This model works very well and has produced much reliable scientific knowledge and technological progress. Even if this is a simplistic vision of the way scientific research progresses, as shown by epistemology of science Feyerabend, ; Chalmers, , such a representation of scientific research is nevertheless a useful principle, which guides scientists to good practice. However, if a direct interaction in the sense described above between a person and their environment is possible, this principle too could influence the outcome of experiments purporting to use the scientific principles, because there could be a direct interaction between the scientists the observer and their object of study the observed.
This destroys the conditions necessary for the convincing scientific demonstration of psi itself. But, then, as psi cannot be proven, the scientific setting itself appears as being still appropriate! Consequently, we can try to use the scientific setting to prove the existence of psi but then we are now again at 1 , which leads to 2 , and it logically follows an infinite paradoxical loop between 1 and 2.
It shows more generally that the principle on which a scientific experiment is based to study psi — the ontological separation between the observer and the observed — would be erroneous. Consequently, any scientific knowledge in this field of research could not be produced as soon as there is no clear distinction between the observer and the observed.
Indeed, there is no way to know, for epistemological reasons, if what is observed is an effect induced by the experimenter due to a possible psi influence or a characteristic of the phenomena independently of the experimenter. The distinction between expectations and reality is then unclear, and the psi researcher using this approach can only become a modern version of Sisyphus 5 as it will be shown later. The Ganzfeld experiment — the most classical protocol in psi research Bem and Honorton, — provides an interesting example of the previous reasoning.
During this experiment, a participant the receiver is comfortably seated in a chair, wearing a mask showing him a uniform visual field usually red while listening to a white noise.
The participant is immersed in a constant and neutral sensory field that rapidly engenders an altered state of consciousness supposed to favor psi perceptions Storm et al. A significant correlation between the choices of the receivers and the targets shown to the senders has thus been demonstrated. But what else has been learned and does this experiment demonstrate the existence of telepathy?
No, because it cannot be proven in a definite manner. Different competing interpretations could be proposed but they cannot be isolated or confirmed. There is indeed no way to propose a falsifiable claim or set-up a crucial experiment Popper, If we suppose that a significant effect is obtained only for feedback trials, does it prove the precognitive hypothesis?
Not so, because even if this experiment was replicated 50 times with the same results and using the best experimental conditions, there is no way to know if this effect is a consequence of 1 a precognitive effect, 2 a psi influence from the participants, 3 a psi effect from the experimenter on the computer that chooses the target, and 4 many other options! Because as soon as there is no clear cut between the experimenter, the participant, and the methodology, everything becomes possible.
Another possibility is that some experimenters are consistently able to influence the experimental data and so gain significant results. This variable itself has been the focus of considerable research Broughton, ; Palmer, ; Parker and Miller, 7. It can be tested during a Ganzfeld experiment by working with 10 different experimenters and by comparing their results.
It could be 1 the effect of the experimenter, 2 the effect of the analyst of the study the one who look at the data first , or 3 many other potential explanations! This is again the same problem: if there is no clear cut between the experimenter, the participants, and the scientific set-up, there is no falsifiable claim.
Importantly, this problem is infinite : when new variables are introduced, without a clearly falsifiable hypothesis due to the absence of an epistemological boundary between the observer and what is observed , the problem exists. They can be considered as inconclusive from a scientific point of view.
Thus, there is no way to be sure that the Ganzfeld is a transfer of information between two people or that precognition is the ability to extract information from the future. Psi studies actually just show that significant correlations between two variables — an intention and a measure — will emerge and take different forms depending on the conditions of the experimental setting.
The recent experiments reported by Bem on the anomalous anticipation of random events illustrate perfectly the problem we have just described. Bem , publishing in a mainstream psychological journal, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , presented the results of four classical psychology experiments e. This publication induced considerable controversy between skeptics and proponents in the academic community and even in several mainstream media Bem et al. We can sum up the different steps of this research paradigm: 1 Bem shows a seemingly reliable psi effect in controlled condition.
It engenders critical reactions from the mainstream community Wagenmakers et al. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not work Galak et al.
Is it because: a the effect actually does not exist; b the setting of the new experiments was less appropriate; c the replication process in itself decreases the effect?
