Hardin's Magic Brain

Vol#7 Psychological forces
Introduction
In this volume we will be looking at psychological forces.
In this series we have already looked at psychological playing card forces, this volume
takes a look at a range of different forces using similar psychological techniques over a
range of plateaus.
One of the staple books in mentalism (in fact staple series) is the psychological subtleties
series.
I have made a purposeful effort in this volume to ensure that I am not crossing over the
content in those books. Psychological forces for me are a particular interesting subject
and throughout this volume you will see the novel (yet entirely practical) ways in which
to apply psychological performances and fit these performances into your own working
repertoire without having to worry about them failing.
I have spent a good number of years chasing down and inventing psychological forces, I
will in this volume talk about a variety of techniques I have not shared in the past - I
will try to give you a glimpse into how I create psychological forces.
This all started, for me many years ago. Many years ago my friends and I
(within the mentalism world) used to play a game in which one of us named an object/ item/
place/ thing and whoever was nominated by the group had to psychologically force that
piece of information on the next person that was willing to participant in a ‘mind
experiment’.
This was not only fun, but it gave each of us the confidence to know that we could do this
on the fly (should we need to) and at the same time helped us gain confidence in our
ability should a routine not go to plan. That is the greatest thing I ever learnt, how to
make a routine that had failed completely seem like a success.
I personally learnt how to pretty much force anything.
I will outline the game and the rules of the game later in this volume, before that, I
would like to share a little history on when I first become interested in psychological
forces.
I remember first becoming enthralled in psychological forces after watching Derren Brown’s
television series’.
Once every so often (at the start of random episodes) he would perform an effect for the
audience at home (to the watching participant) and remember being blown away, I was
completely hooked.
I took these psychological forces to Leeds city center, armed with a camera and tripod I
filmed myself trying a series of psychological forces on random participant’s and NOT ONE
HIT!
You hear me?… NOT ONE FUCKING HIT!
I remember instantly dismissing psychological forces as being non-practical and instead
of trying to work on them, I started studying other things.
Years later after studying/ learning about other areas/ aspects of mentalism and how to
use my voice as my strongest tool in my box of tools, I thought I would give psychological
forces another go and after having a much different experience to the first time I had
tried these forces. I feel this was down to my newly I realized just how little I knew
when I had tried them out the first time around.
I was not utilizing the forces wrong or the scripting, it was my mannerisms, my beat and
my willingness to trust myself and then veer off into another course or direction should
I feel that things weren’t going my way… In short, it wasn’t the force that was at fault,
it was ME.
I am very honest when I say that.
A lot of performers tend to blame the force/ routine when it doesn’t work first time for
them and dismiss the material – Learn how to test these moments in performance without
the participant ever knowing if it was a miss. Then when these moments hit, you won’t
believe the reactions.
Things like this take time, they are just like any good other principle in mentalism - a
tool.
Think about it this way -
The first time you try to ride a bike, could you jump on it and off you went?
The first time you attempted to walk, did you just stand up and start walking?
The first time you attempted speaking, did you start fluently reciting whatever language
it is you speak?
The answer to all of those questions are no, no you did not.
You had to work hard and train yourself, once you had whatever it is you were trying to
perfect, perfected, you forget the amount of time and effort you put into perfecting your
new found skill. You then after getting your new skill down, you hit a patch where it
comes so naturally and mentalism is the same!
You have to be open, receptive and willing to learn something new every day. Do not keep
relying on the same skills you have gained time and time again – Yes refine them and
work them to the point they are perfect but do not stop learning.
If you do it would be a crying shame.
In this volume I am going to share a series of principles, subtleties and tools that do
work, they just require an effort on your part – They are not ‘Takeaway mentalism’.
If you were to watch a performance video of me years ago and then watch me perform today
- there are vast improvements. I am constantly criticizing my own performances and
learning how to refine myself. This is something I will continue to do, don’t worry about
doing this to yourself. It is often the hardest thing to do, looking at your own performances
and being harsh. This is the true secret to success, film everything – Look at yourself,
rectify your mistake and work over. Try to find someone that give you a second eye, who
isn’t a yes man/ woman. Someone who is open to tearing you to pieces but will help build
you back up.
I know I have a hell of a long way to go to match the vision I have in my head of myself
and what I know I can achieve.
I have no natural talent, every skill I have ever acquired I have acquired with nothing
other than hard work.
I hope you get a lot of mileage out of the material in this document and it opens up a
new world of possibilities for you.

Peter Turner 2016
What is a psychological force?
Psychological forces, also known as psi forces or psyche forces are essentially verbal
statements that appeal to the participant’s psyche in order to box them or control them (a
good portion of the time) to select or think of whatever item, object, place and or piece
of information the performer wants the participant to think of at any given time.
It is the practice of mixing verbal acrobatics, statistical practice and cat like finesse.

Are psychological forces 100%?
The honest answer is no, this shouldn’t however detour you from performing them, with
practice and chops you will smash the ball out of the park a massive percentage of the
time. There are ‘ways’ outlined in this volume in which your participant will never know
that you missed and ‘ways’ to get a second opportunity should you miss the first time whilst
simultaneously making things seem fairer from the participant’s perspective.

