Can I judge my own sessions rather than having to find someone else to do it for me?

Yes. My original protocol called exclusively for a third party judge to review both potential targets and then make a selection and assign a score, but recent research to verify if this is necessary has indicated that it is actually preferable to have the remote viewer judge his/her own sessions - that is, as long as the remote viewer is NOT aware of the associations attached to each potential target.

Initially, I thought that it would be impossible for a remote viewer to perceive elements of the 'wrong' target if he/she never ever saw that target, but found that there were times when (according to my third party judge), I described the 'wrong' target VERY accurately - so accurately, in fact, that the session was given a score of 3 or higher. The 'wrong' target is the target in a pool of two potential targets that is NOT shown to the remote viewer at the feedback time because it was associated with an outcome that did NOT happen. As a matter of the old protocol, after the future event transpired, the remote viewer was shown only the target associated with the outcome of the event, and we discarded the 'wrong' target- the remote viewer never, ever saw the 'wrong' target. Because I have scored highly with targets that I have never seen ('wrong' targets), it has lead me to believe that perhaps being blind to the both potential targets before the future event doesn't eliminate the chance of remote viewing the wrong target.

In fact, that is true. I thoroughly tested self judging and found that the average success went up slightly. This is because the remote viewer is better able to judge his/her own sessions than a third party judge. The remote viewer sometimes is unable to completely describe his/her own perceptions about the target on paper making it more difficult for a third party judge to choose the correct target. If the remote viewer is judging, then there may be something subtle in a target that the remote viewer recognizes or remembers sensing in some way when remote viewing.

Don't get 'self-judging' confused with front loading, or getting some information about the targets before remote viewing. The remote viewer must still be BLIND to the contents of either target before remote viewing. The two potential targets must still be chosen randomly from a large pool, and kept hidden from ALL involved until the remote viewing is completed and the judging process has begun.

It is still important to NOT be aware of the target associations (the potential answers to the question about the future) until ALL target sets have been judged, a final target has been chosen in every case, and scores assigned. Not until then should the remote viewer 'look' at the associations that were assigned to the targets that he/she picked in order to evaluate the consensus and arrive at a final prediction. The reason for this is that if the remote viewer (or judge) became aware of the associations as the targets were being judged, then he/she might be influenced to choose one target over the other simply because they started to see a trend in previous judgings, or they might tend to pick the target associated with the outcome that they 'prefer' rather than seeking the truth.

Typically, when I am judging, I will indicate my choice by recording a "R" (right) or "L" (left) and the corresponding score. The "R" or "L" stands for where the target is on my target page - I use an html document that has both targets on one page. When I have finished judging ALL the sessions in the series, then I will go back and look at the associations that were connected with each chosen target (L or R) and record that.

Course Home