Lucadou, ; Kennedy, ; or d the effect is actually the consequence of an experimenter effect described above? But this effect could actually depend on the analyst i. So, the next step of this research paradigm might be 5 to test the magnitude of the effect with 10 different experimenters and 10 different analysts. These different steps show the possible impediments which plague psi researchers in their efforts to prove the existence of psi, in addition to negative results and criticism from mainstream colleagues.
And even if the researcher manages to get significant results at every step — as done by Bem for many years 10 —, there will always be new demands from the mainstream community: more control of the experimental setting, more experiments, more labs, more statistical tools, etc. Even when proponents manage to agree a clear protocol with skeptics, and then obtain significant results, which has been the case with the Ganzfeld Hyman and Honorton, ; Bem and Honorton, , it is never enough.
The underlying problem is that even if a significant effect is found at each step, there is no way to conclude anything about the nature of the effect and consequently no way to produce scientific knowledge about the source of psi Broughton, ; Palmer, : is it from the participants?
From the experimenter? Is it from each experimenter separately? Or is it a stronger influence from the first one who analyze the data? Or, maybe that the one who has originally conceived the experiment? Are there degrees of influence between the experimenter and the participants depending on the type of experiment? But also, is it an effect in the present during the experiment or is it an influence from the future after the experiment , or even the past, if psi can transcend space and time?
There are no definite answers to these questions, whatever results are obtained and unfortunately, there is, to our knowledge, no way to answer these questions because there are only plausible interpretations. Fundamentally, the problem is that the usual epistemological frame of research is not adequate when considering psi proprieties.
In this regard, it might be relevant to stop doing research whose aim is to prove the existence of psi using classical scientific method setting, because it does not really make sense from an epistemological point of view. It may be argued that this methodology cannot produce anything new even with large financing and the passage of a century of research.
Nevertheless, these experiments are relevant in terms of ritual. A selection of classical psi experiments can be used — e. If they are conducted with enough intention, motivation, novelty, and creativity, these experiments should continue to produce significant results.
If another experiment uses the same hypothesis, many researchers have reported that the effect tends to disappear Kennedy, In this regard, using the same hypothesis twice for a psi experiment could be like asking a comedian trying to make the public laugh with the same joke twice.
Psi interactions seem to be the expression of a novelty and novelty, by definition, can be new only once. It might explain the strange results — inversion, displacement, and disappearance of the effect — that appear when the same experiment is replicated Lucadou, They do not do this because the effect does not exist, as suggested by Wiseman , but as the consequence of the fact that this is the only way to maintain the effect. For example, if personality traits are correlated with psi, how to be sure this is not the consequence of the psi influence from the experimenter about which personality traits he believes favor psi?
This is the same for all parameters that could be correlated with psi results These researches cannot produce scientific knowledge and so may be considered as a waste of time and energy in the same way as Sisyphus spends all his time doing a useless and infinite task.
Some researchers in the field have recognized this problem and have stopped doing this kind of experimental research Eisenbud, , Others understand this problem and try to find a way to avoid it with specific experimental set-up Lucadou et al. They suppose that these experiments can be useful to convince the whole scientific community, and a larger audience, if they are conducted in a sufficient rigorous way. This could be considered as a pragmatic approach using the wrong tools to show something that might be true.
And other researchers do not understand this problem and continue to do this kind of research, in the same manner as Rhine used to do, because they do not feel that there are other options.
It would be like a woodsman trying to fell trees with a feather saying that he continues to do so because this is the only tool he has. If they are lucky, despite the inappropriate nature of the research methodology, they will occasionally obtain significant results, but will also obtain null results. If they are resilient, they will do this during all their careers and become Sisyphus, trying to convince a scientific community who do not believe in the existence of what they study.
Not surprisingly, some of them will stop doing parapsychological research and even can become skeptic Blackmore, As mentioned in the introduction, psychology and medicine have been confronted for more than 10 years by what has been called the replication or replicability crisis Maxwell et al.
The same problem is also true for other domains, especially medical and psychotherapy research Ioannidis, a , b. This is, of course, a huge problem that many researchers are trying to solve. One of the hypotheses to explain this situation is that these results could be the consequence of QRPs John et al. It shows that different effects in psychology and medicine tend to diminish with time and replication process e. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the psi community has reported such a decline effect a long time ago Kennedy, Is it the same effect and what is its nature?
