OPYRIGHT NOTICE: | | | | You may forward this document to anyone you think might be interested.

| | | | The only limitations are: | | A) You must copy this document IN ITS ENTIRETY, WITHOUT MODIFICATIONS, | | including this copyright notice. | | You do NOT have permission to change the contents or make extracts. | | B) You do NOT have permission to copy this document for commercial | | purposes. | | | | The contents of this document are copyright (c) 1993 by The American | | Society for Psychical Research. | | | | It was posted on the University of California at Davis ftp server by | | permission of the copyright holder. This ftp server contains ASCII | | files of published articles by Professor Charles T. Tart. Individuals | | wishing to obtain other documents there (which are added to from time | | to time) should | | Connect to ftp server, "ftp.ucdavis.edu". | | Log in as username "anonymous". Send your e-mail address | | as the ident/password string. | | cd to /pub/fztart. | | A "dir" command will show you what is available. | | A "get" command will retrieve documents. | | The file "currentcontents" will be updated regularly, showing | | what papers are available, perhaps with an abstract of each. | |__________________________________________________________________________|

Marijuana Intoxication, Psi and Spiritual Experiences Charles T. Tart University of California Davis, California 95616 & Institute of Noetic Sciences Sausalito, California 94965 Published in the "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research," volume 87, pp. 149-170, *word* indicates italicization in printed version -------------------------------------Abstract General social beliefs that are acquired and operate in our ordinary state of consciousness usually deny the reality of psychic phenomena and thereby probably inhibit psychic functioning. Anecdotal reports, however, suggest that ostensibly paranormal phenomena often occur in association with altered states of consciousness. This study focuses on the altered state of marijuana intoxication. A questionnaire study of 150 experienced marijuana users found that 76% believed in ESP, with frequent reports of experiences while intoxicated that were interpreted as psychic. Sixty nine percent reported that they

had experienced telepathy while intoxicated, 32% reported precognition and 13% reported psychokinesis. Fifty percent had experienced seeing auras around people and 44% reported out-of-the-body experiences. These findings suggest that marijuana, used under the proper psychological conditions, might facilitate the manifestation of psi. No studies are known in which ESP performance was tested under laboratory conditions while percipients were intoxicated with marijuana, but a 1975 study (Tart, 1975; 1976) found a positive correlation between laboratory ESP scoring and frequency of marijuana use outside the laboratory in a student population. This study also found a negative correlation between ESP scoring and frequency of alcohol use in everyday life. A 1977 laboratory study (Tart, 1977) failed to confirm these findings. Differences between the studies are discussed, as is the importance of the ostensible paranormality of various experiences associated with marijuana intoxication on belief systems, irregardless of whether such experiences are actually paranormal. -------------------------------------Ordinary life experiences that apparently involve manifestations of psi (i.e., telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, or psychokinesis) can be of great psychological intensity and meaning, sometimes to the point of producing an experience of insight and spiritual blessedness, at one extreme,, or suffering, fear of going crazy, and maladaptive behavior at the other extreme. Psychological help may occasionally be required. In the past and, unfortunately, still too often in the present, such help was often irrelevant or worsened the client's state. This was due to professional ignorance about psi and the automatic interpretation of ostensible psi experiences as pathological delusions. The recent founding of the Spiritual Emergence Network (see note 1) (Grof & Grof, 1989), which is designed to educate mental health professionals and provide referrals for potential clients, is a useful effort to improve the situation1. The average manifestation of psi in laboratory experiments, by contrast, is usually unreliable and quantitatively weak. This is a major problem in experimental parapsychology: the signal-to-noise ratio is psi research is disappointingly low. Thus I and others have long been interested in the possible uses of *discrete altered states of consciousness* (*d-ASCs*); see Tart, 1983a for a full theoretical explication of the nature of d-ASCs both to facilitate and understand the operation of various psi _______________________________ Note 1 The Spiritual Emergence Network (formerly the Spiritual Emergency Network) can be contacted at their national headquar ters at 250 Oak Grove Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025, 415-327-2776. I urge all mental health professionals to become affiliated with the Network, as concerns about psychic and spiritual matters are becoming increasingly widespread. abilities. I have written extensively on these issues (Tart, 1967, 1968, 1970a, 1970b, 1974, 1977, 1978, 1980, and 1983b), as have others (see, for example, Honorton, 1974; 1975; Honorton & Krippner, 1969; Kelly & Locke, 1981; Krippner, 1975; LeShan, 1974; Masters, 1974; Mishlove, 1983; Parker, 1975; Schmeidler, 1982, 1988; Ullman & Krippner, 1970; Wookey, 1982). See Pekala (1991) for a review of recent empirical research on measuring the effects of altered states.

------------------------------end of footnote Hypnosis, meditation-induced d-ASCs, drug-induced d-ASCs, and controlled or guided emotional states all seem to be potential candidates for psi facilitation. Facilitation of the operation of psi abilities involves helping them manifest more reliably and at stronger intensities of functioning. Such facilitation would have the potential of leading to better understanding because more reliable psi would allow more fruitful process experimentation. Better understanding might also come about through *state-specific understandings* of psi functioning resulting from the development of *state-specific sciences* (Tart, 1972a). These would be testable understandings dependent on the altered logics and perceptions of some d-ASCs, which are not fully comprehensible in our ordinary state. This paper will discuss ostensibly psychic experiences associated with marijuana use, considering both their psychological impact and the possible use of marijuana intoxication for facilitating psi performance under laboratory conditions. Drug Induced Altered States Psychoactive drugs are convenient means of inducing d-ASCs. Although there is much intriguing speculation on the possibilities for using psychoactive drugs for inducing psi, numerous anecdotal reports, and many reviews of the general literature on psychedelics (Blewett, 1963; Cavanna & Ullman, 1968; Clark, 1967; Dobkin de Rios, 1984a; Dobkin de Rios, 1984b; Drury, 1984; Fair, 1975; Garrett, 1961; Kern, 1964; Krippner, 1964; Krippner & Davidson, 1976; Long, 1976; Nicol & Nicol, 1961; Osmond, 1961; Smythies, 1960, 1983; Wasson, 1962; Wilson, 1949), there is only a sparse, older experimental literature on deliberately or experimentally using major psychedelics like LSD25 to facilitate psi functioning (Cavanna & Servadio, 1964; Masters & Houston, 1966; Osis, 1961; Paul, 1966; Puharich, 1962; van Asperen de Boer, Barkema, & Kappers, 1966; Vasiliev, 1965; Whittlesey, 1960). This experimental literature has been reviewed by Krippner and Davidson (1974), with a recent note by Smythies (1987). The tremendous variability of reactions to the powerful psychedelics, however, combined with a lack of sophisticated knowledge on *guiding* psychedelic experiences at that early stage of research, produced results that were encouraging but not solid. A mild psychedelic such as marijuana, which can be used in a relatively controlled and reliable way by psychologically balanced people, offers more promise. Marijuana intoxication is also an excellent candidate for the development of a state-specific science. This latter aspect, however, falls outside the scope of the present paper. Alcohol is the most popular (and probably the most generally dangerous) recreational drug in our culture, having been tried at least once by 86% of Americans (164 million people in our 1985 population of 191 million). Alcohol is reported to have been used within the last 30 days by 59% of the population (National Institute of Drug Abuse, 1986). Marijuana, in spite of continuing illegality, is the second most popular recreational drug, having been tried at least once by 32% of the population

