|
ESP findings
send controversial message By S. Carpenter
Both believers and skeptics agree that the most stringent method for
studying psi is the one dubbed the ganzfeld (German for whole field)
procedure. In this technique, researchers remove sensory distractions
with the aim of promoting telepathic communication between subjects,
called senders and receivers. In ganzfeld studies, a receiver who's unaware of participating in a
psi experiment describes his or her thoughts for 30 minutes. In a
separate room, a sender who can hear the receiver views a video or still
photo. The sender tries to telepathically coach the receiver into
imagining the same scene. Afterwards, the receiver chooses from a set of
four images the one that most closely resembles his or her earlier
thoughts. In 1994, psychologist Daryl J. Bem of Cornell University and his
colleague, the late Charles Honorton of the University of Edinburgh in
Scotland, described surprising results from Honorton's series of 11
ganzfeld experiments. They found that more often than could be explained
by chance, receivers chose the image that matched the one seen by
senders (SN: 1/29/94, p. 68). Now, psychologists Julie Milton of the University of Edinburgh and
Richard Wiseman of the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, England,
have pooled the results of 30 ganzfeld experiments using a statistical
method called metanalysis. In the July Psychological Bulletin,
the same journal in which Bem and Honorton presented their results, the
researchers report that their analysis shows no consistent evidence for
psi. "Although the new studies failed to replicate the effects of
earlier studies, it is not clear why they did so," Milton says. "This has been the history of parapsychology for about 150
years," remarks psychologist Ray Hyman of the University of Oregon
in Eugene. "Procedures look good at the beginning, and then they
fizzle out. Whether or not this is different is hard to say, but this
metanalysis suggests that on the average it doesn't look like there's
much going on." The metanalysis has generated heated discussion among psychologists.
Some argue that Milton and Wiseman were unjustified in lumping all 30
studies together because their results were so disparate. Milton
contends that a standard statistical test of variation among the results
showed that they could treat the studies as a uniform set. Bem says, however, "The reason the effect isn't significant is
that there are three studies that are pulling down the average, and
those studies are very nonstandard." Further, 6 of the 30 studies
showed significant psi effects—more than would be expected by chance,
he adds. Since the metanalysis was completed, nine more ganzfeld studies have
been published. Milton acknowledges that the psi effect would be
statistically significant if the analysis were updated to include these
studies. However, she observes, a single study had an especially strong
result, but no clear-cut effect spans the broad range of investigations.
"That will be a crucial thing to demonstrate in order to make a
strong claim that the studies show a genuine anomaly," she says. "My hope is that some of the proponents of the ganzfeld
procedure will try to use [the new report] as a springboard to develop
something replicable," says psychologist Scott O. Lilienfeld of
Emory University in Atlanta. "The ball is now in their court." From Science
News, Vol. 156, No. 5, July 31, 1999, p. 70. Copyright © 1999,
Science Service. |