Most researchers suppose that it is also the consequence of QRP 15 but a different hypothesis could be proposed; the underlying problem of this decline effect might be psi, if the latter exists. It means that a direct relationship between an intention and reality is possible.
Consequently, when mainstream research is set-up, psi might come in the equation even if it is not invited to the party When researchers develop a new protocol or hypothesis, their expectations or intentions might, through psi, unconsciously induce a result which favors their view. Thus, when a new effect or a new treatment is tested — with, for example, a control group — the researcher might have a psi influence at various points in the research design 17 , which could compromise the utility of the control group as a comparison condition.
May supposes that there is no physical influence in this process and that the participant, using precognitive abilities, will choose unconsciously the right moment to push the button in order to get desired significant result In the same way, a researcher might unconsciously choose the right moment to start the study, choose the participants, collect the data, etc.
From this point of view, psi does not induce a transfer of energy or rely on a known physical force. It rather organizes reality in a discreet manner by ordering randomness. Consequently, some of the mainstream effects look like normal effects but they are not. It is only when other researchers — who may not have the same expectations, beliefs, or intentions — try to replicate them that these effects may mysteriously vanish.
This would not be the effect of QRP, but the consequence of psi It could be argued that if this hypothesis is true, there is no possibility of accumulating any reliable scientific knowledge. But it means that effect sizes around 0. As proposed in introduction, it would suggest that hundreds of researchers and notably more than 20 Nobel Prize winners have been fooled for more than a century, even when using the most reliable tools of scientific research.
For example, the United States government attempted to employ psi for more than 20 years during a program usually known as Stargate in which military personnel were selected on basis of their supposed psi-abilities to acquire information e. If psi does not exist , significant results for nearly a century have only been obtained by methodological errors, self-deception, fraud, and questionable research practices.
How could we avoid such a problem? Since the beginning of the replicability crisis, several solutions have been proposed — pre-registration of study designs, Bayesian statistics, larger N , funnel plots, p -curve analysis, prospective meta-analysis, adversial collaborations, etc.
A pre-registration registry has already been set-up in the field of psi research 22 Watt and Kennedy, , , as well as statistical guidelines for empirical studies Tressoldi and Utts, ; Kennedy, ; Utts and Tressoldi, Pre-submission to scientific journals which accept a paper on methodological grounds prior to results should also be promoted. Such an approach might be extended to other psi paradigms to confirm or deny the significant results of several meta-analysis Sherwood and Roe, ; Storm et al.
On the contrary, if psi does exist , it means that human consciousness can interact with its environment beyond the usual boundaries of space and time, which has fundamental consequences for the way research is conducted in psychology, including psi research as demonstrated by the psi paradox. As already mentioned, the results of experimental psi research have shown, since their beginning, strange patterns in the data displacement, reversal, etc.
A solution might be to consider these patterns not as an obstacle — or just the effect of randomness Wiseman, — but rather as a way to better understand psi and its properties In this model, psi is considered as being something profoundly different to known macro-physical effects and causation, not relying on transfer of information but rather a form of entanglement process depending on the underlying nature of reality Atmanspacher and Fuchs, ; Atmanspacher and Fach, A brief metaphor might be useful here.
A psi experiment is like an egg where the shell forms an enclosed organizational system. It may be possible to maintain a psi effect as long as the organizational closure is not broken, that is as long as the egg is not broken to see what is inside. In this interpretation, the psi interactions are possible as long as the observer does not interfere with the system Houtkooper, It also underlines the importance of uncertainty associated with the source of psi.
When the latter is used for a transfer of information, the psi effect would be suppressed, especially when attempts are made to replicate exactly the same experimental set. Consequently, Lucadou has tried to set-up an experiment in which this type of effect might be maintained by keeping a sufficient level of uncertainty in the system.
The non-transmission axiom could also explain the decline effect and the oscillating trends in the data Pallikari and Boller, ; Maier et al. This last aspect is particularly interesting because these oscillating patterns might be detected, demonstrated, and analyzed when they are compared with classical effects Rabeyron, Even if the possibility that psi exists sounds very implausible to many Wiseman, ; Reber and Alcock, , and as proposed recently by Schooler et al.