and used within the last 30 days by 10%. Thus, somewhere between 18 million and 62 million people have varying degrees of familiarity with the d-ASC that typically results from marijuana use. Marijuana's effects are of interest to experimental parapsychology insofar as it has any psi-facilitating potential. In terms of its interest to the evolving field of clinical parapsychology, marijuana experiences may foster illusions about psychic phenomena as a result of normal experiences being misinterpreted during the intoxicated state as psychic, or it may facilitate genuine psychic experiences, often of an intense variety. In either case, these experiences, mistaken or genuine, must be integrated into a person's life. Some ostensible psi experiences may also arouse normally unconscious fears about psi (Tart, 1982, 1986a; Tart & LaBore, 1986). The techniques (Tart, 1984) for acknowledging and dealing with fears of psi may become relevant, as well as other clinical methods. In this paper, the focus is on ostensible psi and spiritual experiences occurring with marijuana intoxication in populations of marijuana *users,* that is people who use marijuana in everyday life without its use being, by their own report, significantly disruptive to their general happiness and adaptation. The additional clinical issues arising in marijuana *abusers*, whose use is part of a maladaptive psychological addiction, are beyond our present scope. The Altered State Induced by Marijuana Marijuana is what Weil (1972) has called an *active placebo*. That is, there is a definite pharmacological effect due to the chemical nature of the drug, but at the same time psychological and situational factors are so important in determining what the nature and content of the intoxicated state is that marijuana, at low to moderate doses, is like a placebo, with no particular effects at all other than those psychologically induced. The pharmacological effects create a range of *possibilities*; the psychological and situational factors determine which of these possibilities are likely to manifest. These non-drug factors are discussed at length elsewhere (Becker, 1967; Tart, 1971a; Weil, 1972). When I became interested in the nature of the d-ASC produced by marijuana intoxication (popularly referred to as being *stoned*), I first reviewed the laboratory studies of marijuana. It became clear that such studies involved a narrow and specialized selection of psychological and situational factors, so that only a fraction of the range of possible altered mental functioning with marijuana occurred in most laboratory settings. Further, this selection seemed atypical of what people ordinarily experienced when using marijuana in settings of their choice. Further, the laboratory studies had certainly not attempted to foster a state conducive to psi functioning. To examine the fuller and more typical range of marijuana effects, I conducted informal interviews with a number of highly educated users in the late 1960s. This led to the development of a 220-item formal questionnaire. It was distributed informally by giving batches to students and associates and asking that they

pass them on until they ended up in the hands of experienced users, who could then mail them back anonymously. "Experienced" was defined on the questionnaire as having used marijuana at least a dozen times. Questions were of the general form, *During the state produced from using marijuana I experience X, more so than if I had not used marijuana.* Users were asked to rate the frequency of each described effect during their previous six months of use in categories of Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Very Often, and Usually. They were also asked to rate the minimal level of intoxication necessary to experience each phenomenon in categories of Just, Fairly, Strongly, Very Strongly, and Maximum. These categories were defined more clearly in the instructions. A subsequent confirmation study (Tart & Kvetensky, 1973) has shown this experiential rating of thresholds for effects to be reliable. Some illustrative questions are: *I can see new colors or more subtle shades of color than when I'm straight. When listening to stereo music or live music, the spatial separation between the various instruments sounds greater, as if they were physically further apart. I get so lost in fantasy or similar trips in my head that I completely forget where I am, and it takes a while to reorient after I come back and open my eyes.* There were 153 questionnaires returned, which represent approximately 37,000 episodes of marijuana intoxication under ordinary life, non-laboratory conditions. The respondents were mainly Californians (67%), with 87% under 30 years of age. Sixty seven percent were students, 71% were unmarried, and there were twice as many male as female respondents. Their educational level was very high, with 21% having some graduate work or advanced degrees and only 7% having no college training. Many were actively interested in self-improvement, with 36% reporting that they practiced some sort of meditative or other spiritual training method. Frequency of marijuana use ranged from "almost every day" for 19% of the respondents to "less than once a week" for 39%. Most (72%) had tried more powerful psychedelic drugs such as LSD at least once, but only 7% had tried hard narcotics or drugs such as amphetamines: these drugs were considered too dangerous to be worthwhile by most of the educated drug culture at that time. Fourteen of the questionnaire items comprised a validity scale that contained invented experiences that had not been reported by the interviewees and that I considered unlikely to occur, such as, *The force of gravity seems to alternate between pushing me up and pushing me down*. Three questionnaires with more than 6 positive responses on the validity scale were discarded because they probably were filled out carelessly. This resulted in 150 questionnaires remaining for analysis. This sample is not necessarily representative of the general