Are psychological forces language restricted/
dependent?
Yes and No.
That is the simple answer.
If you translate these forces as closely as possible into any language then these forces
will certainly work.
BUT -
What I have found, is that different cultures think differently whilst still thinking the
same. What I mean by this is even though some cultures/ demographics think differently
and the answers are different to the ones listed here (forces aimed at the U.K/ U.S
demographic) the people from within those different cultures/ demographics will still think
in a similar way TO EACH OTHER and if you take your time to learn how those cultures
think and the way they consecutively respond to these forces then you can re-adjust your
answers to fit the area you are.
So in short, in America for example the most frequently named number from one to ten is
seven. In India (I threw out a random country) you might find seven never hits but five
keeps coming up time and time again. You would re-adjust the way you think to coincide
with this fact.
Therefore the forces are not technically restrictive, you just might find that the answers
are different to the ones listed here.
This is something that is very important to understand, the only way you are going to get
these forces down is to work them MORE THAN ONCE!
Also a slight change in the way you talk/ pace can affect the way that an overall force
plays out and the way the participant responds.
Do not dismiss the force should it not hit, try it a few times you might just find that
your participants are answering consistently with the same or similar answers. If this is
the case instead of trying to change the way you talk/ pace or adjust the linguistics, just
change the way you perceive the answer.
Adjust your answer, don’t try and change yourself - it’s the most simple and logical way
to operate.

Piggybacking principle
This is a principle that is going to run concurrent throughout this entire volume.
This principle was born out of the back of feeling ‘cold’ with the psychological forces I
had read in the past.
One thing I loved is the (almost) sure fire nature of the simple forces that were outlined
in previous writings on the subject of psychological forces.
Forcing the colour red/ blue, 37, a lion, 7, a chair, a triangle and a circle and the other
simple forces we all know and all have performed at some point in the past. They are
simple/ fast to force in terms of process and hit frequently.
The only thing I felt with these forces is that they all felt a little bit unfinished. I
sat and thought about that for a while and realized that because these forces are mostly
surefire, why not piggyback off of these forces to get my participants to think of things
that were more impossible.
Piggybacking is the process of taking simple forces and using those forces as stepping
stones at the beginning of a larger psychological force.
The results you will see throughout this document.
A list of psychological forces
I thought I would start by outlining a series of forces and techniques to force specific
thoughts.
Then talk about how these forces can be used in conjunction with classical methodology to
create incredible routines.
This list is only a foundational list but with the tools offered you will see how easy it
is to force other things using the same principle.

Forcing places/ countries
There are a range of ways to force places/ countries, I am going to outline a few here
for you to think about and then offer my thoughts on how these forces can be used to force
other pieces of information.

Paris
This is by far the easiest city to force, I am going to outline two ways to force this city
and then ways to use this city and ‘piggy backing’ principle to move to other cities/
countries.

Variation #1
The performer addresses the first of two participants (this can be done solo).
Performer: “I want you to think of a part of the world for me. When you have one in mind,
think of a country in that part of the world. Maybe think of a few things that make this
country stand out to you.”
(Wait till they confirm they have done that.)
Turn to the second participant.
Performer: “I want you to do something similar. Focus on a landmark… Or building and the
city that surrounds it. Really focus on the smells and sounds in this city, the people.”
Address both of them.
Performer: “I want you both to use all your senses in symphony to culminate in and create
an image of these places in your mind.”
Take note of the script.
I direct the second participant to focus on a landmark and then the city that surrounds
it. The chances are it will be Paris or Rome. I have found that Paris is the most frequently
selected. The framing of the linguistics are so important in this force.
The very first force of Paris I ever heard was - “Think of a city with a landmark in it”.
It felt so restrictive, and none impressive. I thought of a way of asking the same question
in a different way. That is essentially the secret to a lot of the more impressive
psychological forces. The linguistics that wrap up and hide the method.
Notice how I ask the first participant to think of an area of the world, then focus on a
country within that area of the world. This participant’s thought is irrelevant to me –
Although knowing that the second person is likely going to be thinking of Paris I could
use this piece of information as a one ahead to gain the country also (if I wanted).
The second participant is the participant that is of interest to me.
Look at the linguistics –
Performer: “I want you to do something similar. Focus on a landmark… Or building and the
city that surrounds it. Really focus on the smells and sounds in this city, the people.”
I use the pause and restrict principle -

The pause and restrict principle
The pause principle that is little known and to credit it where it came from is something
that I have found impossible – In fact I have never seen another document that has talked
about this principle, all I know is I have come across this principle in the past and I
utilize it.
The principle is psychological in nature and really helps restrict a participant to a
singular thought.
Here is an example –
Performer: “I want you to simply think a colour for me and when you have that colour in
mind think of something that is natural, organic that is that colour… (Pause until you see
the participant start to think) or if you mentally struggle to do that, you can think of
something that is manmade. It really doesn’t matter as long as you have something in mind
that I could not guess.
There are a few key factors that come into play here, the first is that you are waiting
just slightly for the participant to start making their decision. This is important because
the likeliness is that they are not going to change their thought process and will continue
on that train of thought. This is the pause principle.
The second subtlety (the restrict principle) is a subtlety I created to add to the pause
principle. This is a subtlety that comes into play whilst using the line “If you mentally
struggle”, look back up at the scripting. Do you think anyone is going to want to admit to
mentally struggling?
This line forces the participant to complete their initial thought as they want to prove
that they can complete their natural thought. In the above example all you have to do is
think of the colours that the participant could be thinking of – Red, Green, Yellow, Blue
– and think of things that are natural that are connected to these colours.
I will go into detail more on ‘piggybacking later’, I feel this principle is the most
important principle in this entire volume.
Utilizing the pause principle in this context opens up something so beautiful, we obviously
know we have forced the participant’s choice down to one of just a small number of objects
all easily manageable but opened ourselves up to apply this line –
Performer: “You could be thinking of something that is natural or manmade, any colour,
shape or size. I really didn’t restrict you in anyway shape or form. There are well over
a million different things that you could be thinking of right now”.
This is a very cheeky script that can be applied after using the aforementioned principles,
after funneling the participant into a small box you are able to remind them that they
could be thinking of anything. I think this in itself is a thing of beauty.
We will look into this principle in more depth later after learning other force
applications.