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication. The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
This is problematic because the data suggest that the original method is probably more relevant Schlitz and Honorton, ; May et al. The approach relying on unselected participants yields small effect sizes that can only be shown at a statistical level, and is thus easily criticized and less convincing. The argument usually proposed by skeptics to explain such results is that both the experimenter and the participant were cheating Hansel, ; Palmer, Psi research is not unique in this regard.
It can be argued that many effects in psychology have no underlying explanation from a biological or a physical point of view. It is indeed not usual that psychology say something about reality that could contradict sciences studying matter and living organisms. As it will be suggested later in this paper, there may be a possibility for psi researchers to avoid this path. Some researchers have already tried to do this with an experiment in which the participants had to mentally influence the electrodermal activity of another participant Schlitz et al.
One of the experiments has also been conducted with a population composed of artist in order to increase the effect but no significant result has been obtained Rabeyron et al. For a critic of this meta-analysis, see Lakens Bem had already proposed significant results about psi since the s with the Ganzfeld studies Bem and Honorton, , even after taking into account remarks from the critics.
He describes psi research as a sweater constantly unravels. This is why currently researchers try to demonstrate this elusive aspect of psi Maier et al. For example, a line of research has been developed to determine whether the nature of the targets during a psi experiment could influence the quality of the results.
A significant correlation has been found between the descriptions of the participants and the degree of entropy of the target e. So the QRP hypothesis is not sufficient to explain the Ganzfeld results and, by implication, the results of many psi experiments. Classical mainstream experiments have been re-analyzed taking into account the psi hypothesis, leading sometimes to significant results.
For example, Bierman has found a presentiment effect in data from classical Antonio Damasio experiments. The researchers have usually a particularly strong intention toward their results because their ability to publish in a good journal, and their own career, depends on the results they will get. Paradoxically, a scientific experiment could be considered as one of the best set-up to induce psi effect. For example, if the participant has to push a button in order to put a light in green or in red the color of the light depends on the result of the RNG , he does not have a direct and mental influence on the RNG; he has actually choose the right time to push the button in order to select a random binary sequence more 0 or more 1 associated with the right color.
It could also be hypothesized that other controversial effects like homeopathy and different forms of complementary and alternative medicine practices Hyland, could be the consequence of psi Walach, ; Lucadou, If this hypothesis is true, it is not only important from a scientific point of view, but it also means that large amount of money invested in scientific research are lost because they actually concern psi effects.
Such approach has also been used for searching missing persons Schwartz, , archeology Schwartz, , and financial investing Bierman and Rabeyron, The results will be published in Royal society open science. Another original approach consists in determining biological and genetic markers of psi. The aim is then not to demonstrate the existence of psi but rather to describe its biological foundations. For example, phenomenological and neurobiological aspects of synesthesia can be evaluated Eagleman et al.
So, if the profound nature of psi cannot be explained, reliable markers correlated with its expression using fMRI or EEG studies could be determined in order to find neuro-correlates of psi Moulton and Kosslyn, But the level of research in this domain has to be improved Acunzo et al. Genetic analysis could also be relevant to detect selected participants and represent a particularly promising area of research. It is also interesting to note that a number of important discoveries have been made by working with simple organisms.
A famous example has been given by a Nobel Prize winner, Kandel , who has discovered molecular aspects of memory processes thanks to Aplysia californica — a small sea slug — equipped with a very simple nervous system only 20, neurons. If psi is not a specificity of human consciousness and is shared with other species Sheldrake, , it could be relevant to look for the equivalent of A.
In this regard, it seems that what is observed at a macro level is close to what is described by physicists at a quantum level about the influence of the observer. But this model does not pretend that psi is a quantum phenomenon. It rather supposes that several aspects of quantum formalism e. Acunzo, D. Anomalous experiences, psi and functional neuroimaging.
Alcock, J. Give the null hypothesis a chance: reasons to remain doubtful about the existence of psi. Google Scholar. Psi wars: Getting to grips with the paranormal. Charlottesville: Imprint Academic. Atmanspacher, H. Exceptional experiences of stable and unstable mental states, understood from a dual-aspect point of view.