population, of course, and thus generalization of the results must be cautious. Further, there have been major changes in the drug culture since these data were collected in 1970 that also qualify the results. Drug users in 1970 tended to be highly intelligent and educated rebels and visionaries, interested in self-knowledge and improving themselves and the world. Having important insights into oneself and others was one of the most characteristic effects of the marijuana d-ASC in this group, for example. Using marijuana was not a mass fad yet. Once it became a fad, many people who were not that interested in psychology or self-improvement per se started using marijuana because it was the thing to do. Their motivation was probably quite different. Given the active placebo nature of marijuana discussed above, differing motivations and backgrounds would probably lead to significantly different qualities of the d-ASC produced by marijuana. For example, my informants in the initial interviews indicated that they did not use alcohol at the same time that they used marijuana because it dulled the d-ASC produced by marijuana (see note 2). Today studies show that simultaneous marijuana and alcohol use is common, suggesting many people are seeking escape rather than insights. Hochhauser (1977), for example, surveying 365 undergraduates found that of the 42% who admitted to polydrug use, 84% used marijuana and alcohol in combination. I shall return to the issue of the changing nature of the marijuana using population later. Nevertheless, I believe my 1970 respondents are fairly typical of the kind of person who may volunteer for psychological _______________________________ Note 2 With the exception of using small amounts of wine for its enhanced taste, not for its intoxicating effects. and parapsychological testing, namely college students and college-educated people with a strong curiosity about the mind who are seeking various kinds of self-improvement. Such people also represent a subclass of clients often seen by counselors and psychotherapists. Thus, the findings of the 1970 study, applied thoughtfully in individual cases, can still be useful today. ------------------------------end of footnote The general results of the study, as well as details of the analytical procedure, have been presented briefly (Tart, 1970b) and in detail (Tart, 1971a) elsewhere. They constitute a phenomenological description of the general nature of the d-ASC resulting from marijuana intoxication as it was widely practiced by educated people in our culture in the late 1960s. I will highlight the effects relevant to experimental and clinical parapsychology in this article. These have been partially presented in a more popular form elsewhere (Tart, 1971b). Belief in Extrasensory Perception Forty-six percent of the respondents indicated strong agreement to the question, *I believe in the existence of extrasensory perception (ESP), i.e., that people can sometimes acquire knowledge about things happening at a distance in space or time, or about other people's thoughts, when there is no possibility of this knowledge having been acquired through the known senses (sight, hearing, etc.).* Another 30% believed

somewhat, and only 3% disbelieved strongly (see note 3). This total of 76% who believe in ESP is quite high. In 1973, when there was considerably more overt cultural acceptance of ESP than in 1970, a representative poll of the American _______________________________ Note 3 This question had its own response scale, not the one listed earlier. Note also that percentages given will not always add up to 100% due to occasional skipping of questions by respondents and rounding errors. ------------------------------end of footnote population by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago found that 58% of people believed they had personally experienced ESP (Greeley, 1975). This is not the same question as *belief* in ESP, of course, but is the closest available in survey data. The belief that one had personally experienced some kind of ESP had risen to 67% in a 1987 poll ("Polls Indicate," 1987). Telepathy To the question, *I feel so aware of what people are thinking that it must be telepathy, mind reading, rather than just being more sensitive to the subtle cues in their behavior*, 30% responded that they had never experienced this and 22% rarely, but 31% responded Sometimes, 12% Very Often, and 4% Usually. Higher levels of intoxication were usually indicated as the threshold for this effect, and heavy users indicated they experienced it more frequently than moderate or light users (see note 4). Marijuana users who had also used psychedelic drugs did not have to be as intoxicated to believe they had experienced telepathy while intoxicated with marijuana. Precognition Experiencing apparent precognition was a much rarer phenomenon than telepathy. To the question *I can foretell the future by some kind of precognition, more than just predicting logically from present events*, 64% responded Never, 19% Rarely, 11% Sometimes, and only 1% Very Often and 1% Usually. Because most users had never experienced this, there were few ratings of minimal level of intoxication, but those who did rate the level _______________________________ Note 4 All the differences I will report from this study were statistically significant at the .05 level or less, two-tailed. considered precognition a high level effect. Heavier users reported precognition more frequently than lighter users. ------------------------------end of footnote The comparative rarity of ostensible precognition experiences compared with ostensible telepathic ones is interesting in light of a later finding that the frequency and information transmission rate of precognition in laboratory studies is much lower than for present-time telepathy (Tart, 1983b). I do not believe that such a difference is reflected in spontaneous psi cases. Psychokinesis

Ostensible psychokinesis (PK) was reported even more rarely than ostensible precognition. In response to *I can perform magical operations that will affect objects or people while intoxicated with marijuana*, 83% indicated they had never experienced this, 6% Rarely, 6% Sometimes, 1% Very Often, and no one Usually. The few who rated threshold level indicated PK did not occur until very high levels of intoxication were reached. Users were also asked to describe experiences in this category. Responses suggested that the usual parapsychological concept of PK was not communicated well, so responses to this question should be taken guardedly. Nevertheless, it is interesting that both ostensible precognition and PK are reported much less frequently than ostensible telepathy by marijuana users; this parallels a finding that precognition and PK appear at a significantly lower rate of manifestation than present time ESP (telepathy or clairvoyance) in laboratory studies (Tart, 1983c). Auras The aura is a field of colored light sometimes experienced as outlining a person, and it is often reported to change in response to a person's health or emotional state. Although it is undoubtedly an experiential reality for some people, most parapsychologists would put it in the "maybe but almost no evidence to that effect" category as to whether it has any parapsychological reality. The methodology for research to begin to establish whether there are any parapsychological aspects of the aura has been presented elsewhere (Tart, 1972b), but almost no research has been done. Some kind of aura around people is occasionally experienced by marijuana users when intoxicated with marijuana. *I see fringes of colored light around people (not objects), what people have called the "aura"* was reported Never by 50%, Rarely by 23%, Sometimes by 19%, Very Often by 5%, and Usually by 1%. A closely related phenomenon, *I see fringes of colored light around objects (not people), what people have called the "aura,"* is reported with almost identical frequency (46%, 21%, 20%, 8%, 1%). The similarity in frequency suggests we are dealing primarily, if not exclusively, with a change in the way the nervous system processes visual information. Nevertheless, experiencers may interpret this aura as a psychic phenomenon, and perhaps it is at times. Both of these effects have a high level of intoxication threshold. Out-of-the-Body Experiences *Have you ever had the experience of being "located" outside your physical body, i.e., of *you* being at a different location in space than the one you knew your body was at? Dreams aren't included here, or situations where you just lost consciousness of your body. This is where you consciously feel located at a different place and know at the time that you are conscious but at a different location. Has this happened to you? At all? While stoned? Happened before started smoking grass? Happened after started smoking grass?* Although 53% indicated that they had not had an out-of-body

