Freie Scientologen
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Groß, Schweiz
FS Bulletin vom 21. September 2000R
(was originally a posting in alt.clearing.technology, issued as FSB on 13. Dec 2014)
Remimeo
OCA-TEST-FAKE
I made a study on available material on the Oxford Capacity Analysis Test and would like to
share my insights with you:
PURPOSES:
There are two versions of the test, which is used by Scientology for three different purposes
(regging, recruitment and C/Sing):
HISTORY
First an US-version called American Personality Analysis (APA) and created and originally copywrited by Julia Lewis in 1955.
Second a British version based on APA, called Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA) and created and
copyrighted by Ray Kemp in 1959, who recently wrote an article on this in IVy 22.
The APA copyright was bought in 1990 by CoS-Member Tom Voltz and offered to the Church,
that they may use it free for their religious practices. Tom just wanted to use the copyright for
business purposes. WISE was offended by this and the church was willing to SP declare Tom
due to this conflict "he created". This story was told in Tom Voltz' book "Tom Voltz- Scientology - Without an End", he is now a critic of Scientology.
Ray Kemp recognized, that the Church squirreld his test in the 70ies and he tried to handle this
by writing to LRH and got a reply, that he should write a book and consolide the data on the
OCA. He and his junior Tom Morgon did so: "Scientometric Testing". But this book was defeated by the orgs and so he found out, that LRH was not any more in control of his church and
left this corrupt organization. (See at http://www.Deja.com for the posting of Safe www.fza.org
<Safe@xenu.net> on 1st Aug. 1999 to alt.religion.scientology with the title: "How the CofS
stole the OCA test" or Ivy 22, I quote the whole article at the end of this FSB)
SQUIRREL
As I have only access to the testing material of the church from the 80ies and the seminar data
from Tom Morgan (he still works for the church, as far as I know), I can not speak for the
currently used test nor can I compare it to the original version.
The current version of the 90ies consists of 200 questions, which are a bit similar but not identical to the version of the 80ies. About 10 % of the questions are formulated in the opposite of
the "original", which I think is a big alter-is. Of course they will switched the values from NO to
YES and vice versa, but this is not correct, as the questions alway relate to a gradient scale and
not to a two-value-logic!
FSB 21. Sept. 2000 OCA-TEST-FAKE
Seite 2 von 6
I will give some examples of this alter-is (I retranslated these quotes from the german 1988 version back to english):
OCA 1988
Does life seem to you worth living?
OCA 1999
Is your life a constant struggle for survival?
Are you always happy, even without any rea- Are you rarely happy unless you have a special
son?
reason?
Is it difficult to please you?
Are you easily pleased?
Do you find it easy to express your feelings?
Do you tent to hide your feelings?
Some questions arose in 1999, which you can not at all find in the 1988-version. This alter-is is
due to the fact, that the CoS was not willing to find an agreement with the APA-copyright-holder Tom Voltz.
They prefered to start a conflict with him, than to correct their former criminal Copyright violations! (Although the former copyright owner and test author Julia Lewis asked for royalties, the
church never paid any).
I assume, that at least this newest computer based version of the CoS-TEST (in the 90ies) has
nothing any more to do with the original APA or OCA due to the alter is. As it is computer based, we will rarely be able to check it out, as we can't access the value-table, on which the test is
based. But as the questions are altered in such a extreme way, I don't see a chance for a valid
test. Yes, it may still solve the former purpose of INVALIDATING the case of new customers
enough, so that one can sell any intro services. But whether the test gives today a CORRECT
indication of the case of the PC is very questionable. So: I would not use the current test for any
C/Sing any more.
What about the test of the 80ies?
As I can not compare it to the original version, which I do not have (HAS ANYONE PLEASE
HAVE A COPY OF ANY OLDER TEST MATERIALS FOR ME - PLEASE!!!) , I can just tell
you something about the obviously criminal alter-is which can be seen, by analysis from a technical viewpoint.
WHAT IT IS NOT
But before this, I would like to tell you, that the outpoint of the test is NOT that, what the critics of the tests told you about it.
For example there was a british investigation in 1971 on the OCA and the psychologists found
out, that it is nothing worth: Because it is not known to them, not sold and offered on the official Psychometric lines and not created by one of their acclaimed institutes.
Further they critizise, that the test does not give a Zero-Graph, if one answers the questions in
random, as it should!!! They tried one very valid test on the OCA: They answered every question "correctly", but put the answer to the following question. At least this should end up with a
graph line on the ZERO level of the test. What a bullshit.
Also they critizes, that the test is not NORMALIZED. That means, that the medium aberree
should show a graph on a ZERO level. - So the OCA is not valid in their eyes.
FSB 21. Sept. 2000 OCA-TEST-FAKE
Seite 3 von 6
But actually this is no outpoint, as the OCA/APA did not had the purpose to tell you, whether
someone is under or over the "normal" or statistically level of the medium aberree. Its purpose
was to tell, how much of the potential of the aberree can be won with auditing. So
really the usual aberree (raw meat from the street) will usually show a very bad and low graph.
