Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:00, 24 December 2006

Parapsychology is the study of certain types of paranormal phenomena. The term is based on the Greek para (beside/beyond), psyche (soul/mind), and logos (account/explanation) and was coined by psychologist Max Dessoir in or before 1889. Its first appearance was in an article by Dessoir in the June 1889 issue of the German publication Sphinx. J. B. Rhine later popularized "parapsychology" as a replacement for the earlier term "psychical research", during a shift in methodologies which brought experimental methods to the study of psychic phenomena.

In contemporary parapsychology, the term refers to the study of psi, indicating psychic phenomena.

The scientific reality of parapsychological phenomena and the validity of scientific parapsychological research is a matter of frequent dispute and criticism. It is regarded by critics as a pseudoscience, but proponents claim that parapsychology research results are scientifically rigorous. Despite criticisms, a number of academic institutions now conduct research on the topic, employing laboratory methodologies and statistical techniques, such as meta-analysis. The Parapsychological Association has been a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for over 20 years.

Scope of parapsychological study

According to the Parapsychological Association, parapsychology is limited in its scope to the study of three main classes of paranormal phenomena. These classes include:

• Mental phenomena: often described as extrasensory perception, this class includes unusual mental states or abilities, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, retrocognition, remote viewing, psychometry, xenoglossy, mediumism, channeling, clairaudience, clairsentience, and possession. This class involves some type of information transfer occurring outside the confines of one's five senses.

• Physical phenomena: this class includes unusual physical occurrences, such as psychokinesis (often referred to as telekinesis), poltergeists, stigmata, paranormal vanishing, reality shifts, materializations, psychic healing, faith healing, morphic fields, and synchronicity. These types of phenomena often involve the mind influencing its physical surroundings.

• Survival phenomena: this class deals with the survival of consciousness after physical death and includes ghosts, out-of-body experiences (OBEs) (also known as astral projections), reincarnation and near-death experiences (NDEs)

Other reported phenomena which are thought to be paranormal, but which are outside these classifications, are often considered outside the current scope of parapsychology.

History, claims and scientific investigation

Status of the field

Many professional scientists study parapsychology. It is an interdisciplinary field, attracting psychologists, physicists, engineers, and biologists, as well as those from other sciences. One organization involved in the field, the Parapsychological Association is an affiliate of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). . At present (2006) there are about two hundred and seventy five members in the Parapsychological Association.

Parapsychology is a frequently deprecated subject in science and the academy. Individuals who show an interest in studying psychic phenomena, even from a skeptical point of view, often have difficulty finding or keeping sustained employment. They may be denied funding or the chance to publish, but it is difficult to be sure of the cause, as so many funding proposals are denied anyway. Parapsychologists frequently believe, however, that they have been the objects of discrimination due to their field of study.

For example, Cambridge physicist Brian Josephson who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1973 told The Observer "'Yes, I think telepathy exists,' 'and I think quantum physics will help us understand its basic properties.' 'I think journals like Nature and Science are censoring such research,' he said. 'There is a lot of evidence to support the existence of telepathy, for example, but papers on the subject are being rejected - quite unfairly.'"

As a general rule, while trained scientists may not be as likely to believe in parapsychological phenomena as the general public, they are far from monolithic in their disbelief. Surveys of this group are rare, but in their 1994 paper in the Psychological Bulletin entitled Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer Daryl J. Bem and Charles Honorton quote a 1979 survey:

A survey of more than 1,100 college professors in the United States found that 55% of natural scientists, 66% of social scientists (excluding psychologists), and 77% of academics in the arts, humanities, and education believed that ESP is either an established fact or a likely possibility. The comparable figure for psychologists was only 34%. Moreover, an equal number of psychologists declared ESP to be an impossibility, a view expressed by only 2% of all other respondents (Wagner; Monnet, 1979).

A number of Nobel Laureates have been of the belief that the field of parapsychology is worthy of funding and study. Among these are Brian Josephson, Kary Mullis, and Wolfgang Pauli. Many eminent scientists from a variety of fields also support parapsychology research, such as Hans Eysenck, Robert G Jahn, Daryl Bem and Rupert Sheldrake.

State of the controversy

Proponents of parapsychology claim that their subject is not controversial because it lacks valid scientific results, but rather because parapsychology touches on areas of profound human ignorance such as physics and the nature of consciousness, and also areas of deep meaning such as religion, superstition, and traditional beliefs.

