RH, a

mask presented directly after the target (backward masking), disrupts the afterimage,

preventing conscious processing of the target stimulus. In a standard time-forward mere

exposure or habituation study, safeguards such as funnel debriefing procedures would be

used to ensure that the participant was not aware of the target stimuli. In RH, however, this

method was not used because identification of the target does not compromise the RH

hypothesis for two reasons: Firstly, the participant selects the target before the subliminal

exposures and secondly, significant RH effects have previously been successfully

demonstrated with supraliminal exposures of 500 ms (Bem, 2003).

Experimental procedure Participants were shown an information sheet and were given the opportunity to ask any

questions. They were then asked to read and complete a consent form and were given the

opportunity to request a copy of the findings of this study. Participants were told that the

procedure investigated ESP by measuring reactions to pictures of faces and other than a

brief pen and paper questionnaire, the experiment would be run entirely on a computer.

Participants were told the way the procedure tests for ESP would be explained after they

had completed the procedure. Any participant eligible for a course credit was approved

using the Liverpool Hope online experiment management system, Sona. Before starting the

experiment, participants were reminded that they were free to withdraw at any time and

although the experimenter would not be present during the experiment, he would be close

by, if assistance was needed.

Participants were seated in front of the computer in a quiet comfortable location, free from

distractions and were asked to switch off their mobile phones. The RH2S software was

started and before proceeding, the participant was asked to complete the 20-item paper-

based PANAS-X inventory. The participant was informed that all further activity would take

place on the computer and full instructions would be provided on screen.

By default, the RH2S program records the participant’s first name, last name, age and sex

and administered a questionnaire of five measures found to be indicative of Psi

performance. Please see appendix for screen shots of the questionnaire and all measures

used in this study. The instruction screen explained that they would be shown two pictures,

side-by-side and their task was to choose the picture they preferred as quickly as possible

  20

using the stickered keys on the keyboard. Using the left stickered key if they preferred the

picture on the left and the right stickered key if they preferred the picture on the right.

Participants were instructed “just go with your immediate gut reaction, don’t take time to

analyse your preference”.

The RH2S procedure included an optional three minute pre-trial relaxation period,

consisting of a video presentation of astrological images accompanied by ‘new age’ music.

The closing screen provided feedback on individual performance in the negative trials.

Debriefing consisted of an explanation of the procedure, assisted by means of a visual aid: a

double-sided card with a visual representation of a time-forward and time-reversed

habituation procedure, incorporating an explanation of how the participant’s score related

to the hypothesis.

Results Data was transferred from Bem’s RH2S database and statistical software application into

SPSS for analysis. Post-hoc effect sizes were calculated using G*Power software (Faul,

Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007).

Outliers The data were screened for outliers, resulting in the removal of one record. In the fear

trials, the result in question scored 100% in fear trials compared to a mean score of 44.6%

(SD = 19.1) for the remaining records, a discrepancy of more than three standard deviations.

Hypothesis 1, fear trials The hit rate for the fear trials was 44.6% (SD = 19.1), a significant deviation from chance

expectation but not in the predicted direction (t(48) = -2.00, p = .051, two-tailed, d = .29).

Hypothesis 2, negative trials The hit rate for negative trials was 47.4% (SD = 10.2), (t(48) = -1.75, p = .087, two-tailed, d =

.25), a small but not significant effect was found but not in the predicted direction.

Hypothesis 3, positive trials The hit rate for positive trials was not in the predicted direction 50.5% (SD = 15.5) and as

such, is not significantly different from mean chance expectation (t(48) = 0.23, p = .819, two-

tailed, d = .03).

  21

Hypothesis 4, neutral trials The hit rate for neutral trials was not in the predicted direction 47.4% (SD = 14.2), and was a

small but not significant deviation from the chance score of (50%) predicted for neutral

trials, (t(48) = -1.25, p = .216, two-tailed, d = .18).