Philosophies The Pauli-Jung conjecture and its impact today. London: Andrews UK Limited. Bateman, I. Testing competing models of loss aversion: an adversarial collaboration.
Public Econ. Bem, D. Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer. Feeling the future: a meta-analysis of 90 experiments on the anomalous anticipation of random future events.
FRes Must psychologists change the way they analyze their data? Bierman, D. Anomalous baseline effects in mainstream emotion research using psychophysiological variables. Simulations and results of an automated ARV-casino experiment. Testing for questionable research practices in a meta-analysis: an example from experimental parapsychology. PLoS One e Blackmore, S. The elusive open mind: ten years of negative research in parapsychology.
Skeptical Inquirer 11, — Examining psychokinesis: the interaction of human intention with random number generators—a meta-analysis. Braude, S. The gold leaf lady and other parapsychological investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Broughton, R. Repeatability and experimenter effect: are subjects really necessary? The experimental evidence for parapsychological phenomena: a review. Errors of the third kind. Parapsychology: A handbook for the 21st century. Jefferson: McFarland. Carpenter, J. First sight: ESP and parapsychology in everyday life. Chalmers, D. Schneider and M. Velmans Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Chalmers, A. What is this thing called science? Lucia: University of Queensland Press. Coyne, J. Are we witnessing the decline effect in the Type D personality literature? What can be learned? Eagleman, D. A standardized test battery for the study of synesthesia. Methods , — Eisenbud, J. New York: William Morrow. Parapsychology and the unconscious. New York: North Atlantic Book. Feyerabend, P.
Paris: Le Seuil. While experimental and analysis methods became more and more professional in the last decades, researchers complain … Expand. View 1 excerpt, cites background. Meta-Analysis and Replication in Psi Research Replication is critical in demonstrating that a given result is not due to chance or artifact Lykken, and, indeed, most traditional philosophies … Expand.
View 7 excerpts, cites background. A Review and Proposed Model. The hypotheses are 1 alleged psi results are actually due to … Expand. View 7 excerpts, cites background, results and methods. Five Experiments on Telepathic Communications of Emotions. In parapsychology, the term psi refers to hypothetical psychological phenomena that cannot be explained in terms of any known natural law.
A major class of such phenomena involve extrasensory … Expand. The persistent paradox of psychic phenomena: An engineering perspective. Although a variety of so-called psychic phenomena have attracted man's attention throughout recorded history, organized scholarly effort to comprehend such effects is just one century old, and … Expand.
This article presents a meta-analysis of experiments testing the hypothesis that consciousness in particular, mental intention can cause tossed dice to land with specified targets face up. The ganzfeld database has received considerable attention since Bem and Honorton's publication. They reported a significant difference between static and dynamic targets, although they did not … Expand. Psychology and anomalous observations: The question of ESP in dreams. Books by psychologists purporting to offer critical reviews of research in parapsychology do not use the scientific standards of discourse prevalent in psychology.
Experiments at Maimonides Medical … Expand. View 2 excerpts, references results. Replication and Meta-Analysis in Parapsychology. Parapsychology, the laboratory study of psychic phenomena, has had its history interwoven with that of statistics. Many of the controversies in parapsychology have focused on statistical issues, and … Expand.
View 1 excerpt, references background. Extrasensory Perception: Research Findings. Although claims of psychic phenomena have been with us since antiquity, the beginning of organized research into the nature of these phenomena is usually associated with the founding in of the … Expand. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Evidence is reviewed which suggests that there may be little or no direct introspective access to higher order cognitive processes. Subjects are sometimes a unaware of the existence of a stimulus … Expand. We report a meta-analysis of forced-choice precognition experiments published in the English-language parapsychological literature between and These studies involve attempts by subjects to … Expand.
Parapsychological research: A tutorial review and critical appraisal. Beginning in the s, some eminent scientists such as Robert Hare, Alfred Russel Wallace, and Sir William Crookes investigated the claims of spiritualist mediums and believed that they had … Expand. This paper describes a 13 year long, and still continuing, series of laboratory experiments that demonstrate that persons are able to exert direct mental influences upon a variety of biological … Expand.
Related Papers. By clicking accept or continuing to use the site, you agree to the terms outlined in our Privacy Policy , Terms of Service , and Dataset License.
0コメント