But you should not invalidate him with this, but you should tell him, that this shows all the potential of him (above his line), which can be recovered with auditing!
So far to the critics.
BACK TO THE 80ies
Actually the CoS-test of the 80ies has been tampered with. If you are clear and in a jolly good
state and you answer the test, you will get a graph, which will be up north in the area between
70 and 100! With one exception: You will not be able to come to a good position with your column H: Logical Reasoning (Appreciation) / Capacity for Error (Hypercritical). There your clear
will show usually a very low value!!!
Why is this? I investigated which questions should he answer better to solve this problem ;-)
I found the following questions, which your Clear answered "WRONG":
•
YES to 38 (new 37): Do you consider there are other people who are definitely unfriendly toward you and work against you?
•
NO to138 (new 152). Do you rarely express your grievances?
•
YES to 158 (no similar in the new test): Do you consider, that someone does not like
you and criticize you in your absent?
•
YES to 198. (no similar in the new test): Are you often dismayed by the actions of
others and are not able to grasp their double-dealing?
With these and other answers you get a horrible -38 % on the H column and result as very critical!
If you change your mind and switch the above answers, you will jump up to +78 % and qualify
as a Pre-OT or for any exec post!!!
So don't think, that there may be any enemies in any one of your dynamic. Don't believe in SPs,
in 3rd Party, 1.1er or at least never write any KRs on these people and you will have a chance!!!
With this fake of the OCA, they gave every one of us a false indication: you are critical!!! - Now
you understand, why some tech terminals, C/Ses are agreeing with all these sec checks and 6
months checks: All their PCs and Prae OTs must be very out-ethical, have a look at these horrible OCA-graphs, especially column H!
And this fake has another advantage: You keep good guys away from important exec posts. Because for finding an exec, one has to look at the tests of the staffs. You will either just take very
naive guys (who never studied anything on the PTS SP course) or you will take the guys, who
know about this test and are willing to behave, as it is expected from you!
I always wondered, why in the CoS some of the very intelligent and without doubt good-guy
execs or high tech terminals had one stable datum: There are no enemies within our church,
especially not on their senior lines! There is no evil purpose behind all the dev-t, the downstats
etc. This I could not understand, why such intelligent and well trained execs and friends of mine
could talk such a bullshit. Why do they ignore the obvious and all the related LRH-data. Every
second HCO PL on SPs (per the index of the 1991-OEC-Volumes) is about SPs on org lines, on
exec lines.
FSB 21. Sept. 2000 OCA-TEST-FAKE
Seite 4 von 6
This is the solution on this found out-point: They once pondered about, why they did not got
their OCA up. So - once they had the chance to read and evaluate the evaluation data on testing,
they did to find out, which questions did they answer "wrong". When they found
out, they had to decide: Keep your integrity and stay at the bottom of the orgboard or make a
career by answering like it was expected from them and to ignore the contradicting data on SPs
and suppression.
By faking this test, it was also possible to put a lot of "black-scientologists" on to important
exec posts, as they can be briefed, how to answer the OCA correctly. Instead of keeping your
integrity, one just has to adjust to the power and always agree to your seniors.
But let us come back to your public Scientologist, whether clear or not. He ALWAYS gets this
indication of being to critical! - So when he runs into any injustice or any outpoint, he has to remember: This is YOUR CASE, that you recognize this "outpoint". YOU ARE CRITICAL, there is nothing to be changed in this Org.
So this OCA-fake is very valuable for the status quo.
THAT is the reason, why the church rather let the test-author Ray Kemp become ARC-broken
and even leaving the church, as to stop this valuable fake.
Behind a small outpoint (some alter-is in some test material) you will find a big reason and nearly unconfrontable WHY: This church was in progress to be taken over by the enemy. This fake
was just one projekt, which served as a tool.
SHOCKED
Andreas Gross
Free Scientologists
Copyright © 2000, 2014 by
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross
All rights reserved.
FSB 21. Sept. 2000 OCA-TEST-FAKE
Seite 5 von 6
Documentation:
How the CofS stole the OCA test
From Kemp's Column 1995 in IVy 22 by Ray Kemp, USA
Putting it to the test
POSSIBLY ONE of the least understood pieces of technology that has been within the framework of scientology,
as well as many earlier studies of humanity, has been the creation of and the use of tests, so as to measure results.
In the field of psychology in general, among the most commonly used tests circa 1950, were the Minnesota Mul tiphasic, and the Johnson Temperament Analysis, the Stamford Binet and the Kleige, etc., plus a whole battery of
IQ tests stemming mainly from studies in and just after WW1 (1918). As far as I am aware, it was Adler who
first started trying to measure the personality, based on his theory of "The Will to Power", meaning the effort of
the person to attune itself to the winning or "powerful" archetype.
History in scientology
When L. Ron Hubbard wanted to measure the results of Dianetics he used these tests, and a chapter on this acti vity is to be found in his earlier works. These tests were time consuming and bulky, and were somewhat off target
to be able to actually define what he wanted to define. The Johnson Temperament Analysis was closest.
Julia Lewis, who had been trained in Psychometry (testing) reworked a test based on the JTA, I believe at Hubbard's request, and developed the American Personality Analysis, which was then used as a stable datum for dia netic results.