Predictive measures The performance of participants identified by Bem as emotionally reactive (defined as

scoring > 3 on the NiNa scale) was investigated; these were found to be predictive of Psi

performance in earlier PH studies. Slight interactions were found in fear trials 44.7% (SD =

18.6), (t(37) = -1.74, p = .090, d = 0.28 and negative trials 47.1% (SD = 9.1), (t(37) = -1.92, p = .062

ns, d = .31) but no significant interactions were found in positive or neutral trials.

Exploratory analysis 

The PANAS-X basic positive affect inventory produced more interesting interactions for

participants who scored above the midrange (>29) using the basic positive affect measure

(M 29.22, SD 6.58) Interactions were: Fear trials 40.6% (SD = 17.3), (t(22) = -2.61, p = .016, d =

.54), negative trials 45.6% (SD = 9.7), (t(22) = -2.15, p = .043, d = .45). Positive trials were 52.5%

(SD = 15.6) but not significant (t(22) = 0.78, p = .443 ns, d = .16). Neutral trials were 45.3% (SD =

13.9), (t(22) = -1.62, p = .120 ns, d = .38). No significant interactions were found in any of the

trials using the basic negative affect inventory. 

Sex differences Striking sex differences were found. Females scores were found to significantly deviate

from the chance (50%) score in fear trials 40.9% (SD = 17.7), (t(30) = -2.88, p = .007, d = .52). A

small interaction was observed in negative trials 46.8% (SD = 9.3), (t(30) = -1.93, p = .063, d =

.35) but no interaction was observed with positive and neutral trials. Conversely, a

significant score for males in positive trials was observed 56.9% (SD = 11.2), (t(17) = 2.64, p =

.017, d = .62). Male neutral trials were 43.1% (SD = 14.1), (t(17) = -2.09, p = .052, d = .49) but no

significant interactions were found with fear and negative trials.

Age differences It was found that participants aged <= 38 performed better in fear trials 40.7% (SD = 18.9),

(t(33) = -2.87, p = .007, d = .49) and negative trials 46.1% (SD = 9.2), (t(33) = -2.48, p = .019, d =

.42). For participants where age > 38, results for all trials were not significantly different

from mean chance expectation.

  22

                                                            

Mean reaction time In the preference task, participants were instructed to make their choice as quickly as

possible so that conscious processing would not interfere with the task. A wide range of

reaction times was recorded - 667 ms – 3962 ms, (M = 1672, SD = 801) but no significant

interaction within any of the trials was observed.

Discussion The results fail to support the experimental hypotheses because they are not in the

predicted direction. The most obvious reason (as stated by H0) is because Psi does not exist

and that the results will be according to mean chance expectation (H0: μ = .5). In such

circumstances, convention dictates that H0 should not be rejected, despite the fact that data

are not consistent with chance expectation; they are ordered and demonstrate significant

effects. H0 is rejected however, because this affords the possibility of considering alternative

explanations that are not represented as post-hoc hypotheses. Put another way "We

balance probabilities and choose the most likely. It is the scientific use of the imagination." 2

RH2S and the Bem’s original PH studies are operationally very similar and both use positive,

negative and neutral affective stimuli. RH and PH studies have been successfully replicated

with significant results. The results from the present study, however, seem to indicate Psi-

missing - a phenomenon often observed in Psi replications, where results appear to reveal

unexpected and significantly worse than chance avoidance of the target. It is tempting to

attribute the results of the present study to Psi missing but to do so would be to overlook

certain key characteristics of the facial stimuli used in the present study.