experience (OBE), 23% reported they had experienced one OBE, and 21% reported that they had experienced multiple OBEs. Three percent did not answer this question. Fewer males reported OBEs than females, but males were more likely to report multiple OBEs. Respondents more involved in personal growth tended to report more OBEs. Some of the OBEs were while intoxicated with marijuana, others not, but more than twice as many users indicated their OBEs had occurred after they had started using marijuana as those who indicated their OBEs had preceded use. A related marijuana effect is *I have lost all consciousness of my body and the external world and just found myself floating in limitless space (not necessarily physical space).* Twenty-nine percent report this Rarely, 30% Sometimes, 10% Very Often, and 4% Usually. OBEs are probably more common in our culture than suspected, but only a few small-scale surveys have been conducted. In the most comprehensive, a mail survey of students at the University of Virginia and townspeople in Charlottesville, where the university is located, Palmer (1979) found the 25% of the students and 14% of the townspeople believed they had experienced at least one OBE. Thus the marijuana-using respondents in this survey show a very high incidence of ostensible OBEs. Marijuana use, then, may either induce OBEs and/or make a person more likely to remember or report them. Reactions to having an OBE range from worrying that one is crazy (especially if there is no cultural support for the experience) to considering it of profound religious significance (see Gabbard & Twemlow, 1984). The recent literature on near-death experiences also illustrates this latter point clearly (see, e.g., Moody, 1975, 1977; Ring, 1980, 1984; Sabom, 1982). An experience reported by one of the respondents illustrates some of the classical features of OBEs (see note 5). I had quite an interesting experience while camping. I got stoned on grass, and as I was about to go to sleep, I came completely awake and aware of my surroundings. It was pitch black in the tent, yet I could see as if it were daylight. I felt as if my body were covered with eyes and I could see in all directions. I slowly floated up through the top of the tent, looking at the whole area. I got farther away, moving towards space. I got very realistic views of the earth. I kept moving up until I could see half of the earth, then the earth and the moon, continuing _______________________________ Note 5 The respondent reported this under the spiritual experiences section of the questionnaire rather than the ESP portion. ------------------------------end of footnote until I stood at the edge of space, inspecting the whole universe. I was all of a sudden struck by man's insignificance. Then I proceeded to move until I could see hundreds of universes glinting like stars. None of these universes was any larger than the head of a pin. It was incredibly beautiful. I began laughing almost hysterically because now our own universe, immense as

it seems to us, was no bigger than the head of a pin and one among millions besides. I described the whole experience as it happened to several other people; and I believe, from the reaction I got, I thoroughly scared the hell out of them. There were a number of important spiritual experiences surveyed in the questionnaire, considered parapsychological in inexact popular usage of the term, that should be mentioned, although they are not strictly parapsychological in the modern, scientific use of the term. By "spiritual" I mean experiences that seem to take the experiencers beyond the boundaries of their ordinary selves and physical limitations and connect them with a Greater Reality of intelligence, meaning, and purpose. Contact With the Divine Although 39% had never experienced contact with the divine while intoxicated with marijuana, most of my 1970 respondents answered positively to *I feel in touch with a Higher Power or a Divine Being to some extent when intoxicated with marijuana; I feel more in contact with the "spiritual" side of things.* This was rated Usual for 10%, Very Often for 12%, Sometimes for 24%, and Rarely for 13%. This effect tends to occur at higher levels of intoxication. Spiritual Experiences One third of the respondents replied Yes to the question, *I have spiritual experiences, discrete experiences which have had a powerful, long-term religious effect on me, while stoned.* Those responding positively were asked to briefly describe such experiences. The primary components reported were a sense of unity with the cosmos, stimulation of a long-term interest in spiritual matters, contact with divine beings, long term and positive changes in lifestyle, and a sense of deep peace and joy. These qualities are typical of nondrug induced mystical experiences (Pahnke, 1966; Pahnke & Richards, 1969). Marijuana and Psi in the Laboratory Whenever people are polled about their ostensible psychic experiences, problems of definition and reporting arise. Does the respondent have the same criteria for ruling out ordinary explanations, thus qualifying an event as ostensibly psychic, as the researcher does? Is the respondent accurate in reporting? These problems are particularly acute when ostensible psychic events occurring during periods of marijuana intoxication are asked about, as there are major changes in styles of perception, emotion, and evaluation (Tart, 1970b, 1971a) as well as possible problems in the way an event was remembered for later reporting and evaluation. An event that might appear unimportant, coincidental, or explicable by ordinary means to a non-intoxicated person might appear important and mysterious to the intoxicated person. Thus the experience might be falsely evaluated as psychic. Contrariwise, an event that is actually psychic, but might be misperceived as ordinary by a non-intoxicated person, might be correctly perceived as psychic by an intoxicated person.

These confusions will often be unimportant in dealing clinically with a person who is emotionally affected by what he or she considers psychic, irregardless of the actual case. It is of theoretical interest to the clinician, however, as well as of great practical importance to the laboratory worker wondering if marijuana intoxication might boost psi performance, to determine if the apparent boost of psi by marijuana is real. Ideally, straightforward laboratory experimentation with percipients intoxicated at times and not intoxicated at other times would provide a clear answer. Given the illegality of marijuana, the poor funding in parapsychology, and the bureaucratic and social complexities of doing research with marijuana, however, I do not anticipate any laboratory research on this in the immediately foreseeable future. I do have some less direct research material that bears on these questions, however. Results From The 1975 Confirmation Study In the fall of 1975, John Palmer, Dana Redington, my experimental psychology class students, and I carried out a large study on the effects of immediate feedback on ESP performance in the laboratory, based on a theory that immediate feedback would eliminate the typical declines found in laboratory ESP work and provide an opportunity for some percipients to learn improved ESP performance (Tart, 1966). An initial study had supported these predictions (Tart, 1975, 1976). The overall results of the entire study have been presented elsewhere (Tart, Palmer & Redington, 1979). Briefly, 1835 UC Davis students were given two paper and pencil tests of general ESP (GESP) ability in their classes. Results of this classroom procedure are described fully elsewhere (Palmer, Tart, & Redington, 1976). The more successful student percipients were invited to participate in six individually supervised laboratory tests of GESP ability, which constituted the Confirmation Study. Students who continued to show strong signs of positive GESP performance in the Confirmation Study were invited to work in a more extensive Training Study. In the Confirmation Study, a percipient did four tests on one kind of testing machine and two on another. The *Aquarius* 4-choice machine task (Targ & Hurt, 1972) called for pushing one of four response buttons to try to identify a target number selected by the machine's electronic random number generator. The selected target number was displayed to an experimenter in a distant room, who tried to "send" it to the student percipient. The 10-Choice training machine (*TCT*) was similar, but with 10 target choices. In the 1975 Confirmation Study, 72 students completed at least one run on the Aquarius 4-choice machine. Overall, they showed significant ESP hitting (1,554 hits for 5,951 trials when 1,487.75 hits were expected by chance, p < .05, one-tailed). Although statistically significant, the results represented a relatively low level of psi functioning, with a *psi coefficient* (Timm, 1973) of .01; that is, psi was only being manifested on about one percent of the trials, after chance hitting is factored out. This low level of functioning is, unfortunately, typical in parapsychological studies.