Back to Paris force variation #1
Performer: “I want you to do something similar. Focus on a landmark… Or building and the
city that surrounds it. Really focus on the smells and sounds in this city, the people.”
Notice the use of the ‘pause and restrict’ principle, after mentioning landmark I pause –
I let the participant start their process of thinking and then proceed with “OR BUILDING”
– This line is the important line. The participant has already started thinking and
therefore I know the landmark is going to override the building but it opens me up to be
able to say –
Performer: “I asked you to focus on a city, but to make it an interesting city, a city with
something that stands out about that city like a building or landmark. If for example you
had thought of the piece palace it might have been Den Hague in Holland or The Burj
Kalifa in Dubai. There are well over 50,000 cities in the world and over 30,000 of those
cities have something interesting about them that makes them unique”.
After funneling the participant into one of a few cities, I then open up the amount of
vast possibilities that were available to them whilst simultaneously reframing what I
actually said.
Take notice this line – “a city with something that stands out about that city, like a
building or landmark”, I led with building as opposed to landmark and therefore the script
about Piece palace or Burj kalifa completely stays consistent.
This also serves as a way to create a false memory when the participant reiterates their
experience to their friends later.

Paris Force Variation #2
This time we are going to use a very simple tactic to force Paris.
As Paris is widely known to have romantic ties we are going to exploit this in this
particular force.
This serves as a good example of how to create a psychological force – I will go into
detail after the force that will exemplify (I haven’t used that word for a while) exactly
what I mean.
For this force to work, we are going to be creating a list of emotions then entice the
participant to select the “Love” or “happiness” emotion and finally ask them to tie a city
to that emotion.
The script below outlines the force (feel free to play with it).
Performer: “In a moment I am going to ask you to make a choice; this choice is something
that is not tied to your life. I don’t want you to let your private thoughts become part of
this; I want it to be random.
Before you make any decisions, it’s essential to understand how we make decisions. No matter
what decisions we make in life, we make them based on one specific emotion. I am sure you
have made irrational decisions when in a negative frame of mind, we all have and on the
other side of the coin made cool calculated decisions when thinking positively.
I want you to choose an emotion, then use that emotion to make a decision.
Clear your mind. Think of the words envy, Love (slight pause), Happiness or Sadness and
while thinking of one of these emotions think of the first city that pops into your mind.”
Then quickly add as a side note:
Performer: “If you can't do that with the first emotion you think of, jump to one where
you definitely can.”
Notice the opening of the script, I practically tell the participant that if they choose a
negative emotion, then they will be making an irrational decision. By getting them to
vocalize that they have made irrational decisions when in a negative frame of mind, you
will steer them away from the negative emotions because it will still be lingering
subconsciously. Not only that I also stated at the start of the script that I do not want
them to tie this to their private life, I need it to be random.
Tell me how envy ties to a city? Or sadness? Or happiness? Love is the only emotion that
really ties to a city at random. This might seem a simple force in writing, but the
participant won’t be able logically break it down the way that it is laid out here.
Another subtlety at play is one that I will go into more detail on later, love is “potently
placed” in the most psychologically selected position and this also aids in upping the
probability of love being selected.

Additional ideas – (Paris forces)
As this is such a simple force to perform I feel that it is a good place to briefly look
at the ‘Piggybacking princple’.
You can apply the piggybacking principle to this force in order to get the participant to
think of another country (IF YOU SO WISHED).
Be aware this adds extra process, if you are time conscious then I would suggest dismissing
this additional particular idea but, if you are more the conversational performer then
this can be a nice way to subtly guide the participant towards any country you wish (or
name/ word but this will be something that we will discuss in more depth later).
Here is a simple script to apply after you have forced Paris –
Performer: “In-fact let’s make this a little bit more random, think of the country that
this city exists within, think of the first letter of the country, go up the alphabet one
letter and think of a completely new country starting with that letter. I cannot think of
a fairer more random way to think of a city”.
The country Paris exists within is obviously France, France starts with an F, the next
letter up in the alphabet is the letter G and therefore the country must be Greece or
Germany.
This is not restrictive in terms of place/ subject area you can have the participant think
of, by adjusting the way the participant moves up and down the alphabet and or the subject
you want to force them toward.

Another interesting idea to add to the Paris force is contributed by Seamus Maguire
(see contributions section of this volume for his other wonderful contribution).
-
After you have forced the landmark upon the participant (without revealing it)
then add,
Performer: “I want you to imagine a gentleman standing at the side of whatever
building/ landmark stands out to you in this city. He has quintessential regional
name that is tied to that place you are thinking of - do you have an image of this
man and his name in mind also?”
Take a few seconds to read this – What name would you go for with France in mind?
I will reveal the name just before the next section, you can see if you were right.
What I personally feel is beautiful about Seamus’ idea is that you now have the
choice to reveal either the name or the place that the participant is thinking of.
In my opinion I think it is nicer to not name the place and slightly obscure the
name so that the place is still in the participant’s mind and you can employ the
‘Bob principle’ or ‘Piggybacking’ later of the piece of information that was never
said out loud and still Segway off into another effect for free.
- What do I mean by that?
The name was ‘Pierre’ did you get that?
The name I would reveal is the name Peter, not pierre.
I am pretty sure that everyone knows the translation and therefore when you hit
the name, the place is forgotten as it seems irrelevant.
I wouldn’t focus on the routine as a place force, just a way to generate a name at
random. This reveal is also more impressive from the audience’s perspective as a
name like Pierre is really only relevant to France. Whereas Peter could be relevant
to anywhere and your audience still don’t have a clue as to what the place is.
I am sure with a little bit of thought you could also find names that are relevant
to other countries to apply this same logic. I feel this is a perfect example of
just how good piggybacking can be with a little bit of thought.
A few years ago I added a contribution to a book by Dale Shrimpton that outlined an object
force using a similar principle. If you can think of objects/ items that are widely known
to be connected to a specific country or city and you can force that city with ease it is
only a stone’s throw away from leading them to the object.