Some skeptics have accused scientists involved in parapsychology of being frauds and pseudoscientists who bias their results to fulfill their emotional needs.

There are at least half a dozen peer-reviewed journals of parapsychology. However, research in this area has been characterized by deception, fraud, and incompetence in setting up properly controlled experiments and evaluating statistical data (Alcock 1990; Gardner 1981; Gordon 1987; Hansel 1989; Hines 1990; Hyman 1989; Park 2000; Randi 1982)."

Proponents of parapsychology have responded that the skeptics are promoting "scientism" rather than real science by acting as if results which contradict established knowledge cannot be real. Even Marcello Truzzi, a founder of the Society for Scientific Exploration, director for the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research and founding co-chairman of the skeptical organization Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (now the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry), said that

A characteristic of many scoffers is their pejorative characterization of proponents as "promoters" and sometimes even the most protoscientific anomaly claimants are labelled as "pseudoscientists" or practitioners of "pathological science." In their most extreme form., scoffers represent a form of quasi-religious Scientism that treats minority or deviant viewpoints in science as heresies (Truzzi, 1996).

Truzzi also stated that

Over the years, I have decried the misuse of the term "skeptic" when used to refer to all critics of anomaly claims.Since "skepticism" properly refers to doubt rather than denial--nonbelief rather than belief--critics who take the negative rather than an agnostic position but still call themselves "skeptics" are actually pseudo-skeptics and have, I believed, gained a false advantage by usurping that label. In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved.Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic.Thus, if a subject in a psi experiment can be shown to have had an opportunity to cheat, many critics seem to assume not merely that he probably did cheat, but that he must have, regardless of what may be the complete absence of evidence that he did so cheat and sometimes even ignoring evidence of the subject's past reputation for honesty. Similarly, improper randomization procedures are sometimes assumed to be the cause of a subject's high psi scores even though all that has been established is the possibility of such an artifact having been the real cause.Evidence in science is always a matter of degree and is seldom if ever absolutely conclusive.(On Pseudo-Skepticism by Marcello Truzzi)

Skeptics have responded to criticism by saying, in the words of Carl Sagan, that "…extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Parapsychologists riposte that they have attained levels of proof which are more than sufficient to prove their results in any other field of science.

Another factor which makes parapsychology highly controversial is that there is no theory which can account for parapsychological results. Psi seems to be able to establish informational links both to the past and the future. Its effects do not seem to drop off according to the inverse square law, as with other physical forces. And information gathered using psi does not seem to require energy to facilitate its transfer. Also, there may not be any limit on the complexity of information gained by psi.

Parapsychology is also disturbing to those who believe that to admit that psi exists would encourage religion, superstition, and psychic frauds, as all these are based either on manifestations of psi, or on reports which are hard to distinguish from it. Skeptics wonder if this would undermine the foundations of science and reason.

There have been a huge number of parapsychological experiments performed under controlled laboratory conditions. According to Dr. Dean Radin,

In 1993, the parapsychologist Charles Honorton, from the University of Edinburgh, considered what skeptics of psi experiments used to claim, and what they no longer claimed. He demonstrated that virtually all the skeptical arguments used to explain away psi over the years had been resolved through new experimental designs. This does not mean the experiments conducted today are “perfect,” because there is nothing perfect in the empirical sciences. But it does mean that the methods available today satisfy the most rigorous skeptical requirements for providing “exceptional evidence.” As we’ve seen, such experiments have been conducted, with successful results.(Radin 1997:208-209)

Many of these experiments have been done with the aid of skeptics of parapsychology, and also with the aid of professional conjurors, in order to eliminate as much as possible all controversies concerning the analysis of the data gathered, and to prevent fraud on the part of the subjects. Dean Radin quotes parapsychologist George Hansen as saying that

Although the public tends to view magicians as debunkers, the opposite is more the case. Birdsell (1989) polled a group of magicians and found that 82 percent gave a positive response to a question of belief in ESP. Truzzi (1983) noted a poll of German magicians that found that 72.3 percent thought psi was probably real. Many prominent magicians have expressed a belief in psychic phenomena. …. It is simply a myth that magicians have been predominantly skeptical about the existence of psi.(Radin 1997:207)

Concerning a series of computer-controlled ganzfeld experiments done by the parapsychologist Charles Honorton in the 1980s, magician Ford Kross, an officer of the Psychic Entertainers Association wrote that

In my professional capicity as a mentalist, I have reviewed Psychophysical Research Laboratories' automated ganzfeld system and found it to provide excellent security against deception by subjects.(Radin 1997:86)

Another major reason that psi has remained controversial is that parapsychologists have sometimes been fooled by hoaxes. Some parapsychological studies have been badly designed, in such a way as to permit fraud. In the case of Project Alpha, magician James Randi planted magicians as subjects of a parapsychological experiment, and they were able to fool the researchers. Such methodological failures have been cited by skeptics as evidence of the probability that most if not all parapsychological results derive from error or fraud.