The 73 students who completed at least one run on the TCT made 467 hits in 4,520 trials, 15 more hits than expected by chance, which was not significant. Low or zero amounts of overall ESP in a group such as this decrease the sensitivity of correlational tests to pick up real relationships, but they do not destroy it completely. A group average not significantly different from chance may conceal genuine ESP that is canceled out at the group level by very high and very low scoring percipients. As far as we knew, student percipients were not intoxicated with marijuana or any other drug during the laboratory testing. To test whether prior use of marijuana, major psychedelic drugs, and/or alcohol use might be related to GESP scoring in spite of the low level results we distributed a questionnaire about drug use to participants in the Confirmation Study. Through an elaborate coding system, we were able to correlate their responses with their Confirmation Study GESP scores while protecting their anonymity. Fifty-five student percipients returned completed questionnaires. The drug-use questionnaires asked 14 questions. Question 1 concerned personal experience with marijuana on a 4-choice scale, ranging from never to more than a dozen times. Question 2 asked: "Do you regularly practice any sort of meditation or other non-drug discipline for spiritual or personal growth?". Question 3 inquired about the length of time marijuana or hashish has been used. Questions 4 and 5 asked for ratings of marijuana use in all the time the respondent had used it and in the last 6 months, in the same question form that the original 1970 marijuana study asked. Question 6 asked what percentage of the time a respondent would choose alcohol over marijuana to alter his state of consciousness if both were freely available. Question 7 asked how many times a more powerful psychedelic such as LSD, mescaline, peyote, psilocybin, dimethyltryptamine (DMT) or diethyltryptamine (DET) had been used. Question 8 asked how long alcohol had been used to get tipsy or drunk (rather than just for taste with meals), and Questions 9 and 10 rated frequency of use over total time and the last 6 months for alcohol, in the same form as for marijuana. Questions 11, 12, 13 and 14 reproduced the telepathy, precognition, magic, and out-of-body experience questions from the original study. Although these student respondents had been selected for potential GESP ability, not on the basis of their drug use, they had an extensive history of drug use. Although 40% had never tried marijuana and 82% had never used one of the more powerful psychedelic drugs, 44% had used marijuana at least a dozen times and 78% had used alcohol to get tipsy or drunk at least once. The marijuana users averaged 4 years of use, over a range of one month to 10 years, the alcohol users averaged 3, years of use over a range of 1 month to 13 years. The results of this study were most intriguing and most frustrating. The intriguing result is that Palmer, Redington, and I all clearly recall (personal communications with each, October, 1986) that we found that students who used marijuana moderately to heavily, but seldom used alcohol, scored significantly above chance in the Confirmation Study. Further,

students who were heavy alcohol users scored significantly below chance. We decided not to write this result up at the time as we thought it best to wait for confirmatory results in future studies we hoped to carry out. The frustrating aspect of this result was that lack of funds for further research broke up our research team before this planned joint research, and in the chaos of moves resulting neither I nor my colleagues can find copies of the analyses our memory is based on, nor can we locate enough of the original data to present detailed results. Thus, these findings about marijuana and alcohol use and GESP performance must fall in a category of "better than an anecdote but less than a proper experiment." I would normally not publish a finding based on memory, but the virtually total lack of data on this important question justifies recording our joint recollection of what occurred. Results From The 1977 Confirmation Study Working with just my UC Davis students, I was able to carry out a similar study 2 years later in the fall of 1977. Following a large scale Selection Study with new students, an identical drug-use questionnaire was returned by sixty students in a Confirmation Study design that was similar to the previous one except that all the testing for the drug questionnaire part of the study was collected on a newer version of the TCT, the *ADEPT* (Advanced Decimal Extrasensory Perception Trainer). Six tests of 20 trials each were done with each student percipient. As with the TCT results of the previous study, there was no evidence of ESP for the overall group, with 747 hits occurring in 7,200 trials when 720 were expected by chance. Although the sensitivity of correlational tests is decreased because of the overall chance results, analyses were carried out because these are the only data that I know of bearing on the question of marijuana use and laboratory psi performance. The 1977 percipients, like the 1975 ones, had been selected for potential GESP ability, not drug use, yet again showed extensive drug experience. Seventy-seven percent of them had used marijuana from 1 month to 12 years, about 4.5 years on the average. This was about 7 months longer on the average than they had used alcohol for altering their state of consciousness. Sixty percent had tried one of the more powerful psychedelics at least once, compared to 18% in the 1975 sample. Our remembered positive correlation in the 1975 Confirmation Study between GESP scoring and marijuana use, and the negative correlation between GESP scoring and alcohol use, received no confirmation in this 1977 sample. Spearman rank order correlations between total marijuana use and GESP were close to zero, although there was a small negative, but insignificant, correlation between frequency of marijuana use over the last 6 months and GESP scoring (R = -.25, t[36] = 1.52, p < .20, two-tailed). The correlation between GESP performance and previous experience with major psychedelic drugs was insignificant (R = .14). Correlations with alcohol use all ran around an insignificant -.10. I did find three significant correlations with GESP functioning, however. The more frequently a percipient

self-reported experiencing ostensible telepathy, precognition, or magical effects while intoxicated with marijuana, the lower their GESP score in the laboratory. The Spearman rank order correlation coefficients were -.47, -.45, and -.33, respectively, the first two significant at p < .01, two-tailed and the third significant at p < .05, two-tailed. As the probability of finding two correlations significant at the .01 level in 19 tests is less than .02, these results are unlikely to be an artifact of multiple testing (see note 6). _______________________________ Note 6 The growth practice item, being binary, was not suitable for testing with the Spearman test. It was tested by a Mann-Whitney U-Test and showed no significant difference in GESP scores of those who did or did not report practicing meditation or some other non-drug growth practice. ------------------------------end of footnote Comparing the Studies The recalled results of the 1975 sample, a positive correlation between marijuana use and GESP, and a negative one between alcohol use and GESP received no support from the 1977 sample. Indeed, the results of the 1977 sample could be interpreted to mean that ostensible psychic experiences while intoxicated with marijuana, because they are negatively related to actual laboratory GESP performance, may well be illusory much of the time. This may be the case, but I will suggest some additional considerations to flesh out the picture. Because of the illegality of marijuana, the attitude of rebellion connected with using it, and the rapidly changing fashionability of marijuana use in the time periods under consideration, there may be significantly different populations of users in the 1970, 1975, and 1977 samples. In 1968, for example, an annual survey of college freshmen sponsored by the American Council on Education, showed that fewer than one in five students supported legalization of marijuana, but by 1977 a majority (53%) favored it (Astin, Green, & Korn, 1987). That year was a high point of support, as it had fallen back to 22% in 1985. A similar peaking of approval of marijuana in high school students in 1975 to 1978, followed by a decline, was reported by Johnston, O'Malley, and Bachman (1986). An occasional survey of attitudes toward marijuana in upper division psychology students in his classes by Sommer at UC Davis found similar changes (Sommer, 1988). My data allows some comparison of the 1970, 1975 and 1977 samples. The 1977 sample of marijuana users (who were not selected for being marijuana users but for promise of GESP ability) differed from the original users in the 1970 study in their reported ostensible psychic experiences. The 1977 respondents reported ostensible telepathic experiences while intoxicated with marijuana significantly more frequently (p < .05, two-tailed, by chi-square test) than the original sample, viz. 17% Never, 43% Rarely, 17% Sometimes, 20% Very Often, and 3% Usually. The 1977 respondents also reported significantly lower minimal intoxication thresholds than the 1970 respondents (p < .02, two-tailed, by chi-square test) for experiencing

