The Proper Place for the Use of
Psychometry in Field Investigations
PSYCHOMETRY:

“By definition, the ability or art of divining information about people or events associated with an object solely by touching or being near to it.”
                                                            

 Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary of the English Language – 2004
 

    The study of the paranormal sometimes brings the researcher into the realm of suspended disbelief, by that I am suggesting that we sometimes use tools that would not normally be considered anything less than fictitious. Paranormal investigators use common tools in an attempt to document abnormal situations, the use of a thermometer to prove the existence of a “cold spot” or other instrumentation to document the flux of energy in a given space. We routinely use photography, video cameras and tape recorders in an attempt to capture an otherworldly manifestation. But these are all proven tools with baseline testing to prove they are operating normally. It is quite another thing when the field investigator turns to divination to uncover the truth, but that is exactly what psychometry is and what we sometimes utilize in the most puzzling of cases.

    Psychometry is a tool that should not be used too often, simply because it is not by any stretch of the imagination empiric. Nevertheless it can be utilized to uncover information that could ultimately lead to concrete evidence not otherwise available.  Like a criminal investigation, the use of psychometry has no standing in a court, but can help the investigator to find what he is looking for.

    The ASUP has used psychics for this purpose sparingly, simply because of the limitations already mentioned and with mixed results. Those results however have yielded a “hit rate” far above the norm, which suggests that the use of such data is to be encouraged, with one overriding guideline and that is that the psychic being used has a reasonable track record beforehand.   

    That guideline is however perplexing; the quintessential question of the “chicken or the egg.”  To use the psychic you must have a reasonable expectation of his or her performance, but how does one find that psychic to begin with?  The answer is that we sometimes have to throw out the guidelines and utilize unproven subjects in cases where the outcome, positive or negative, has no lasting consequences. To be more precise, create your cadre of psychics from cases involving subjects that will not be harmed if the psychic is totally wrong.  Simply put, don’t use an untested psychic on a lost child case; limit those “tests” to cases of known outcome or where the subject is in no present harm.

    We mention “known outcome” for an obvious reason. To set the psychic at work on a case that does not have a predictable outcome will yield nothing to determine the validity of the psychic’s “read.”  A good test, for example is to use an old case that has already been “solved” to your satisfaction. For example, a search for a “missing” automobile. Utilizing psychometry, the introduction of a piece of the car or a photo of the car can lead the psychic to tell you what they perceive.  If they give you good indicators, the history of the case, the
location of the vehicle, etc. You have a hit that is proven. When testing a psychic, never given them a case to which you have no answer; there is no way to evaluate the data.

     There are exceptions to even that rule. Cases that have not been solved, but are otherwise at a dead-end, may gain new life when you give the psychometrist a chance to see and feel clues in the case. What are referred to as “dead cases,” for example, can be enhanced through psychometry.      A word of warning is necessary here; while it is tempting to tell the media of this tool in your arsenal, you will probably find yourself the subject of lost faith by doing so.  The public wants results, but they will ridicule those who use the tools at hand. Once you interject the term psychic, you have opened the floodgates.    Likewise, it is important to utilize good testing guidelines. Blind testing has proven to work as well as
physical manipulation, that is to say, a photo in a sealed envelope can be as easily “read” as the photo itself. Try not to give the psychic anything that will lead them to an answer, a bloody piece of cloth for example.  Attempt to keep a barrier in place.  When using a sample in an envelope, ask the psychic to write his findings on that envelope. That might help you later. Do not give any background on a case if you intend to ever use the psychic’s findings in public. Don’t tell the psychic what the case is about, no details should be offered.    Finally, it has been suggested that a really talented psychic may be reading the mind of the tester, not the
contents of the envelope, so in really sensitive cases, it might be advisable for a third party to be enlisted, who knows absolutely nothing about the case of the testing, to actually hand the material to the psychic. In the same category, it might be suggested that the envelopes be prepared by someone who has no knowledge of the case, for the same reason.

    The use of psychics and psychometry is a natural fit for the paranormal investigator for obvious reasons, but care must me taken not to over react to their findings in either director.  “Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water,” simply because some of your findings have come from a psychic, but be sure to guard against wholesale acceptance of that psychic’s findings, as well.    Keeping an open mind while weighing the real value of psychometry is the key to its usefulness in the field. Keep the psychic separated from field investigators while a case is in progress, just as you would sequester your researchers from the investigators during the preliminary phase of any case study. And do not hesitate to give the psychic reasonable feedback when a case is completed, so he or she can re-evaluate their
findings and better hone their skills.    A psychic’s “read” can routinely be frustratingly vague for the coordinator, which is to be expected. Sometimes, once in a great while, we will come across a psychic who is right on and very specific; if you find someone like that, hold on to them.  But do not assume that when a psychic seems vague, that he or she is not doing a legitimate job. Unfortunately, many times, what the psychic tells us is very accurate once the case is solved, but otherwise useless.  To tell you that a missing person is buried in a green tarp, near running water and there is a tall structure nearby might be totally accurate, but useless when seeking the exact location. It is my belief that if you work with a talented psychic, the information you get will become more and more accurate, to the point where it will become as good as a road map. The key is in gaining their trust, knowing they will not be subjected to ridicule and that they will be recognized as a part of the team.  Unfortunately, there are those who truly believe that they have psychic ability, but fail to be able to demonstrate it.  It is the belief of many that everyone is capable of being psychic to some degree that is probably true, just as virtually everyone is capable of writing, but few possess the gifts of a Mark Twain or Ernest Hemingway.

    As you can see, the use of psychometry can be challenging, but in the cases where it has worked, it has been a blessing.  I would respectfully suggest that the use of the psychic has its place in our field, but just like any other tool, it should be used only when appropriate!

©2006 – ASUP (All Rights Reserved)