At that time I had been working on a subject called Human Engineering and had studied Adler, while in the Royal Navy and on a tour of duty, experimenting with what you now know as the angled carrier deck, and the mirror
deck landing lights, among other things, and involving also studying such matters as attention span, communi cation/reaction time and so forth.
Discussing this with Ron, along with Herbie and Jack Parkhouse at our home one evening, Ron brought up the
matter of the APA, stating that the test results did not seem to fit the observed results on students and pcs in Lon don. I pointed out that a personality test is only as valid as the testee's personality meets the original stand ente red into the test set up. Put very simply, an American personality is not the same as a British, German, French, or
any other cultural group's personality.
Ron asked me whether it would be possible to write a test that was more general in nature, and would enable him
to see in the test what he was looking for. He also wanted it to be in the same general format as the APA and if
possible to have both tests interchangeable in the matter of what he wanted to see as information. Quite a task.
As a result of quite a few months works, I eventually devised the Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA). Note that it
did not test personality, but rather the capacity of any person with respect to various traits and syndromes.
Syndrome
Definition of syndrome: any combination of two or more traits which, when taken as a whole, have meaning.
Example: A person with no action level but very depressed is not likely to commit suicide, but a very depressed
person who also shows a high action level and a high tendency to spur of the moment activity is much more a
suicide risk.
The OCA was copyrighted in my name by Ron and was by agreement released to the HASI [Hubbard Association
of Scientologists International] and HCO [Hubbard Communications Office], (Ron's organizations), for use.
The first article on testing, written by me, and the first bulletins also written by me, appeared in the British ma gazine 'Certainty.' The original printing of the booklets also had my name on them but subsequent issues had
"HCO Staff" as the author and, much later, had L. Ron Hubbard listed as the author.
One of he most important aspects of devising such a test or inventory is to not allow the testee to predict what it
is one is looking for, and to put in check questions that show this up. Another factor is the weighting of certain
questions differently from others.
FSB 21. Sept. 2000 OCA-TEST-FAKE
Seite 6 von 6
It must be understood that, just as the APA is not merely a rework of the JTA, the OCA was not a rewrite of the
APA. They are comparable, but not the same.
This simple fact, not understood by the testing department of many of LRH's organizations has caused much
grief and confusion, with untrained personnel administering the test and using APA scoring sheets for OCA
questions and vice versa.
Another idiocy that crept in was under the guise of 'economy', when people ran out of test materials, they simply
took the last sheet of whatever they had and xeroxed a new set. The trouble with that is that after five generations
of xeroxing, the answer sheets no longer fit the platens, and are just about one question off line.
The point is that testing is a very accurate, technical action and playing fast and loose with the documentation
does not work.
Present time
Another aspect not fully understood is that the resultant graph is NOT a graph of that person's personality; it is a
picture of what the testee considers is the way others view him, and to which he agrees.
Anyway, in 1959, when we started to reach in the area of make 'Clears', Ron and I discussed again the whole
matter of testing. "How do you test a Clear?" Ron asked. My immediate answer was "When he goes clear we tatto a 'C' on his forhead -- when he makes OT he unmosks it." However, we never put that into practice.
What I did was to rework the test into the 1959 edition, which does have questions that a clear would answer differently, and I devised a scoring system suggested to me by Philip Phillips, based upon reciprocal math so that
the highest score became a zero. This reduced the strain on marking, and mostly, eliminated addition errors.
Since I was in USA by this time, my copyright was file at the US Copyright Office as an update of the earlier edi tion.
In 1970 I went on a tour of various countries' orgs, examining their testing department, and was horrified at the
scene. Tests had been wrongly translated, questions had been changed "Because some questions contradict
others", or "We changed that because it made people think about the answer", and I reported this to Ron when I
got to Flag.
He was very upset and asked me to write the definitive book on testing, which I did, with editing help from Tom
Morgan, my then Organizing Officer. This book, "Scientometric Testing", went out to many Franchise organiza tions, but caused havoc in the Church Organizations who protested and as a resul succeeding in getting Issue Au thority banning the book.
Realize that by this time Ron had lost control of his whole organization anyway, and was being fed just what in formation the new management wanted him to have.
Situation now
Since I became no longer connect to the Church, which I consider to be spritually bankrupt, I have seen such a
mess of changes in what they now call the "Standard OCA Test" and another version that a front group were sel ling to industry under the name, I believe, Ullman, that I can tell you withou hesitation that I wouldn't trust any
current test from that source.
A few monts ago I received a phone call from a London newspaper, asking me about the OCA, which the
newspaper said was being used "all over London" as a gimmick to persuade people to buy courses and that there
had been consumer complaints filed.
I told the reporter, truthfully, that I had no idea what 'they' were doing these days, and I explained the history,
purpose and use of the testing as laid down by Ron himself, (and I do not mean the later bulletins put out under
or over his name by others.)
The reporter asked me why I was not suing the Church for plagiarism or copyright infringement, and my reply
was, and is, that the current test as put out by the Church organizations, under any name, is so far removed from
the original that only the name is left."