ostensible telepathy (10% Just, 45% Fairly, 27% Strongly, and 17% Very Strongly). The 1975 sample (for whom we recall a significant positive correlation of GESP scores and marijuana use and a significant negative one with alcohol use) did not differ from the original 1970 sample in terms of frequency of ostensible telepathic experiences while intoxicated with marijuana, but did indicate a significantly lower minimal intoxication threshold for experiencing this (p < .03, two-tailed, by chi-square test). The 1975 and 1977 samples did not differ significantly from each other on these two measures, but it should be noted that the small sample sizes involved in comparing these two reduce the sensitivity of the tests. The 1977 respondents indicate a higher frequency of ostensible precognition and of magical operations while intoxicated with marijuana, with lower minimal thresholds for these phenomena, compared to the original 1970 sample, but these trends do not reach statistical significance. Comparisons between the 1975 and 1977 samples are not practical here due to low numbers. Another alternative interpretation of the apparent negative correlation between laboratory psi performance and frequency of ostensible psi experiences while intoxicated with marijuana is one suggested by Osis (personal communication, August 1990). People who believe they have strong psychic ability may be more defensive about being tested in the laboratory, and their consequent anxiety may inhibit psi performance. Along the same lines, people who have experienced a variety of psi experiences may find the narrowness of laboratory tasks an insult to their abilities and so not perform (Swann, 1987). Further, the ostensible psi experiences self-reported with marijuana intoxication may be genuine but state-specific (Rossi, 1987; Tart, 1972a). The particular constellations of abilities helpful to psi functioning operating in the d-ASC of marijuana intoxication may not transfer well to the ordinary state of consciousness. Finally, it must be noted that the 1975 sample actually showed statistically significant (albeit small) ESP functioning in the laboratory, whereas the 1977 sample did not. The 1977 sample may have been more deluded about the actual paranormality of their ostensible psi experiences than the 1975 sample. These alternative interpretations are subject to empirical test in principle, although the practical difficulties of obtaining the necessary legal approvals and support for laboratory research with marijuana are unlikely to be overcome at this time. Conclusions The empirical data reported here are, of course, quite pre liminary, much of the data being abstracted from a larger, general study of marijuana intoxication per se. The findings should be taken only as suggestive until more extensive empirical studies validate or disprove them. Given the unlikelihood of such studies with our current political and social climate, I have presented the material, in spite of its preliminary nature, for its inherent interest: To my knowledge, it is all we have.

In looking at the development of ordinary, "normal" consciousness from a transpersonal perspective (Pearce, 1973, 1974; Tart, 1983a, 1986b), a main function of ordinary *consensus* consciousness is to selectively shape perception, thinking, feeling, and behavior to a narrow, integrated range that embodies the myths, hopes, fears, wisdom, and survival strategies of the particular culture a person is born in. This specialization has survival value in many ways, but can ultimately be detrimental to individuals and societies because the automatization of mental processes involved and emotional attachment to and defense of these automated patterns of perception and reaction inhibit the capacity to deal with a changing world in a flexible, adaptive manner. In the more educated portion of our Western culture, this shaping and conditioning frequently includes a rejection of classical religious beliefs and experiences and a rejection of psi phenomena. Altered states appeal to people for many reasons, but the one of most importance to us here is that they provide glimpses or moments of escape from the constrictive forces of consensus consciousness, pointing out possibilities of growth, maturation, adventure, and pleasure for individuals and society. Contact with a Supreme Being or similar experiences can take a person from a confused, depressed state of ordinary existence and make his or her world full of hope and meaning, for example. An OBE, as a second example, especially if it is a component of a near-death experience, usually convinces the experiencer that he or she need not fear death, that death is not an end but an opening into a new world of joyful possibilities. But our common cultural conditioning is to dismiss such experiences as imaginary at best, as avoidance of the hard facts of material reality, and, at worst, as signs of craziness. This is why ostensible psi experiences, whether genuine or not, are psychologically important. Something *impossible* happens, "impossible" given the belief structure of a purely material world that excludes psi. The conceptually impossible event can be interpreted to mean that the restrictions of possibilities in the consensus consciousness belief structure may be a common *belief*, but not an absolute limit. We may indeed have possibilities more in line with a spiritual view of humankind than with a strictly materialistic view. Thus ostensible psi experiences are important to many in contemporary culture because they provide validation for a more spiritual view. I have qualified psi experiences with the word ostensible in the above paragraph to focus on the effects of such experiences on psychological attitudes and beliefs per se. Some ostensible psi experiences are, of course, genuine psi experiences, meeting scientific criteria of being inexplicable by any reasonable extension of normal scientific, materialistic theories. The occurrence of highly evidential psi events of that sort makes the above argument more powerful. Living in difficult, dis-spirited times, then, many people will deliberately seek spiritual and psychic experiences. Marijuana use will continue to be an important vehicle in this search, even though many other methods, drug and non-drug, will be employed. Further understanding of the effects of marijuana on consciousness will be of value, then, in promoting the

