The term Remote Viewing was first coined in 1971 by Ingo Swann and Janet Mitchell, along with Karlis Osis and Gertrude Schmeidler, at the American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR). When Swann was invited in the 1970s  to participate in Psi experiments at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), CA, he took the concept of Remote Viewing with him. The SRI group initially headed by physicist Hal Puthoff, and later joined by Russell Targ and others, implemented Remote Viewing into their experimental protocols.

What came to be called the “Out-Bound Experimenter” model by SRI, was designed and implemented in 1971–1972, at the ASPR, with Swann as subject, Janet Mitchell as monitor and Osis and Schmeidler as supervisors. In the “Out-Bound Experimenter” model, a viewer would try to perceive the whereabouts of a researcher who had gone to a local target, say a park or museum. Vera Feldman and Erlander Harraldson were the first two modern out-bound experimenters.

Since the early research at the ASPR and SRI, the Out-Bound Experiment (nowadays titled “Outbounder” or “Beacon” remote viewing) has come into general usage, both in scientific experiments and informal settings. It has also become a popular demonstration at conferences and with groups to showcase the ability to perceive hidden or remote information through anomalous or psychic means. This experimental protocol has gained traction as a method to explore and potentially validate claims of extrasensory perception and remote viewing capabilities.

Participants and Roles

The outbounder experiment typically involves the following participants:
  1. Remote Viewer: The person who attempts to perceive and describe the target location.
  2. Interviewer or Monitor (optional): Assists the viewer during the session.
  3. Beacon Team: One or more people who physically visit the target location.

Target Selection & Procedure

Target selection and procedure for the outbounder experiment are carefully designed to ensure randomness and prevent any potential information leakage to the remote viewer. The process begins with the preparation of multiple potential targets, each distinct and accessible within a reasonable timeframe from the viewer’s location. These targets are typically diverse geographical features, structures, or locations with unique characteristics, such as bridges, libraries, amusement parks, or natural landmarks. The key is to select targets that are sufficiently different from one another to make the viewer’s descriptions easily distinguishable.

Once the targets are selected, the details of each location, including its name, precise location, and driving instructions, are sealed in separate, identical envelopes. This step is crucial in maintaining the blind nature of the experiment. The actual target selection occurs just before the experiment begins, usually through a random process such as shuffling the envelopes and using a die roll to determine which envelope is chosen. This randomization helps to eliminate any potential bias in target selection and ensures that no one, including the beacon team, knows the target in advance.

The procedure unfolds with all participants gathering near the room where the remote viewing session will take place. The viewer meets and shakes hands with the beacon team, establishing a personal connection that some believe may enhance the viewer’s ability to “tune in” to the team’s location later. Watches are synchronized, and a start time for the viewing is agreed upon. The beacon team then takes the randomly selected envelope without opening it and proceeds to their vehicle. Only when they are out of sight of the viewer and monitor do they open the envelope and follow the enclosed directions to the target location. Meanwhile, the viewer is secluded in the designated room, ready to begin the remote viewing session at the agreed-upon time, completely unaware of the chosen target or the beacon team’s whereabouts.

  1. Multiple potential targets are prepared in advance.
  2. Each target is a distinct physical location (e.g., playgrounds, public buildings, marinas, windmills, natural landmarks).
  3. Target information is sealed in separate envelopes.
  4. A random selection process is used to choose the target.
  5. The remote viewer is sequestered in a closed room, unaware of the target.
  6. The beacon team opens the selected envelope and travels to the target location.
  7. At a predetermined time, the viewer begins the remote viewing session, attempting to perceive and describe the location where the beacon team is present.
  8. The viewer records impressions through verbalization and sketches.

Target Feedback

In an outbounder experiment, feedback is a crucial component that allows the remote viewer to compare their perceptions with the actual target location. The feedback process typically occurs after the remote viewing session has been completed. Here’s how feedback is usually handled:
  1. Immediate Post-Session Feedback:
    After the remote viewing session ends and the beacon team returns, the viewer is often escorted to the actual target location. This allows the viewer to physically experience the site they attempted to describe during the session. This immediate, in-person feedback can be particularly impactful, as it allows the viewer to directly compare their impressions with the real-world location.
  2. Video Feedback Alternative:
    In cases where it’s impractical to take the viewer to the target location, an alternative method is used. The beacon team records a video of the target site while they are there during the experiment. This video is then played back to the viewer after the session, providing a visual and auditory representation of the location.

During the feedback phase, the viewer compares their written notes, sketches, and verbal descriptions with the actual target. This comparison helps identify which perceptions were accurate and which may have been off-target or misinterpreted. The feedback session serves as a learning opportunity for the viewer. It helps them understand how their mental impressions correlate with physical reality, potentially improving their ability to interpret future remote viewing experiences.

For more formal experiments, the feedback phase may also involve a structured analysis of the viewer’s results. This could include scoring systems to evaluate the accuracy of the viewer’s perceptions against predetermined target characteristics. In some protocols, especially in more rigorous scientific studies, feedback might be delayed to prevent any potential cueing or biasing of the viewer in subsequent trials.

The feedback process in outbounder experiments is designed to provide clear, objective information about the target, allowing the viewer to assess their performance and potentially refine their remote viewing skills for future sessions.

Purpose and Theory

The outbounder experiment is designed to help the remote viewer “home in” on the intended target site using their conscious awareness. The presence of the beacon team at the location is thought to assist the viewer in focusing their perceptions on the correct target.

Experimental Variations

Some researchers have explored variations of the outbounder experiment, including temporal outbounder protocols. These variations aim to enhance the accuracy of remote viewing descriptions, particularly for future events.

Back to Glossary Index Page