Citation

On each of 60 trials, 5 participants (Ps), selected based on high state  and trait dissociation scores in a previous motor automatism experiment,  explored with a computer pen a 16x16 inch grid affixed to a computer  writing tablet, stopping to register a response to a randomly selected  target square. The grid is conceptually divided into 16 squares (4 in  each of 4 quadrants). The dependent variable was the average of 2  z-scores representing square and quadrant hits. Ps attended 2 1-run  baseline sessions and 2 1-run test sessions. In between, they completed  15–20 1-run training sessions with subliminal auditory feedback. The  feedback stimulus was the spoken word(s) “good” (quadrant hit) or “good  good” (square hit) superimposed on brownian (similar to pink) noise. 1  of the 5 Ps significantly confirmed the hypothesis of higher scoring on  test than baseline runs. There was significant or suggestive evidence of  anomalous cognition in the baseline and/or test results of 4 Ps and the  5 difference scores showed significant between-subjects variability.  There was no evidence of learning in the training sessions. According to  the underlying theory, conditions for learning were not met because Ps  did not successfully blank the mind and were overly attentive to the  feedback sounds.