BAE 2.4

Magazine Overview

This issue of the Bulletin of Anomalous Experience, Volume 2, Number 4, dated June 1991, is primarily focused on the intersection of anomalous experiences, psychological research, media representation, and legal considerations. The editorial musings address the challenges of media exposure, particularly from tabloids like the National Enquirer, and the importance of caution when dealing with reporters. It also introduces Joanne Hager as the new Associate Editor and provides a breakdown of the readership by profession, highlighting a significant number of psychologists, psychiatrists, MDs, ufologists, and writers/researchers.

Editorial Musings: Media and Misrepresentation

The editor recounts an experience where his work with abductees was misrepresented in the National Enquirer. He details how a reporter named Esmond Choeke from the 'Northern News Service' (which appears to be a one-person operation selling stories to tabloids) contacted him, focusing on sensationalism rather than clinical or scientific issues. This experience serves as a cautionary tale about media exposure, emphasizing the need for individuals to be careful about how their work is presented. The editor notes that while most reporters were receptive, Choeke was distinctly unreceptive to a scientific approach. The article also mentions a similar incident where Choeke contacted a local GP psychotherapist, presenting the story to the National Examiner. The reporter who was contacted by Choeke has recommended that the Medical Post issue a warning to subjects of articles about this type of misrepresentation.

Networking

This section provides contact information and professional backgrounds for individuals involved in anomalous experience research and support.

• Laura Boyle, MD: A psychiatrist in Dallas, Texas, specializing in adolescent psychiatry, substance abuse, panic disorders, and affective disorders. She has a private practice and consults for the University of Dallas. Her professional experience includes directing adolescent services at Taylor Manor Hospital and serving as a clinical assistant professor at the University of Maryland. She has also published articles on drug abuse and teen suicide.
• Jean E. Byrne, BSRN, PhD: Based in Norman, Oklahoma, Byrne is a medical technician with a background in nursing and hypnosis training. She maintains a private Holistic Health practice incorporating hypnotherapy and massage therapy, focusing on behavioral problems, stress management, and smoking cessation. She also works with clients undergoing Past Life Therapy and is involved with MUFON, assisting with abduction cases by providing hypnotic regression and support. She works as part of a team with Richard Siefried and Jean Waller to support abductees in Oklahoma.
• David J. Hufford, Ph.D.: An Associate Professor of Behavior Science at The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in Pennsylvania. Hufford is a folklorist whose research interests include the study of supernatural beliefs and their relationship to experience and reason. He argues that such beliefs persist because they have an empirical base and are developed through normal reasoning, challenging the notion that they are irrational or easily explained away by conventional means. He is interested in anomalous experiences and their interpretations, including alternative healing and mystical experiences.

Mail!

This section features correspondence from readers.

• Hilary Evans comments on Kenneth Ring's Omega Project findings, suggesting that experiencers of anomalous phenomena are a selected or self-selected category, not just average individuals. Evans questions whether traumatic childhood experiences are the cause of psychological conditioning leading to anomalous adult experiences, or if the psychological condition pre-existed both. He proposes that some individuals may be 'ASC-prone' (prone to altered states of consciousness), which makes them more likely to have anomalous experiences. He constructs a syllogism: People in ASCs are more likely to have anomalous experiences; Some people are ASC-prone; Therefore, ASC-prone people are more likely to have anomalous experiences. This opens the inquiry to consider whether ASC-proneness is innate, developed, or a side-effect of childhood trauma.

Cautionary Notes On Hypnosis

This section presents two critical perspectives on the use of hypnosis, particularly Ericksonian hypnotherapy.

• Peter B. Bloom (American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis) raises concerns about Ericksonian hypnotherapy, questioning its departure from established hypnosis traditions. He critiques the concept of directly accessing the unconscious via ideomotor signaling for regression to perinatal awareness or past lives, stating there is no scientific evidence to support such claims. Bloom warns that clinicians might suggest experiences that patients accept as true, which can be detrimental. He also notes that Erickson's focus on techniques might overshadow the importance of context in therapy, and that 'demand characteristics' of the experimental situation influence subject responses.