Creating psychological forces
This is really going to be something that I am going to discuss briefly as you will see
several times throughout this volume ways in which I construct psychological forces. When
you need to force something psychologically the fastest way to start to construct a force
is to focus on the most direct route to get to the participant to think of what you want
and then slowly work away from that to the point it doesn’t seem so obvious.
Here is an example –
If I said to you, what is in the sky during the day time, yellow and large?
The Sun right?
Or name a famous reindeer?
Rudolf right? (Sorry Art I couldn’t resist!)
So taking the sun, we know it occurs in the daytime we know that it is yellow and we know
it is in the sky.
Let’s start obscuring the details,
Performer: “The way our brain constructs particular images is really interesting, it is
interesting in the sense that it will take the smallest characteristics of whatever it is
we might be thinking of for example the smell, size, texture and construct these
characteristics at such a speed that we see it in its entirety.
If for example you thought of a tangerine, our brains would envision the shape and sweet
sugary smell, the colour and texture or its skin and then present our brain with the fact
we are thinking of a tangerine faster than the speed of light.
If I were to ask you to think of a colour you might likely think of the colour red, because
this coffee cup is red (point to anything that is red) or green because it might be your
favourite colour each one of those choices would be conscious and therefore contrived. I
want this to be random, close your eyes think of a colour and then think of something that
is that colour”.
The participant might think of the colour blue or yellow now (these would be the most
psychological colours chosen at this point).
If the participant chose the colour yellow – the participant would think of a banana or
the sun – I dismissed them thinking of a piece of fruit as I mentioned a tangerine in my
previous script… How can this be random if it is the same as my thought?
If the participant thinks of blue, they will likely think of the sea – By simply fishing
for colour (without making it overtly obvious) if you know they have picked blue and they
are going to draw the sea you could still take back the hit.
Performer: “Whatever you are thinking of I want you to construct a full picture in your
mind, so for example let’s say you had picked something completely random like a chicken,
you might draw a barn or a tractor to construct and entire picture in your mind”.
They will do this, the most obvious thing to do is draw a boat, some birds and on the top
right (which is psychological in itself) the sun. To get the participant to think of the
sun look at your participant and in the air draw an imaginary frame –
Performer: “I want you imagine your picture filling the inside of this frame, I want you
to focus on specific areas of this picture, firstly focus here (point to the bottom center)
now here (the bottom right corner), here (the center), here (the top right where the sun is)
focus here I find this interesting.
This is the area of the photo I think I want you to focus on, I don’t know why I just feel
it is”.
Wallah!
This is one way to force the sun.
Another way might be to use a series of ‘reverse restrictions’ using the exact opposite to
lead the participant to the thought.
Performer: “Think of something at random like an object… (Pause) or thing be it natural/
organic like a flower or manmade like a key. When they have something in mind, let’s make
this more random.
If this is something you could hold or pick up in a moment we are going to change to
something that you could not and vice versa but before you do that think of this.
If this is something that is small, make it something that is really big, if this is really
big, make it something that is really small. If this is something - man made make this
something natural or organic and vice versa.
This just ensures that you are thinking of something that is not statistically chosen, in
the sense that you are going with the exact opposite of whatever it is you committed to in
the first place. I believe this force would force a tree or the sun – I have not tried it
I simply constructed it as I was writing to outline how I might construct a force.
Remember there is a simple rule, focus on the characteristics of the thing that you want
to force ensure these are characteristics that if you asked your participant what it was
you are thinking of they could simply answer for example –
What has a steering wheel inside it?
TO STRESS – You would never ask this question, but you would inch by inch see how far
away you could get from asking this question (whilst still asking this question – if that
makes sense?) and in the end what you will have is a psychological force that is not
obvious to the participant, they will really feel that they could have had a free choice.

Germany/ Greece
This force is again another simple force that utilizes the ‘Piggybacking principle’ –
address the participant,
Performer: “before you do this I am going to tell you that most people go for the number
3, I want this to be an entirely free choice. Think of the first number that pops into your
mind and count along the alphabet that many letters so if you did choose 3 it would be C.
When you arrive at that letter think of a country that starts with that letter.
Here we are assuming the participant will think of the number 7.
For the people reading this that are new to the whole area of psychological forces, I will
quickly outline the ‘7 force’.

