Peripheral Perception via Subliminal Stimuli
Written, compiled and edited by E. Taylor, R. Sadana and R. Bey
Progressive Awareness Research
Progressive Awareness Research
P.O. Box 13249
Spokane, WA 99213
Table of Contents
The Controversy (iv)
Understanding Subliminal (vi)
Subconscious Mind Power (viii)
Models of Subliminal Perception (xiv)
The Legal Status
of Subliminal Communication in America (xvi)
Remarks for the Revised Edition
To those whose work fill these pages, the authors extend their deepest
gratitude for both the research and the courage necessary to venture off
the beaten path and into the fringes, as all pioneers must do.
Special acknowledgement is also due the following individuals for their
efforts in dialogue, review, ideas, support and encouragement:
Professor Wm. Guillory
Dr. Don Morgan
Dr. Jim Seidel
Dr. Charles McCusker
Mr. Steve Fisher
Mr. Lee Liston and the Ut. State Prison Staff
and lastly, but certainly not in order of importance, we wish to acknowledge
you the reader, who this reference was assembled for.
Thank you !
The material in this reference has been organized alphabetically and
chronologically. The field of subliminal science is so rapidly expanding
that we, as compilers and editors, were literally reviewing, writing and
editing the contents of this work right up to the day before it left for
The information was verified by use of the Dialog Information Service.
Our desire was, and is, to create a reference work. We were mixed about
its form only because of our feelings that it should be expandable. Finally
the decision to bind blank pages for your notes opposite each print page
was settled upon. This way comments and new studies could be made and
updated while not disturbing either the organization or the quality of
It is our sincerest hope that you find this format both convenient and
On numerous occasions Progressive Awareness Research
has been asked to provide some sort of review of the literature regarding
perception without awareness or what popularly is known as subliminal
communication. Since this is a field of our expertise we have repeatedly
been called upon to explain the process in terms that anyone could understand.
What follows is a simple explanation developed by our president, Eldon
Taylor and a review of the literature with brief comments relevant to
the various findings produced in the different studies.
Our own research is ongoing with studies underway at the time of this
writing at, or in conjunction with, Colorado State University, Weber State
College and the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh. Planned studies for
the future include incorporating "negative" messages in an audio
subliminal tape to determine if alleged messages in heavy metal recordings
do indeed adversely effect the listener.
It is the opinion of Progressive Awareness Research
that there is no reasonable doubt remaining regarding the presence of
perception without awareness. What remains to be thoroughly researched
is the behavioral effects for both short- and long-term periods. In Eldon
Taylor's words, "What is really now at question is the power of language.
If language indeed creates inappropriate responses that we term maladaptive
then it stands to reason that language has the possibility to reverse
this process. In other words, if one has been raised to believe that they
are no good, due largely in part to words that were so stated, then is
it possible to alter this belief by addressing the subconscious with positive
words? I believe so."
We at Progressive Awareness Research hope that what
follows provides insights to those who desire to contribute to the quality
of the human experience. We encourage all to share their findings in an
effort to sophisticate each other's understanding of the human condition.
We are proud and happy to be able to share our findings as well as a review
of the work of many dedicated researchers.
Although this literature review has been checked and re-checked for errors,
the nature of the work is such that some errors may still remain. If you
come across any errors or omissions, we would be very grateful if you
would inform us.
Research in the fields of hypnosis and subliminal stimuli has demonstrated
the effectiveness of words delivered while in trance to produce a great
number of effects, both physiological and psychological. Still, a number
of research findings further suggest that a great controversy regarding
the results of certain audio subliminal tape studies divided the academic
field of psychologists on the general efficacy of any subliminally presented
message when delivered in an audio modality. A thorough review of this
controversy yielded great differences in technical methods used to produce
Unlike visual subliminal technology, which is normally
either accomplished via slide insertion, Tachistoscope or candle power
ratios, audio subliminal programs are produced by commercial
companies who use as many different methods to create a tape as there
are companies. Researchers in the field seem to have all to often overlooked
the basics of chemistry when attempting to replicate others findings and\or
to produce new results from expanded hypotheses. Often, therefore, the
psychological researcher has forgotten that science requires exacting
methods including the basics of technical creation, like the temperature
a gas is heated to, in order to verify another's findings. One such study
was conducted (this year) by a doctoral student in the Philosophy of Psychology
at the California School of Professional Psychology. She employed a tape
produced by a commercial company to measure the effect of subliminal auditory
stimuli on academic learning and motor skills performance among police
cadets. Her findings indicate that "neither music nor music with
subliminal messages improved" either learning or
motor skills. (Lenz, 1989).
Careful examination of her documentation however indicates that the tape
producer created the audio subliminal at 40 to 50 decibels beneath the
music. (Ibid). When the psychologist is ignorant of electronics this is
perhaps an understandable error since most players utilized to play subliminal
messages have a dynamic range of less than 50 db. Nevertheless,
a clear theoretical limit of perception thresholds does exist in the literature
and as such should have been reviewed. Despite these comments many research
projects have been conducted without an eye to the technical and theoretical
aspects of magnetic media and audiology. Research designed without an
awareness of the technical aspects offer protocol that produces statistics,
all of which says absolutely nothing about subliminal stimuli; rather
they speak to technical inadequacies.
A yet unannounced 3 part study by Anthony Greenwald et al, employed tapes
from four commercial companies. The results indicate that no statistical
difference exists between the placebo groups and the test groups. However,
when asked, Greenwald admits that he knows nothing of the technical design
of these tapes and cannot release the names of the manufacturers. In essence,
therefore, the results speak only of the four companies, their methods,
etc., and not audio subliminal stimuli.
In my various books I often discuss technical inadequacies that are passed
off as "silent voices" or audio subliminal stimuli. The bottom
line is simple: NO voice is not subliminal. You cannot create an audio
subliminal stimuli by lowering the speech into or beneath the sound floor
of magnetic media.
Subliminal - >