Small assumptions can lead to flawed reasoning. The assumption in question concerns the

stimuli used in RH2S where it was assumed that IAPS and Ekman stimuli could be used

interchangeably. Clues to the reasons for apparent target reversal may be found in studies

of the amygdala and facial affect. As previously discussed, facial stimuli offer an ethically

acceptable alternative form of stimuli compared to IAPS and present a more efficient way of

eliciting affect (Hariri, Tessitore, Mattay, Fera, & Weinberger, 2002). Emotionally evocative

scenes, such as those used in the IAPS collection and pictures of facial affect, such as Ekman

are often used interchangeably and are selected according to their valence rating but

substantial differences exist between these two stimuli type that have only recently been

explored. Emotional faces (Ekman) generate emotion recognition whereas emotionally

 2 Sherlock Holmes from The Hound of the Baskervilles (1902) p. 687

  23

evocative scenes (IAPS) directly evoke the corresponding emotion (Hariri, Tessitore, Mattay,

Fera, & Weinberger, 2002).

Habituation of the target takes place with both IAPS and Ekman stimuli but in RH, the

outcome is different depending on the stimulus used. Negative facial stimuli are not

regarded as aversive in the same way as a picture of an accident victim or a mutilation

scene but negative facial expressions per se represent a warning or indirect threat. In RH2S,

negative facial stimuli represents a warning signal that diminishes during the habituation

procedure. Thus with IAPS stimuli, the target is preferred because it appears less aversive

than the non-target, allowing the individual to avoid confronting a direct negative

emotional response. When using Ekman face targets, the warning signal diminishes due to

habituation and the non-target preferred due to the orienting response and other

attentional processes. In effect, the non-target appears more interesting.

Two individual measures regarded as reliable predictors of Psi performance in PH studies

were included in the RH2S protocol. These were defined by Bem as measures of emotional

reactivity and were: Intensity of reaction to negative images (Ni) and Awareness of

reactions to negative images (Na). These were adapted from Zuckerman’s sensation seeking

scale (Bem, 2003). Analysis of the data using these measures failed to reveal any significant

interactions. Once again, the nature of the stimuli used may explain this deviation from the

results of previous studies. Intensity of reaction and awareness of reaction to negative

images are inappropriate measures when using pictures of facial affect because unlike IAPS,

which contain particularly graphic and disturbing imagery, facial expressions are not

emotion eliciting stimuli.

The PANAS-X provided a measure of positive or negative affect experienced by the

participant at the time of the experiment. Participants who scored higher than the

midpoint on the basic positive affect scale (>29) performed significantly better (albeit, not

in the predicted direction) in fear and negative trials with a slight interaction in positive

trials. No significant interactions were found using the basic negative affect scale,

suggesting that mood might modulate emotion identification. These observations suggest

that the positive emotional state of the individual is a more useful predictor of RH2S

performance than the previous Ni and Na measure.

One aspect of Bem’s PH studies did correlate with the present study. Bem reported strong

sex differences and attributed most of the significant effects to women. The present study

  24

had similar findings. Females scored more highly in fear/negative trials whereas males

scored more highly in positive and neutral trials. As discussed earlier, this interaction was

observed in a conventional fMRI study by Goldenring Fine, et al, (In Press), further

supporting the idea that the use of facial stimuli is the reason for the directional findings of

the present study.

One final observation of the data revealed an interesting parallel with the work of Ruffman,

Sullivan, & Edge, (2006) who compared the abilities of young and older adults to rate

pictures of faces and situations. There were no significant age differences in the ability to

distinguish between low danger and high danger situations but older adults did not

distinguish the difference between less dangerous and more dangerous faces to the same

extent as younger adults. Bem did not report any age differences in earlier PH studies but

the findings of the present study reveal that significant RH effects for fear and negative

faces only occur in the <=38 age group. No significant RH effects were found for any of the

trials in the >38 age group and this is entirely consistent with Sullivan et al’s study. The use

of IAPS pictures in earlier PH and RH studies would not reveal such differences because

neagative stimuli consisted entirely of situations, not faces. To say that similar age

differences do not occur in Bem’s studies is speculation but one must wonder whether Bem

would fail to notice or report such an unusual finding if it existed.