The Seven force/ other important pieces of information
If you ask a participant to think of a number from 1-10 the likeliness is that a participant
will choose 7, the second most popular psychologically chosen number is the number 3.
These are the most psychological chosen numbers. The exact science behind this in all
honesty I do not know but I can offer a theory that I believe is the reason why this
works as solidly as it does.
If you start by dismissing the number 3 (as outlined earlier) or by simply saying “Don’t
go for three as everyone does” and then move onto asking the participant to think of a
number BETWEEN 1 and 10, what happens In the participant’s mind is without consciously
being aware of it they will dismiss the number 1 and 10 because you said BETWEEN 1-10, the
number 3 is dismissed as is the number 2 and 4 as they are touching the number 3.
This leaves the numbers 5,6,7,8 and 9.
The number 7 is right in the middle of all of those numbers and that is the reason I
believe it is the most psychologically chosen number.
I have also noticed that if I ask a participant (after dismissing the number three) to name
the first number that pops into their mind the participant will almost always picks a
singular digit and it is almost always the number 7. This is a really strange psychological
oddity that exists within the subconscious of the mind. Try it –
Try to put a slight amount of pressure on the participant when asking the question, be
fairly assertive and the biggest secret to this sort of thing is to speed up your speech
when you dismiss the number 3. This is implicit to the participant that their answer needs
to be quick without you saying you need them to hurry or ever saying the word quickly.
There is nothing worse than saying to a participant “Quickly name the first number that
pops in your head”. I totally feel that this ruins the overall effect you are trying to
convey and makes the performance seem rushed and it loses its power. The last thing I want
is the participant to feel that they were pressured into making a choice.
Knowing that the number 7 is psychologically chosen number, performers (magicians and
mentalists) tend to go for the number 6 or the number 8.
This is something that I have discovered from jamming with other performers.
Another interesting thing to try out is the reverse logical of forcing the number 7 to
force the number 3/ 4.
Let’s for the sake of example say the participant is going to be asked to think of a number
from 1-10 if you address your participant by saying,
Performer: “Most people go for the number 7 when asked to think of a number between 1-10,
if you were to envision seeing the number 7 in the forefront of your mind and then
jumping back to another number like the number 9 for example. See it really largely like
this”
This is where you would draw the number nine (in reverse, so it is the right way around
from the participant’s perspective).
This will force the participant towards the number 3/ 4.
If you get a little bolder you never need mention to the participant to think of a number
from 1-10.
If you use implication to have the participant believe they are only to select a number
from 1-10 when you re-frame later you can point out that you never specified a cap on the
size of the number they could have selected.
Here is an example,
Performer: “When asked to think of A (emphasize the letter A whilst holding up your
forefinger) number you will find that most people will go for the number 7. If I asked
you to envision the number 7 on the forefront of your mind and jump back to A (emphasize
again slightly and hold up your forefinger again) number like the number 9 for example
what would it be?”
This leads me to another point that in my haste I almost missed – If you ask the participant
to THINK of a number, it gives them a chance to think about their choice and change their
mind. The probability of the participant going for what we want is upped massively by
asking the participant to name the number out loud. By naming the number out loud it
doesn’t give the participant a chance to think and change their mind and adds an air of
pressure to the entire situation without you specifically pressing the participant.
If the participant thinks of 3/ 4 then you can also force – Canada/ Denmark by using the
aforementioned force of Germany but using a reverse logic.
Here is an outline of how to use this logic to get the participant to think of a name.

Invisible Dice force
This is another reliable way to force the number 7, I outlined this force in the ‘Numbers’
volume in this series but as we are on the subject of piggybacking off of specific forces
to create places/ names I think this fits aptly here.
Performer: “I want you to imagine that you are holding a dice in your left hand and
another in your right, in a moment, not yet, you are going to imagine rolling the two
dice.

Obviously each dice has the numbers 1-6 upon the faces, when you imagine rolling the dice
I want you to see a different number on each dice when you roll them. One dice for example
might be a 2 and the other dice might be a 6, if we added those together the total would
be 8.

The total is obviously going to be different each time you roll, the second time you roll
the total might by 5.

Imagine rolling the dice now, seeing the two numbers and then adding the two random
numbers together”.
This will usually as suggested above force the number 7. The reason it reliably forces the
number seven is that you eliminate the numbers 1 and 6 by mentioning them. You then
mention the number 2, the number 8 and the number 5. 2 can never be totaled as as the
numbers on the dice have to be different.
Psychologically this leaves the number 7 or the number 9.
I can also open myself up for a second chance should it not hit the first time I ask the
participant for a number – by saying “I am sure you know that each time you roll the dice
it would be a different total if you were to roll them now for example, the total would
be?”
If they say 7 then it is perfect and you have achieved what you set out to achieve. If
they do not roll the number 7 it is fine, just simply say.
Performer: “How fair is this? Roll them again the total will be different and we will go
with whatever the next total is”.
Look at the key line in the script I carefully crafted the words ‘for example’ into the
script– this is placed really cleverly in the scripting in a place that means you can go
with the total they give or point out that when they just rolled it would be an example.

If they hit seven on the second roll you are golden, the first part will only ever be seen
as an example.
When you see how you can simply force a name using this technique (in the next example)
you will see how much fun you can have with it.

