Testing the notion that a "foot shiner" could have been used during the Delmore experiment

George Hansen (1992) has recently suggested that the conditions used to explore the apparent ESP abilities of Bill Delmore may not have prevented subject fraud. In one part of his article, Hansen noted that Delmore might have been able to see the identity of some targets (playing cards) by catching a glimpse of their faces in a reflective surface. Hansen suggested that such a surface might have occurred naturally (e.g., windows or door knobs) or have been brought into the room by Delmore. During a recent trip to the United States, I met with Hansen. While discussing the Delmore case, it occurred to me that the test conditions might not have prevented Delmore from using a "shiner"(1) attached to his foot. This method occurred to me since H. Kanthamani (1992) had recalled that, during testing, Delmore was located on the opposite side of the experimenter's desk. She noted that

the desk had a solid wooden back extending almost to the floor (except for a gap of 6 in. from the bottom, which corresponded to the height of the legs of the desk). (pp. 350-351)

and that

because the solid back of the desk was facing the subject, B.D. usually sat facing the west wall with his long legs stretched parallel to the table. (p. 351)

It seemed possible that these conditions might have allowed Delmore to place a small mirror on the end of his foot and carefully angle it under the 6-inch gap such that he could gain a reflection of the target material. A few days later I was scheduled to visit the Institute for Parapsychology, and I thought that this might be an ideal opportunity to test the plausibility of this hypothesis.

First, I met with Kanthamani and Ed Kelly. I suggested that I would like to test the "foot-shiner" hypothesis. It was understood that I was interested in two aspects of the testing: (1) to see whether a shiner attached to the foot would reflect any target information and, failing this, (2) to learn the degree to which the experimental procedure needed to be violated to obtain such a reflection. After a short discussion, Kanthamani and Kelly agreed to the proposed testing and suggested that I publish the findings.

I purchased two highly reflective concave mirrors (2 and 4 inches in diameter). These sizes seemed most appropriate, since a mirror smaller than 2 inches in diameter would not be of much use, whereas one larger than 4 inches would likely have been detected by the experimenters. It seemed possible that either of the mirrors could have been smuggled into the testing area. The smaller one could easily be concealed in the hand. The larger one could have been hidden up the leg of a trouser. Both could conceivably also have been secretly attached to the subject's foot as he reached to the floor in order to, for example, tie up a shoelace or retrieve an object that he had "accidentally" dropped.

Testing was carried out on the afternoon of July 25, 1994. Present during testing were Kanthamani, John Palmer, and myself. Unfortunately, Kelly was unable to attend because of previous commitments.

It was important to accurately reconstruct relevant physical aspects of the original test environment. The room in which the Delmore testing took place is currently used as Palmer's office. Reconstructing all of the Delmore test conditions would have required shifting a considerable amount of furniture and, given that we were only testing the "foot-shiner" hypothesis, seemed unnecessary. As such, we decided that testing should be carried out in a vacant room of similar size. Kanthamani arranged for a desk, identical to the one used in the Delmore tests, to be placed in this room. Kanthamani also obtained 10 decks of playing cards, shuffled them together, and placed them in the "target drawer." Kanthamani and I constructed several card folders identical to those used in the original testing.

Kanthamani sat in the experimenter's chair. I played the role of Delmore and sat on the opposite side of the desk. I attached the small (and later the large) mirror to the outside of my right shoe (using double-sided tape) and stretched my legs out toward the table. It seemed possible that the experimenter might not have detected a mirror placed at this location (especially as he or she would not have been looking out for it). I then experimented with numerous positions of my right foot, until I could see a reflection of the outside of the target drawer. This experimentation resulted in considerable bending and turning movements (in order to capture a reflection in the mirror) that Kanthamani believed the experimenter would have thought odd. It seems possible, however, that Delmore may have been more skilled in the use of such a device and therefore may not have needed to engage in quite such noticeable behavior.

Kanthamani then duplicated the procedure apparently used during each trial. She held the folder in her left hand and then randomly chose a card with her right hand and placed it inside the folder. This occurred inside the open drawer, and the card was not turned face up at any time. Under these conditions, it was not possible to gain even a glimpse of the target card in either the small or the large mirror.

Next, I decided to estimate to what degree this protocol would have had to be violated in order to obtain a reflection of the card in the mirror. I asked Kanthamani to tilt the target card toward the mirror and slowly bring it vertically up out of the drawer. The bottom of the card had to be approximately 4.5 inches above the top of the drawer side and tilted toward the subject's foot before it was possible to glimpse it in the mirror. When the large mirror was used, the faces of the cards held at this height and angle could be accurately identified. Use of the small mirror resulted in less accurate responses.

In short, if this reconstruction of the test conditions and protocol was accurate, it seems highly unlikely that Delmore could have cheated by positioning a mirror on the end of his foot. Such a method seems possible only if the target playing cards were lifted several inches above the drawer and angled toward the mirror before being placed inside the opaque black folders.

1 A "shiner" is a small convex mirror that allows magicians (and crooked gamblers) to quickly glimpse a surface that would normally be inaccessible (e.g., playing cards as they are dealt face down across a table.

REFERENCES

Hansen, G. (1992). Criticisms of the research with Bill Delmore. Journal of Parapsychology, 56, 307-333.

Kanthamani, H. (1992). A response to George Hansen's critique: Some supplementary notes on the research with B. D. Journal of Parapsychology, 56, 345-361.

University of Hertfordshire Hatfield Campus College Lane Hatfield, Herts AL10 9AB England

COPYRIGHT 1995 Parapsychology Press
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group