Future research The purpose of the RH2S protocol is to investigate the existence of Psi. Research has

established that the human amygdala is hard-wired to detect emotional expressions,

particularly those of anger and fear. In the absence of Psi, RH2S is designed to generate

random data at chance levels and because the most striking results involve the use of

negative stimuli, it is recommended that future studies should concentrate on negative

facial expressions only. Furthermore, in the light of the results of this present study, Bem’s

Ni and Na measure of emotional reactivity should be replaced with measures based on the

recognised and validated PANAS-X inventory. One further improvement could be made: In

order to investigate relationships between facial expression types, the sex and age of the

participants and to establish a set of baseline data for future studies, a pilot study based on a

conventional, time-forward RH2S study should be implemented.

In conclusion, The present study presents a compelling case for the existence of Psi.

Significant RH effects were observed in the fear and negative trials indicating retroactive

  25

habituation of the stimuli. The original predictions were based on the earlier PH rationale,

using IAPS and erotic stimuli but retrospective evaluation of the research surrounding the

function of the human amygdala and facial expression are consistent with the direction of

the results. If Psi does exist, an opportunity is afforded to carry out replications using the

RH2S protocol. RH2S shows great promise as a simple test of Psi, requiring no more than a

modest laptop PC or Mac computer and one experimenter. If used with noise cancelling

headphones and providing the participant carries out the task in a distraction-free location,

this protocol could be successfully implemented outside the confines of the psychology lab.

The software is self contained and capable of implementing all of the measures discussed.

The data is internally security checked in order to minimise fraud and data analysis is built

in to the software. The use of facial stimuli should not be of concern to any university ethics

committee allowing any interested party, from serious investigator, committed skeptic or

interested student, to investigate the fascinating phenomenon of Psi.

 

  26

 

References Bem, D. J. (2008). Feeling the Future III: Additional Experimental Evidence for Apparent Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect. The Joint Annual Convention of The Parapsychological Association, Inc. (51st) and The Incorporated Society for Psychical Research (32nd). Winchester: The University of Winchester.

Bem, D. J. (2005). Precognitive Aversion. 2005 Parapsychological Association Convention. Parapsychological Association.

Bem, D. J. (2003). Precognitive Habituation: Replicable Evidence for a Process of Anomalous Cognition. Proceedings of Presented Papers. from the Forty-sixth Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association (pp. 6-20). Vancouver: S. Wilson (Chair).

Bornstein, R. F., & D’Agostino, P. R. (1992). Stimulus recognition and the mere exposure effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (63), 545-552.

Britton, J. C., Shin, L. M., Feldman Barrett, L., Rauch, S. L., & Wright, C. I. (2008). Amygdala and fusiform gyrus temporal dynamics: Responses to negative facial expressions. BMC Neuroscience , 9, 44.

Britton, J. C., Taylor, S. F., Sudheimer, K. D., & Liberzon, I. (2006). Facial Expressions and Complex IAPS Pictures: Common and Differential Networks. NeuroImage (31), 906-919.

Calder, A. J. (1996). Facial Emotion Recognition after Bilateral Amygdala Damage: Differentially Severe Impairment of Fear . Cognitive Neuropsychology , 13 (5), 699-745.

Cox, W. E. (1956). Precognition: an Analysis. Journal of the American Society of Psychical Research (50), 99-109.

Dijksterhuis, A., & Smith, P. K. (2002). Affective habituation: Subliminal exposure to extreme stimuli decreases their extremity. Emotion , 2 (3), 203-214.

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1975). Pictures of facial affect. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Ewbank, M. P., Lawrence, A. D., Passamonti, L., Keane, J., Peers, P. V., & Calder, A. J. (2009). Anxiety predicts a differential neural response to attended and unattended facial signals of anger and fear. Neuroimage , 44 (3), 1144-1151.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods (39), 175-191.

Goldenring Fine, J., Semrud-Clikeman, M., & Zhu, D. C. (In Press). Gender differences in BOLD activation to face photographs and video vignettes. Behavioural Brain Research , np.