Psychological force of a name
Here is an example of how to use the force outlined for the country above to get the
participant to think of a name and then determine what that name is..
Performer: “If I asked you off of the bat to think of a name the likeliness is that you
would pick the name of someone that is connected to your life and the more skeptical people
that are watching will possibly think that I overheard you on the phone or somehow
profiled you on Facebook. I would like to propose a completely random way to think of a
name. Follow me here.
When asked to think of A (emphasize the letter A whilst holding up your forefinger) number
you will find that most people will go for the number 7. If I asked you to envision the
number 7 on the forefront of your mind and jump back to A (emphasize again slightly and
hold up your forefinger again) number like the number 9 get one in mind. I am going to
assume the number is under 26, count along the alphabet whatever number it is you are
thinking of and then when you get there, think of the first name that pops into your head
that starts with that letter.
This ensures complete randomness, you didn’t know you were going to choose this number and
therefore there is no way that you could have known what letter you were going to be
thinking of and if you didn’t know the letter there is no way that you could have known
what name you would have ended up thinking of”.
[You will know if the participant has chosen a letter near the start of the alphabet as
they won’t need to place their fingers behind their back to count on, they will mentally
be able to count along to the letter without too much effort. If you notice that the
participant is having to count then it might be time to revert back to the trusty billet.
The names they will likely be thinking of are –
Carl, Chris, Christine, David, Daniel and Danielle.]
The first port of call is to determine the sex of the person the participant is thinking
of. There are two ways to do this, the trusty closed question or a verbal dodge.
Option #1
Performer: “The name you are thinking of is not a male name is it?”
If the participant answers with a yes, simply respond with – “I thought as much” with a
slight smile that suggested that you knew it was a male name.
If the participant answers with a no, simply respond with – “I didn’t think as much” with
a slight smile again that suggests you suspected their answer.
Option #2 (my preferred option)
This is a verbal dodge that really works well, it’s as simple as watching the participant’s
reaction –
Performer: “I feel with you, you went for a male name (pause *for reasons you will
understand in a moment*) but then you changed at the last second to a female name”.
You are pausing very slightly to see the participant’s reaction to the male statement. If
they respond positively with a confirmation that you are right, you don’t need to counter.
The reaction if the participant is confirming you are right should be instantaneous, if
you see a slight, slight hesitation in the participant’s reaction quickly counter with –
“but then you changed to a female name”. This is where you seemingly hit from the
participant’s perspective but cleverly whilst seeming to hit find out the answer to the
most important question – Is the name they are thinking of male or female?
Now you have established the sex of the name the participant is thinking of, it’s time to
hone in on the name.
There are several principles available to whittle down the amount of names to a couple
and then you can use a mechanical principle to get down to one.
One principle is Michael Murray’s incredible ‘CUPS principle’ – by simple asking the
participant, “Can you think of the exact amount of letters in the name you are thinking
of?” By gauging the reaction of the participant’s affirmation you should essentially know
if the same is a short one or a long one.
This will reduce the number of possibilities.
Another one is to apply the ‘Wash principle’ – This has been outlined a few times in this
series but fits perfect here –

The Wash Principle
The Wash Principle can be used verbally or physically. This principle (when used wisely)
will reduce your miss rating massively. In this instance, we will pretend we are working
with letters as opposed to anything else.
Let's start with using the wash principle in a physical scenario.
We will imagine we are fishing for a letter someone is thinking of out of a series of
letters, just to give this a real world context we will imagine we are coming toward the
end of a routine (like a word divination). We have deduced after reducing the participant’s
choices down to two letters (via whatever process). For the sake of this hypothetical
situation we will say the letters are F and G.
Address the participant,
Performer: “Focus on the first letter in this person’s name?
Imagine drawing the letter in the air; imagine seeing all the different lines and the way
that letter is constructed.
Concentrate for me but don't say anything out loud.”
This is where you pick one of the letters and start to draw the letter in the air.
(We will imagine the participant is thinking of the letter F).
Remember to draw the letter from the participant’s perspective, in essence you are drawing
it backwards.
Watch the participant’s face; if they react by starting to smirk, you know it's that letter!
If not, wipe the air clean and shake your head as though you are not seeing it clearly.
Secretly we now know what the letter is based off of the participant’s reaction.
Ask them to re-focus on the name and proceed with your effect.
Even if you didn’t hit, you corrected yourself and therefore have NEVER missed. The
theatrics are beautiful here also as it really is just two minds working in unison.
You can see how this would be useful if you are torn between two pieces of any information.
Return to effect***
When you got down to two names, write one name on a billet and place it sticking out of
your breast pocket (writing towards the chest), if you are not wearing a suit jacket, simply
place the billet face down on the table and tell the participant it will be important later
and not to worry too much about it for the meanwhile.

Greg vs Gary
This is bold, but awesome – Simple and effective.
For a female participant -
Performer: “We are going to create a fictional situation, a fictional first kiss – This has
to be entirely random, I want you to think of the first number that pops into your mind,
then count along to the letter that falls at that number. A would be 1, B would be 2 and
so on and so forth.
When you reach that letter, think of the first name that pops into your mind that begins
with that letter – This will be your fictional first kiss. This ensures that we are not
revealing anything personal and at the same time it would prove if I could guess this I
could guess any name you were thinking of”.
For a male participant –
Performer: “We are going to create a fictional situation, a fictional best friend from
school – This has to be entirely random, to ensure this is random I want you to think of
the first number that pops into your mind, then count along to the letter that falls at
that number. A would be 1, B would be 2 and so on and so forth.
When you reach that letter, think of the first name that pops into your mind that begins
with that letter – This will be your fictional first kiss. This ensures that we are not
revealing anything personal and at the same time it would prove if I could guess this I
could guess any name you were thinking of”.

Another principle that you can use to force a name/ country is a principle I have discussed
in the past but is purely psychological and I feel fits perfect here – ‘The increment
force’.

The increment force
This force, as I am sure you will come to realise, is a lovely little force.
There are a number of applications for this force. Let your imagination run wild. I am
currently exploring lots of applications for this force and will detail my findings in
my “Book of the demons”
Variation #1: The performer asks a participant to think of any letter of the alphabet—the
participant never says this out loud.
The performer also says very little and only talks when he is instructing the participant.
The performer then asks the participant to take that letter and to think of a country that
starts with that letter.
The performer is able to deduce the country.