manifestation of psi in the laboratory, in aiding clients to understand and integrate ordinary life and marijuana-induced ostensible psi and spiritual experiences, and in understanding the nature of the human mind. References Astin, A., Green, K., & Korn, W. (1987). "The American Freshman: Twenty-Year Trends, 1966-1985". Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA. Becker, H. S. (1967). History, culture and subjective experience: An exploration of the social bases of drug-induced experiences. "Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 8", (3), 163-176. Blewett, D. (1963). Psychedelic drugs in parapsychological research. "International Journal of Parapsychology, 5"(1), 43-74. Cavanna, R., & Servadio, E. (1964). "ESP Experiences with LSD25 and Psilocybin: A Methodological Approach" (Parapsychological Monographs No. 5). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Cavanna, R., & Ullman, M. "(Eds.)" (1968). "Psi and Altered States of Consciousness: Proceedings of an International Conference on Hypnosis, Drugs, Dreams, and Psi." New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Clark, W. H. (1967). Religious aspects of the psychedelic substances and the law . "International Journal of Parapsychology,, 9"(1), 32-36. Dobkin de Rios, M. (1984a). "Hallucinogens: Cross-Cultural Perspectives". Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1984. Dobkin de Rios, M. (1984b). The vidente phenomenon in third world traditional healing: An Amazonian example. "Medical Anthropology", (Win), 60-70. Drury, N. (1984). "Vision-Quest: A Personal Journey Through Magic and Shamanism". Chalmington, England: Prism, 1984. Fair, J. D. (1975). "An Investigation of the Relationship Between Paranormal Phenomena and Altered States of Consciousness". Unpublished doctoral dissertation, United States International University, 1975. Gabbard, G. O. & Twemlow, S. W. (1984). "With the Eyes of the Mind: An Empirical Analysis of Out-of-Body States." New York: Praeger. Garrett, Eileen J. (1961). Patterns of clairvoyance. "Proceedings of Two Conferences on Parapsychology and Pharmacology", pp. 14-16. New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Greeley, A. M. (1975). "The Sociology of the Paranormal". Beverly Hills: Sage. Grof, S., & Grof, C. (Eds.). (1989). "Spiritual Emergency: When Personal Transformation Becomes a Crisis". Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher. Hochhauser, M. (1977). Alcohol and marijuana consumption among undergraduate polydrug users. "American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 4"(1), 65-76. Honorton, C. (1974). Psi-conducive states of awareness. In E. D. Mitchell & J. White (Eds.), "Psychic Exploration: A Challenge for Science" (pp. 616-639). New York: Putnam's. Honorton, C. (1975). ESP and altered states of consciousness.

In J. Beloff (Ed.), "New Directions in Parapsychology" (pp. 38-59). Metuchen: Scarecrow Press. Honorton, C., & Krippner, S. (1969). Hypnosis and ESP performance: A review of the experimental literature. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 63", 214-252. Johnston, L., O'Malley, P., & Bachman, J. (1986). "Drug Use Among American High School Students, College Students, and Other Young Adults: National Trends Through 1985." Rockville, MD: National Institute of Drug Abuse. Kelly, E. F. & Locke, R. G. (1981). "Altered States of Consciousness and Psi: An Historical Survey and Research Prospectus." (Parapsychological Monograph No. 18.) New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Kern, M. D. (1964). The University of California Extension Division Liberal Arts Conference: Seminar on psychical research and the psychedelic drugs. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 58", 75-76. Krippner, S. (1964). The hypnotic trance, the psychedelic experience, and the creative act . "American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 7", 140-147. Krippner, S. (1975). "The Song of the Siren: A Parapsychological Odyssey". New York: Harper & Row. Krippner, S., & Davidson, R. (1974). Paranormal events occurring during chemically-induced psychedelic experience and their implications for religion. "Journal of Altered States of Consciousness, 1," 175-184. Krippner, S., & Davidson, R. (1970). Religious implications of paranormal events occurring during chemically-induced "psychedelic" experience. "Pastoral Psychology, (Sep), 21", 27-34. LeShan, L. (1974). Psychic phenomena and mystical experience. In E. Mitchell & J. White (Eds.), "Psychic Exploration: A Challenge for Science" (pp. 571-576). New York: Putnam's. Long, J. K. (1976). Shamanism, trance, hallucinogens, and psychical events: Concepts, methods, and techniques for fieldwork among primitives. In A. Bharati (Ed.), "Realm of the Extra-Human: Agents and Audiences" (pp. 300-313). The Hague: Mouton. Masters, R. E. L. (1974). Consciousness and extraordinary phenomena. In E. Mitchell & J. White (Eds.), "Psychic Exploration: A Challenge for Science" (pp. 598-615). New York: Putnam's. Masters, R., & Houston, J. (1966). "The Varieties of Psychedelic Experience". New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Mishlove, J. (1983). "Psi Development Systems". Jefferson: McFarland. Moody, R. (1975). "Life After Life?". Atlanta, GA: Mockingbird Books. Moody, R. (1977). "Reflections on Life After Life". Atlanta, GA: Mockingbird Books. National Institute of Drug Abuse. (1986). "NIDA Capsules". Nicol, J. F., & Nicol, B. H. (1961). Experimental uses of chemical compounds. In "Proceedings of Two Conferences on Parapsychology and Pharmacology" (pp. 27-29). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Osis, K. (1961). A pharmacological approach to parapsychological experimentation. In "Proceedings of Two Conferences on Parapsychology and Pharmacology" (pp. 74-75). New York: Parapsychology Foundation.