• The U.S. Supreme Court on Hypnosis details the case of Vickie Lorene Rock, who was charged with manslaughter. Her attorney suggested hypnosis to refresh her memory about the shooting. After hypnosis, she recalled details that led to the discovery of a defective gun. The Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that hypnotically refreshed testimony was inadmissible per se. However, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned this, stating that the Arkansas rule violated Rock's constitutional right to testify. The Court acknowledged the unreliability of hypnosis but argued that a per se exclusion was an arbitrary restriction, and that the admissibility should be determined on a case-by-case basis. The commentary by Roy Udolf discusses the implications of this decision, noting that juries must still evaluate testimony and that the Rock decision allows for the possibility that hypnotically refreshed testimony can be true, especially when corroborated.

The Dissenting Opinion

Chief Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justices White, O'Connor, and Scalia, dissented from the Supreme Court's decision in Rock v. Arkansas. They argued that the Court did not provide sufficient constitutional justification for invalidating the Arkansas rule, which was based on the inherent unreliability of hypnotically refreshed testimony. The dissenters emphasized that the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on evidence and that the Arkansas rule was a permissible response to a novel and difficult question, suggesting that the Supreme Court should not mandate its own view on the matter.

Magnetic Implant Response

This section presents original research by Nicholas A. Reiter on the 'Magnetic Implant Response' (MIR) in relation to UFO abduction experiences. Reiter, an engineering technician, has been investigating Tesla coil effects and bio-magnetic interactions. His research, conducted with a colleague (AR) and volunteers in Dallas, Texas, aims to understand the abduction process as a technology, detect and neutralize alleged abduction implants, and develop a defense system.

The research is based on the assumption that an advanced intelligence is using a highly advanced technology, possibly based on unknown energy forms, to conduct experimentation and manipulation of humans. The experiments involved testing volunteers (V-#1 to V-#4) with a strong horseshoe magnet, which elicited a 'panic' response, mental terror, and apprehension, particularly in those with 'classical' abduction experiences. The MIR was found to be dependent on the magnetic flux and disappeared when the flux was diverted.

Interestingly, the Tesla Coil Suppression Effect (TCSE) was discovered when V-#1 was exposed to a Tesla Coil, which suppressed the MIR. This effect was also observed with V-#2. Furthermore, V-#1 found that powering up the Tesla Coil could dispel sensations of unseen entities being nearby, suggesting it might disrupt or drive away invisible forces. The report concludes that while no definitive conclusions can be drawn yet, the MIR and TCSE are promising areas for further investigation.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the challenges of researching and reporting on anomalous experiences, particularly in the face of media sensationalism and the complexities of memory and consciousness. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, advocating for rigorous scientific investigation while acknowledging the subjective nature of these experiences. There is a strong emphasis on caution, particularly regarding the use of hypnosis and the interpretation of data. The publication serves as a platform for sharing original research, personal experiences, and critical commentary within the field of anomalous phenomena, fostering a community of 'inquiring minds' who seek to understand these complex issues.

Bulletin of Anomalous Experience, Vol. 2, No. 4, June 1991, is a networking newsletter focused on the UFO 'Abduction' phenomenon and related issues, aimed at scientists and mental health professionals. The publication aims to provide a forum for information, insights, and ongoing debate, treading a path between academia and the marketplace.

The MIR Phenomenon and Experiments

The issue details experiments related to the Magnetic Imprint Response (MIR). The protocol involves testing volunteers for their ability to sense magnetic fields using a galvanic skin response (GSR) monitor. Subjects are blindfolded and a horseshoe magnet is moved near their heads. Five out of twenty-four volunteers tested reported distinct sensations, including apprehension, pressure, disorientation, dark shapes, and involuntary twitching. Common characteristics of these positive responses included an unpleasant, weird feeling, extreme nervousness, vivid effects, increased perspiration (indicated by GSR), and a specific location on the head where the sensation occurred.

Specific MIR regions identified on volunteers include behind and below the left ear, left temple, above the nose between the eyes, and above and slightly behind the left ear.

A controlled blind test was conducted with a volunteer named Dennis (Case #6). The magnet was sealed in a box, along with two identical dummy boxes. Dennis, blindfolded and connected to a GSR monitor, correctly identified the box containing the magnet when it was moved near his head, with the GSR monitor showing a strong positive response. Notably, after the test, Dennis felt no sensation when the magnet was presented again, suggesting the MIR had spontaneously vanished.

The author, an engineering technician, approaches the MIR with a practical background and hesitates to form definitive theories, suggesting the effects might be related to a natural, in-born magnetic sense or implants. The author is conducting interviews with the five positive responders to determine if they have UFO abduction-related histories.