Breakdown
This force can be used to force anything that goes up in increments (or anything that goes
up sequentially; i.e., 5, 10, 15), and more than that it also teaches a valuable lesson (I think)
about how to take things that are not considered useful within a specific art and, with a
little bit of work and refinement, make them incredible and totally practical.
The original concept goes back to the “stop force” or “timing force” using playing cards.
Don’t worry, this effect isn’t done using any cards at all, but to understand how it works
you need to understand the timing force.
This is also referred to as the “stop force” or the “dealing force.” To quickly refresh your
memory, it’s the force where the performer deals down the cards one at a time at a
particular pace and the performer asks the participant to say stop at any point, which
usually forces the sixth card.
The first thing I did with the force was to eliminate the cards and to replace them with
a beautiful invisible piece of theatre. I hope you enjoy what I have done with it.
To start with I will explain how the stop force is done with playing cards (after all, this
is a great way to practice the pacing).
At first this will seem bold, but I promise once you have the timing down, it is so easy
and will work 99% of the time.
Take a deck of playing cards and place a force playing card in the sixth position. When
you are sitting with a participant, start to deal down at a moderate pace.
When you have dealt two cards, look at the subject and say:
Performer: “just, say stop.”
(Say it in a tone that suggests that they should have known they were saying stop. Their
brain will freak out at this point and they will say stop on the sixth card.
Get the pacing down, and once you have, you can force any number. The card they stop at
will always be four cards after you have said, “Yeah, say stop.”
That is, if you want to force the tenth card, then use the stop line after the sixth card
and then they will stop on the tenth.)
Once you have gotten used to the pacing and you’re comfortable, you are ready to practice
the Increment Force. Here is the scripting/difference between the Timing Force and the
Increment Force.
Performer: “In a moment when I ask you to think of something, it's essential that you say
nothing out loud.
“If I ask you a question of give you an instruction do not say anything out loud. Do you
understand?”
If the participant responds, remind them not to talk.
(This may sound like overkill, but it's essential and it ensures things go the way we want.)
Performer: “I am going to touch the air like this (tap a full stop in the air). Every single
time I touch the air like this (touch a different spot in the air), I want you to imagine
letters of the alphabet going up in increments.”
Here we will give the participant a demonstration.
Touch the air while simultaneously saying, “A,” touch the air again and simultaneously say,
“B,” and repeat for C. Whilst doing this, remember the pace of dealing down the cards as
the same pace is going to apply theoretically; it is like you are dealing invisible playing
cards into the air (without making a dealing motion).
Performer: “In a moment I am going to do this without saying a word. The only time I will
say anything is if I want to give you an instruction. It’s essential you count in your
mind up through the letters every time I touch the air. Do you understand that?”
This will force them to verbalize a Yes or physically nod their head. When they do you
want to remind them:
Performer: “Stay as still as possible and don’t say anything.
“Are you ready?”
Start to touch the air (implying the same pace as you would deal a playing card onto the
table).
After the second air touch, say:
Performer: “Just think stop.”
This will force the letter “F” (or somewhere in that very near vicinity)—I rarely miss on
this. Continue to touch the air but increase the pace after a few letters, and when you
have estimated you have counted all the letters, wipe the air clean. The number of touches
really doesn’t matter as the participant stops counting after they have stopped on a
particular letter.
(This will subtly suggest that you went through the entire alphabet and the subject had
the free choice to stop anywhere. More importantly, this is beautifully theatrical).
Address the participant:
Performer: “You are now thinking of a random letter, and neither of us said anything out
loud; everything was done in our minds alone. Do you agree that letter was a completely
free choice?”
Participant: “Yes.”
Performer: “I would now like you to think of a country that starts with that letter. This
ensures that there is no way I could have somehow influenced you to think of a country,
as fate decided what letter you would stop on, and that ultimately helped you make the
decision on the country.”
I would like to remind you that you are not just limited to forcing the letters in the
region of the letter “F.” Here is an example of how you could force the letter “I.”
Continue to touch the air until you point to the letter “E” and then apply the line, “Yeah,
think stop.” This would force the letter “I.” The reason this works is it forces the
participant to just stop a few letters after the letter “E.”
If you wanted to force another letter for whatever reason, it’s easy as long as you remember
this line: “A few before.” What do I mean by that?
I would go to the letter I wanted to force (let’s say we wanted K). I would then count a
few letters back, K – J – I – H, and that would be the letter “H” and therefore that is
the letter on which I would apply the line.
As you can see this force relies on the old timing force.
I would suggest that if you are comfortable forcing the number 7 using this technique
(instead of letters) then you can also apply a simple principle to get the participant to
move wherever you want the participant to move. This is as simple as saying, “there is no
way I could know what number you are thinking of, in fact let’s make it more random add
2 onto whatever number you are thinking of”.
If you tied this to letters, the 7th letter would be the letter G and we know we can
comfortably force this. By asking the participant to add two to their number (before asking
them to tie the number to a letter) then you know they will be thinking of the letter I.
Again I have just taken something that is mechanical in workings and made it psychological.
This particular force is great for countries as there are a restricted amount of countries
that the participant could think of.

Something small but interesting
When you read this you will instantly dismiss it, I know that because it’s not an effect
and reading it on paper you will never understand the power it has on the participant.
This is for the psychological performer as opposed to the more esoteric performer. But as
an esoteric performer you could utilize this too (I do occasionally).
This is situational, at every show I have ever done there is always one person that puts
what I do down to NLP or Body Language or asks me if it plays a part in it. I always
explain now (as a more esoteric performer) –
“When I first started doing this I studied that sort of thing massively and made a conscious
effort to utilize it at any chance I got but to be honest after years and years of doing
this it sort of become second nature. In fact I remember the very first thing that I learnt,
let me show you”.
This is the set up for the more esoteric performer, if you are a psychological performer
you never really need to explain anything.
- Like I said you are going to find this really silly, but I promise you the participant
will totally buy into this and give you credit for nothing.
Address your participant,
Performer: “What I need you 2 do is 4-get any suggestions you might think I am throwing
at you, it is essential you have the 3-dom of choice during this experiment. I want you to
name the first number that pops into your mind”.
As I say ‘mind’ I snap my fingers and extend five fingers toward the participant (like my
hands are demonstrating a mini explosion from the front of my brain).
Your work is done.
It doesn’t matter what the participant names – Let me explain if the participant says the
number one simply say –
“The way this works is simple, remember I said tell me the FIRST number that pops into
your head”.
Two would be – “The way this works is simple, think back to what I said, what I need you
TWO do is”.
Three would be – “The way this works is simple, think back to what I said, I said you have
the THREEDOM of choice”.
Four would be – “The way this works is simple, remember I said FOURGET any suggestion
you think I am throwing at you”.
Five would be – “Remember the very last thing I did? I snapped my fingers and did this
right? How many fingers were I holding up?”
You simply recite the script that is relevant to whatever the participant named out loud.
Since the participant believes in stuff like this (as they asked you) and cannot remember
what you said any bit of script you highlight they are completely going to remember.
They will always take it as a hit and you will get credit for nothing.
If the participant names a seven for example just highlight two parts of the script that
add up to that number and explain that is why they went for that number. This is about
moving yourself verbally to adapt the participant’s choice. I have never really had anyone
name a double digit but its fine if they do just learn to adapt yourself to whatever they
say.
This doesn’t just apply to numbers, you can create scripts for any area of mentalism. I
find with numbers the script is simple to remember and you are ready to use it a moment’s
notice.
Always take credit for any hit you can get for free, I feel as well this answers perfectly
the participant’s question.
I would suggest at the end of doing this to act like you have just experienced a nostalgic
experience you could even smile and say “I haven’t done that for years”.