Osmond, H. (1961). Variables in the LSD setting. "Proceedings of Two Conferences on Parapsychology and Pharmacology" (pp. 33-35). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Pahnke, W. (1966). Drugs and mysticism. "International Journal of Parapsychology, 8", 295-320. Pahnke, W. N., & Richards, W. A. (1969). Implications of LSD and experimental mysticism. In C. T. Tart (Ed.), "Altered States of Consciousness: A Book of Readings" (pp. 399-428). New York: Wiley. Palmer, J. (1979). A community mail survey of psychic experiences. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 73", 221-251. Palmer, J., Tart, C. T., & Redington, D. (1976). A large-sample classroom ESP card-guessing experiment. "European Journal of Parapsychology, 1", (3), 40-56. Parker, A. (1975). "States of Mind: ESP and Altered States of Consciousness." New York: Taplinger. Paul, M. A. (1966). Two cases of altered consciousness with amnesia apparently telepathically induced. "Psychedelic Review, 8", 4-8. Pearce, J. C. (1971). "The Crack in the Cosmic Egg." New York: Julian. Pearce, J. C. (1974). "Exploring the Crack in the Cosmic Egg." New York: Julian. Pekala, R. (1991). "Quantifying Consciousness: An Empirical Approach". New York: Plenum Press. Polls Indicate (1987). Polls indicate paranormal experiences well on their way to becoming normal. "Brain/Mind Bulletin, 12", (7), 1, 5. Puharich, A. (1962). "Beyond Telepathy". Garden City: Doubleday. Ring, K. (1980). "Life at Death: A Scientific Investigation of the Near-Death Experience". New York: Coward, McCann & Geoghegan. Ring, K. (1984). "Heading Toward Omega: In Search of the Meaning of the Near-Death Experience". New York: Wm. Morrow. Rossi, E. 1987). From mind to molecule: A state-dependent memory, learning and behavior theory of mind-body healing. "Advances, 4", No. 2, 46-60. Sabom, M. B. (1982). "Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation". New York: Harper & Row. Schmeidler, G. R. (1982). Psi and states of consciousness. "Theta, 10", 6-9. Schmeidler, G. R. (1988). "Parapsychology and Psychology: Matches and Mismatches". Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Smythies, J.R. (1960). New research frontiers in parapsychology and pharmacology. "International Journal of Parapsychology, 2"(2), 28-38. Smythies, J.R. (1983). The impact of psychedelic drugs on philosophy and psychical research. "Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 52", 194-200. Smythies, J. (1987). Psychometry and mescaline. "Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 54", 266-268. Sommer, R. (1988). Two decades of marijuana attitudes: The more it changes, the more it is the same. "Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 20", No. 1, 67-70. Swann, I. (1987). "Natural ESP: The ESP Core and Its Raw Characteristics". New York: Bantam. Targ, R., & Hurt, D. (1972). Use of an automatic stimulus generator to teach extrasensory perception. "Proceedings IEEE International Symposium of Information Theory".

Tart, C. T. (1966). Card guessing tests: Learning paradigm or extinction paradigm? "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 60", 46-55. Tart, C. T. (1967). Psychedelic experiences associated with a novel hypnotic procedure, mutual hypnosis. "American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 10", 65-78. Tart, C. T. (1968). Hypnosis, psychedelics and psi: Conceptual models. In R. Cavanna & M. Ullman (Eds.), "Psi and Altered States of Consciousness" (pp. 24-41). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Tart, C. T. (1970a). Did I really fly? Some methodological notes on the investigation of altered states of consciousness and psi phenomena. In R. Cavanna (Ed.), "Psi Favorable States of Consciousness: Proceedings of an International Conference on Methodology in Psi Research" (pp. 3-10). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Tart, C. T. (1970b). Marijuana intoxication: Common experiences. "Nature, 226", 701-704. Tart, C. T. (1971a). "On Being Stoned: A Psychological Study of Marijuana Intoxication". Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books. Tart, C. T. (1971b). ESP and pot. "Psychic, 3", (2), 26-30. Tart, C. T. (1972a). States of consciousness and state-specific sciences. "Science, 176", 1203-1210. Tart, C. T. (1972b). Concerning the scientific study of the human aura. "Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 46", 1-21. Tart, C. T. (1974). On the nature of altered states of consciousness, with special reference to parapsychological phenomena. In W. G. Roll, R. L. Morris & J. D. Morris (Eds.), "Research in Parapsychology 1973" (pp. 163-218). Metuchen: Scarecrow Press, 1974. Tart, C. T. (1975). "The Application of Learning Theory to ESP Performance." (Parapsychological Monographs No. 15). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Tart, C. T. (1976). "Learning to Use Extrasensory Perception". Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Tart, C. T. (1977). Drug-induced states of consciousness. In B. Wolman (Ed.), "Handbook of Parapsychology" (pp. 500-525). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Tart, C. T. (1978). Psi functioning and altered states of consciousness: A perspective. In B. Shapin & L. Coly (Eds.), "Psi and States of Awareness" (pp. 180-210). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. Tart, C. T. (1980). Using altered states of consciousness to facilitate or study psi: Some methodological suggestions (Summary). In W. G. Roll (Ed.), "Research in Parapsychology 1979" (pp. 11-12). Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press. Tart, C. T. (1982). The controversy about psi: Two psychological theories. "Journal of Parapsychology, 46", 313-320. Tart, C. T. (1983a). "States of Consciousness". El Cerrito, CA: Psychological Processes. (Original work published 1975.) Tart, C. T. (1983b). Information acquisition rates in forced-choice ESP experiments: Precognition does not work as well as present-time ESP. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 77", 293-310. Tart, C. T. (1983c). Laboratory PK: Frequency of manifestation and resemblance to precognition (Summary). In W. G. Roll, J. Beloff & R. A. White (Eds.), "Research in Parapsychology

1982" (pp. 101-102). Metuchen: Scarecrow Press. Tart, C. T. (1984). Acknowledging and dealing with the fear of psi. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 78", 133-143. Tart, C. T. (1986a). Psychics' fears of psychic powers. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 80", 279-292. Tart, C. T. (1986b). "Waking Up: Overcoming the Obstacles to Human Potential". Boston: New Science Library. Tart, C. T., & Kvetensky, I. (1973). Marijuana intoxication: Feasibility of experiential scaling of level. "Journal of Altered States of Consciousness, 1", 15-21. Tart, C. T., & LaBore, C. (1986). Attitudes toward strongly functioning psi: A preliminary survey. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 80", 163-173. Tart, C. T., Palmer, J., & Redington, D. J. (1979). Effects of immediate feedback on ESP performance: A second study. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 73", 151-165. Timm, U. (1973). The measurement of psi. "Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 67", 282-294. Ullman, M., & Krippner, S. (1970). "Dream Studies and Telepathy" (Parapsychological Monographs No. 11). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. van Asperen de Boer, S. R., Barkema, P. R., & Kappers, J. (1966). Is it possible to induce ESP with psilocybin? An exploratory investigation. "International Journal of Neuropsychiatry, 2", 447-473. Vasiliev, L. L. (1965). "Mysterious Phenomena of the Human Psyche" (Sonia Volochorg, Trans.). New Hyde Park: University Books. Wasson, R. G. (1962). Hallucinogenic fungi of Mexico. "International Journal of Parapsychology, 4"(4), 41-58. Weil, A. (1972). "The Natural Mind: A New Way of Looking at Drugs and the Higher Consciousness". Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Whittlesey, J. R. B. (1960). Some curious ESP results in terms of variance. "Journal of Parapsychology, 24", 220-222. Wilson, A. J. C. (1949). Ayahuasca, peyotl, yag. "Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research", "48", 353-363. Wookey, E. E. (1982). Hypnosis. In I. Gratton-Guinness (Ed.), "Psychical Research: A Guide to its History, Principles and Practices" (pp. 229-237). Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, England: Aquarian Press.

Footnotes