Some MIR experiencers have reported psychic or 'ghost' incidents, dreams of large insects, or sightings of UFOs. The report concludes by stating that the MIR and TCSE (Transcendental Consciousness State Experience) effects are believed to be real and may offer insights into bio-energetic relationships and the UFO enigma.

Personality Characteristics of Experiencers

This section features excerpts from a paper by Donald A. Johnson, Ph.D., titled "Personality Characteristics of Persons Reporting Experienced Anomalous Trauma: What We Know From Questionnaire Data, The MMPI, 16-PF, MBTI, NEO-PI, and WAIS." The paper reviews current research on the personality traits of individuals reporting experienced anomalous trauma (EAT), including those claiming UFO abduction.

Abstract Highlights:

• The research examines findings from various psychological tests (MMPI, 16-PF, MBTI, NEO-PI, WAIS) and discusses the viability of the fantasy-prone personality hypothesis.
• It presents evidence for psychopathology as well as normal individual differences.
• Data on hypnotic suggestibility, dissociative experiences, childhood fantasy proneness, and subjective psychic experiences are also discussed.

Research Sources Reviewed:

• Slater (1985): Blind evaluations of psychodiagnostic tests for UFO abductees.
• Ring and Rosing (1990): Comparative study of UFO close encounter experiencers and near-death experiencers.
• Stone (1989): MMPI results from UFO abduction subjects with missing time.
• Parnell (1986, 1988) and Parnell and Sprinkle (1990): MMPI and 16-PF profiles of 225 UFO experiencers.
• Rodeghier, Goodpaster & Blattterbauer: MMPI, ICMI, and Creative Imagination Scale scores from UFO abduction experiencers.
• Johnson (1991): MBTI and NEO-PI results on EAT claimants.
• Analysis of Personality Assessment System (PAS) for EAT claimants.

Conclusions from the Paper:

1. Some EAT claimants exhibit personality profiles that lead to doubts about their accounts, with some belonging to immature or unstable reference groups and showing elevated MMPI scores for 'faking,' 'paranoid tendencies,' and 'schizoid processes.'
2. There is limited support for the fantasy-proneness hypothesis as a primary cause of EAT. While some individuals reporting abduction experiences may have slightly elevated scores for openness to fantasy, these are not outside the normal range.
3. Many individuals reporting abduction experiences seem to have personality data consistent with experiencing serious traumatic events, showing heightened vigilance and threat sensitivity, and being less socially adept, ill at ease interpersonally, vulnerable to rejection, and lacking a strong sense of identity. The UFO abduction scenarios may serve as a screen memory to protect victims from intolerable information and overwhelming affect.
4. The findings do not definitively determine the source of the UFO experience. However, the role of psychological factors in UFO abduction experiences is significant and provides clues for understanding the phenomenon.
5. The importance of personality characteristics suggests a need for categorizing the various aspects of these experiences and analyzing subgroups of EAT claimants rather than lumping them together.

How BAE Works and Editorial Stance

The "About Bulletin of Anomalous Experience" section explains that BAE is a networking newsletter for interested scientists and mental health professionals, providing a forum for information and debate. It aims to "comfortably tread the narrow path between the groves of academia and the dust and heat of the market-place, inquiring and suggesting, not asserting or insisting." The publication is contribution-driven and nominally bimonthly, but may publish more frequently if contributions warrant. It also includes excerpts from medical literature, often regarding hypnosis.

Contributors are encouraged to share their experiences, conclusions, and questions. Correspondence submitted for the Bulletin is assumed to be for publication unless specified otherwise. Lengthy contributions can be sent on diskette. The editor, David Gotlib, M.D., can be contacted via mail, CompuServe, or the WELL.

Copyright and Subscription Information

Contributions to BAE remain the property of their authors, and reproduction requires express written permission. Distribution is limited to mental health professionals and interested scientists. Subscriptions are $20 per calendar year, and back issues from 1990 are also available for $20. Payment by cash or money order is preferred to cheques.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the scientific investigation of anomalous experiences, particularly the MIR phenomenon and the psychological profiles of UFO abductees. The editorial stance, as articulated by Hilary Evans and echoed in the 'How BAE Works' section, is one of open inquiry, suggesting rather than asserting, and seeking to bridge the gap between academic research and public interest in these phenomena. There is a clear emphasis on empirical observation and psychological analysis as tools for understanding anomalous experiences, while acknowledging the complexity and the need for further research and categorization of different types of experiences.