Macro!
This comes from totally being inspired by the way Bob Cassidy thinks and acts.
Bob talks about opening every stage act with a ‘Macro effect’ as opposed to a ‘Micro effect’.
What he means by this is an effect that is performed on the entirety of the audience
instead of one or two individuals.
I totally agree with this way of thinking, this creates a fail-safe in which you can
perform any psychological effect and not have to worry about failure.
You can do this when you are performing to three people (I’d say this is the minimum
number) up to as many as you like.
As you know that the majority of the room is going to be thinking of whatever it is that
you are forcing – You can frame this as a test of being receptive to suggestion.
I frame this as a test to separate the senders of information and the receivers.
I would usually frame it like this –
Performer: “Before I can get into anything I need to be able to separate the room into two
groups, the first - those who are adept at transmitting information and the second those
who are proficient at receiving information.
When transmitting or receiving information the brain acts very much like a cell phone.
That is probably the best analogy I can create, if you think about the way a cell phone
operates if two people try to call each other simultaneously the call can never connect,
if two people are waiting for the other to call obviously the call can never connect. The
only way that a call can successfully connect is if one party makes the call and the
second party is receptive to answer that call.
That is why it is necessary to know who is going to be good at transmitting information
and who is going to be good at receiving information”.
This is where you would perform your psychological force, now it is a test to separate the
two groups and there is no focus on failure as the audience will put down those who
received the information as good receivers and those who didn’t as good senders.
There is NO failure.
Think about this, in a close up group knowing who is good at sending or receiving
information (even though we are using this as a pseudo excuse) is important to remember.
Because there is a small number of people, it is likely that the audience will remember if
the others in the group were senders or receivers. You need to take this into consideration
in your performances.
If there is ever a spectator as mind reader routine, then you might remember to choose a
participant that was better at ‘receiving information’ if you are going to guess a piece of
information you might pick someone who is better at sending information. If you are going
to perform a routine such as do as I do (a self-working variation) you might pick one
sender and one receiver. Try to stay consistent with the opening effect.
When using a macro effect I highly recommend utilizing ‘Harvesting’ from ‘Psychological
subtleties two’ – Banachek.
This is not my principle to tip, but it is very, very clever.
One thing I can share is what this principle inspired me to create – This is not similar
to Banachek’s principle but if it wasn’t for his amazing principle I would have never
created this -

The Nando’s principle/ Culling
Nando’s for those who don’t know is a chain of restaurants in the U.K, I didn’t name this
principle the Nando’s principle, Mark Chandaue did. I shared this principle with Mark in
Nando’s and from that day forward he’s always called it ‘The Nando’s principle’.
This fits in here as a way to dismiss a psychological force (or any other type of force)
as a random choice.
For example – Let’s say we were performing a psychological force of a name and the name
was ‘Fred’ (this is purely an example, but possible with the forces in this volume) we will
say for example that we know for a fact it has hit (I know we can’t for sure but this
principle can be applied to a routine where you billet read and can be sure).
Just before you come to the reveal look around the room and point at random people (people
that the participant is never going to approach) and say – I feel this lady would have
gone for Jack or Jake, this gentleman Paul, this lady I would say Lauren you see it’ all
about getting a feeling for it. What did you go for?”
Participant: “Frank”.
Performer: “Turn the piece of card over and see what I thought you might go for”.
When the participant turns over the piece of card and it hits, it also confirms the fact
that the random people you pointed at would have thought of the names that you said they
would think of and you get the credit for those hits too!
This is also clever as it dispels the idea that everyone would think of the same thing. It
essentially quashes the psychological force and makes the reveal more impressive.

Hidden in plain sight
One of the biggest secrets when performing psychological forces is probably going to be
one of the smallest segments in this volume.
This is the art of learning how to hide predictions in plain sight (so you can use them or
dismiss them).
It is essential when performing psychological forces to utilize mechanical outs to ensure
that you don’t have to have the guilt of failure.
I have NEVER felt guilt when I am performing, I always liken any psychological
performance to ‘The trick that cannot be explained’ the reason I liken it to that particular
effect, is that your participant does not know where you are going with the direction of
the effect.
I am not scared of trying for the hit and if I miss simply saying “Ok this tells me – “.
Then I create a logical statement as to how that person thinks.
You will notice I never filled out what it tells me about the participant, the reason I
have purposefully left out what to say is because it has to be different each time.
I can however give you an example of what I say.
Performer: “O

Vol 7 Psychological Forces pdf