Guiley, R. E. (1991). Harper's Encyclopedia of Mystical and Paranormal Experience. New York: HarperCollins.

Hariri, A. R., Tessitore, A., Mattay, V. S., Fera, F., & Weinberger, D. R. (2002). The Amygdala Response to Emotional Stimuli: A Comparison of Faces and Scenes. Neuroimage , 17 (1), 317-323.

  27

Klintman, H. (1983). Is There a Paranormal (Precognitive) Influence in Certain Types of Perceptual Sequences? Part 1. European Journal of Parapsychology , 1, 19-50.

Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1999). International affective picture system (IAPS): Technical manual and affective ratings. University of Florida, Center for Research in Psychophysiology, Gainesville.

Li, W., Zinbarg, R. E., Boehm, S. G., & Paller, K. A. (2008). Neural and behavioral evidence for affective priming from unconsciously perceived emotional facial expressions and the influence of trait anxiety. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 20 (1), 95-107.

Matsumoto, D., & Willingham, B. (2009). Spontaneous Facial Expressions of Emotion in Congenitally and Non-Congenitally Blind Individuals. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 96 (1), 1-10.

Mikels, J. A., Fredrickson, B. L., Larkin, G. R., Lindberg, C. M., Maglio, S. J., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (2005). Emotional category data on images from the International Affective Picture System. Behavior Research Methods , 37 (4), pp. 626-630.

Morris, J. S., Frith, C. D., Perrett, D. I., Rowland, D., Young, A. W., Calder, A. J., et al. (1996). A differential neural response in the human amygdala to fearful and happy facial expressions. Nature (383), 812-815.

Radin, D. I. (1997). The Conscious Universe. San Francisco: HarperCollins.

Radin, D. I. (2000, July 31). Time-reversed human experience: experimental evidence and implications. Journal of Nonlocality and Remote Mental Interactions .

Ruffman, T., Sullivan, S., & Edge, N. (2006). Differences in the Way Older and Younger Adults Rate Threat in Faces But Not Situations. Journal of Gerontology , 61B (4), 187-194.

Savva, L., & French, C. C. (2001). Investigating the presentiment effect as an adapted behaviour. Evolution and psi. 25th International Conference of the Society for Psychical Research. Cambridge: Clare College.

Savva, L., Child, R., & Smith, M. (2004). The precognitive habituation effect: an adaptation using spider stimuli. Proceedings of Presented Papers: The Parapsychological Association 47th Annual Convention, (pp. 223-229).

Sowa, J. F. (2001, August 25). Processes and Causality. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from jfsowa.com: http://www.jfsowa.com/ontology/causal.htm

Stanford, R. G. (1974a). An Experimentally Testable Model for Spontaneous Psi Events: I. Extrasensory Events. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research (68), 34-57.

Stanford, R. G. (1974b). An experimentally testable model for spontaneous psi events: II. Psychokinetic events. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research (68), 321-356.

Thomas, K. M., Drevets, W. C., Dahl, R. E., Ryan, N. D., Birmaher, B., Eccard, C. H., et al. (2001). Amygdala Response to Fearful Faces in Anxious and Depressed Children. Arch Gen Psychiatry (58), 1057-1063.

Watson, D., & Clark, L. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule – Expanded Form. Unpublished Manuscript . Iowa City: University of Iowa.

  28

Williams, L., Liddell, B., Kemp, A., Bryant, R., Meares, R., Peduto, A., et al. (2006). Amygdala-prefrontal dissociation of subliminal and supraliminal fear. Human Brian Mapping , 27, 652-661.

Yang, E., Zald, D., & Blake, R. (2007, November). Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness during continuous flash suppression. Emotion , 882-886.

Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9), 1-27. (

 

  29

Appendix I 

Ethics application form 

  30

Appendix II 

Supervisor contact sheet 

  31

Appendix III 

Measures and forms