Whereas the intention experiments addressed the role of consciousness in the physical world and found a striking correlation between a person's desire and random outputs, the results brought up far more questions than they answered. First, since the effects could not be explained using the regular physical forces, how exactly were they taking place? Were the researchers observing an effect that only manifested itself when a directed intention was present, or was there some kind of more fundamental force that just so happened to produce observable results in the experimental conditions? Just as physics has its notion of "electric fields" and "magnetic fields", the researchers questioned whether it might be possible to find a "consciousness field" that correlated with these mind-matter effects.

Unlike the intention experiments, which provide feedback and have an explicitly pre-stated intention, FieldREG experiments take place with no feedback or pre-recorded intention. In FieldREG, experimenters bring REG devices with them to various real-life venues (such as operas, business meetings, sporting events, and artistic performances) and allow the device to accumulate data in the background. While the REG is running, the experimenter pays no attention to its output, he or she only makes note of important changes in the environment. For example, at an opera, the experimenter would mark the beginning and end of each act, the intermission, or perhaps a particular musical piece.

To assess the significance of the data generated during a particular venue, the experimenters would break down the data according to the marked subsets and then look for particularly strong deviations from chance. Using the coin flip analogy from our intention section, the experimenters used statistical tools to look for evidence of unbalanced or non-random outcomes that correlated with specific times or events, such as Act 1 of the Opera. After accumulating trials in a number of different environments, the cumulative experimental results seem to suggest deviations from chance that correspond to creativity, small close-knit groups, and emotionally meaningful events. Academic lectures, business meetings, and venues that did not involve much personal interaction did not, on the whole, seem to produce significant results.

While there are exceptions to any of the above generalizations, these results would make it seem as though some types of human interaction are capable of engaging consciousness in a physically measurable way. For whatever reason, the REG appears to be sensitive to certain group dynamics, and this opens up yet another area of potential research and applications.