DRAFT

Abstract

This is a Best Practice providing a methodology for  evaluating technology and examples of EVP to help distinguish between mundane sounds and EVP.

Justification/Introduction

The study of trans-etheric phenomena is a frontier science and numerous different technologies are being tried in an effort to determine what works and what works best. A methodology for standardizing results may provide an empirical base for evaluating those technologies. For instance, it is possible to evaluate the effectiveness of an EVP recording protocol if each session is of the same length and the quantity and quality of resulting EVP is documented for each session and then compared as an average to the new session.

The first question for any example of phenomena is whether or not it is evidential. The following series of questions will help establish the likelihood that the example is evidential.

Three primary forms of EVP are currently recognized:

1. Transform or "ordinary" EVP: The formation of a phenomenal voice by transforming available audio frequency energy in the recording process.

2. Opportunistic EVP: The formation of a news sound stream by selecting available sound fragments formed either from a "raw" sound file that has been "chopped" into short fragments (EVPmaker), formed by rapidly sweeping a radio dial (radio sweep).

3. Environmentally stimulated EVP: This generally employs speech synthesis selected by detecting changes in the energy environment of the device (Paranormal Puck).

In addition, there are three primary forms of energy for voice formation:

1. Random noise: That produced by a common fan (generically known as "white noise"). This is the bases of "ordinary" EVP.

2. Live voice: From a recorded speech (EVPmaker), radio signals (radio sweep), crowd babble (replacement for audio-frequency noise in ordinary EVP.

3. Speech synthesis: Either the control of a speech synthesis circuit or program (Paranormal Puck) or pre-recorded phonemes or allophones (EVPMaker).

Human factors include:

1. Understanding EVP is a learned ability: The [[EVP online listening trials]] showed that the average website visitor was able to correctly hear 25.2% of the words used in three blind trials. The indications are that even the best example may not be understood as intelligent communication by an untrained listener and it is apparently possible to train oneself to better understand EVP.

2. Sound of EVP sometimes unique to practitioner: An experienced practitioner sometimes has difficulty correctly understanding examples recorded by others. This is probably due to different brands of recorder, different technologies and different sound sources.

3. Witness often hears what is expected: It is usual for an example to be paid for others after explaining what it is thought to say. If an example has enough pulses of sound resembling syllables which occur at a voice-like pace, then it is common for the listener to "fit" meaning to what would not be understood without prompting.

4. Selective reporting: This is usually found in the form of "story telling" in which the practitioner will describe a result based on recorded sounds that come close to what was expected and ignoring others. A second form of this is recording until a likely response is recorded, and ignoring the intervening sounds.

5. Listener's desire to please: In one example, an example was published on a discussion board with a description of what was said in the example, eight people more or less acknowledged hearing the same, yet a blind online listening test produced a word recognition of %Rw = 0 for three of the five examples and an overall 7.5 %Rw. Based on prior trials using transform EVP, we expect 25%. In this trial, the overall average would be zero if it was not that the term "is it" had been clearly recorded from live speech, producing a recognizable mundane phrase that has been reported as phenomenal using story telling.

Recommended procedure, Considerations and Requirements

A decision tree is used in this practice. The test is to be applied to an example and the results are intended to provide information about the effectiveness of the technique used to record the example.

• The recording should be able to be heard and correctly understood without prompting. Based on prior listening test, the current average percent word recognition for website visitors is 25.2 %Rw. At a minimum, a reasonable number of people (5?) should be able to report hearing at least 25% of the words as reported by the practitioner.

• If the results are less than 25%, then the technology or technique should be considered inferior for that particular example or session. Although not an established number, it is expected (as a draft) that a %Rw of less than 10% should indicate that the technology or technique should be discarded.