Andrew Greeley, a Catholic priest and a sociologist from the University of Arizona, studied surveys on belief in ESP from 1978 through 1987, and he also studied the mental health of believers in ESP. The surveys he studied showed that from 1978 through 1987, the number of American adults who reported psychic experiences rose from 58% to 67% (clairvoyance and contacts with the dead were reported by 25% of his respondents). According to Greeley, the elderly, women, widows and widowers, and the conventionally religious report a higher incidence of such experiences. He also tested the psychological well-being of people reporting mystical experiences with the "Affect Balance Scale" and found that people reporting mystical experiences received top scores. Greeley summarized his findings by writing:

People who've tasted the paranormal, whether they accept it intellectually or not, are anything but religious nuts or psychiatric cases. They are, for the most part, ordinary Americans, somewhat above the norm in education and intelligence and somewhat less than average in religious involvement.

A few parapsychologists are skeptics, for example Chris French and his colleagues at the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit at Goldsmiths College in London, and Richard Wiseman and his colleagues at the Perrott-Warrick Research Unit in the Psychology Department of the University of Hertfordshire, both of which units include individuals who are members of the Parapsychological Association. These researchers do not approach the field with a belief in the paranormal, but are rather interested in the purely psychological aspects of those who report paranormal experiences, along with the study of the psychology of deception, hallucination, etc. These researchers also have provided their own guidelines and input to other parapsychologists for the design of experiments and how to properly test those who claim psychic abilities. While some of these guidelines have been useful, many have suffered from a naive understanding of scientific practice in general and in parapsychology in particular, from a distorted view of the methodology actually in use in the field, and the unfortunate habit of some skeptics of making sweeping statements about the applicability of counter-hypotheses to lines of research without actually investigating the appropriateness of those counter-hypotheses to the details at hand. (See, for example a mostly-positive review of one of these guidelines written by skeptics.)

Interpretation of the evidence

Scientists who support parapsychology research hold that there is at least a small amount of data from properly controlled experiments that can be trusted for a small number of psi phenomena. Some of these scientists hold that this evidence is not definitive, but suggestive enough to warrant further research . Others believe that a great deal of evidence has been collected, which, if it addressed more conventional phenomena, would be sufficient to provide proof.

Some experiments have tested the ability to use ESP to get above-average scores when guessing targets such as cards, pictures, or videos. Other experiments have tested the ability to foretell future events, both consciously, and unconsciously by using electrodes to measure galvanic skin responses to future stimuli. There have also been many ganzfield experiments testing the ability to influence random number generators. Many of these experiments have had positive results, with subjects scoring significantly above chance. This significance, when analyzed using statistics, has often been astronomically high.(Radin 1997:84) However, such results only seem impressive to those educated in statistics, because the results have been only a few percentage points above chance. For instance, where chance = 25%, a psychic might score, on average, between 33% and 37%.(Radin 1997:83-88) Some of the studies have returned results which are not significantly above chance (often defined as a 95% confidence interval).(Radin 1997:78-84) When results of these studies are combined in meta-analyses, they return astronomically high results in favor of the existence of psi (or some unknown factor). This is so even when common statistical tools are used to rule out "file drawer" cases which might occur when insignificant results are not reported. Other experiments aimed at detecting psi, especially those performed by experimenters and subjects who disbelieve in psi, have scored significantly below chance (this is called psi-missing).(Radin 1997:108-109) Despite the extremely positive results of psi experiments, however, parapsychology remains highly controversial, partially due to the lack of a theory which explains its results.

Criticism and response

General context

Skeptics of parapsychology hold that the entire body of evidence to date is of poor quality and not properly controlled; in their view, the entire field of parapsychology has produced no results whatsoever. They cite instances of fraud, flawed or potentially flawed studies, and the psychological need for mysticism as ways explain parapsychological results.

Why, then, are so many people predisposed to believe that ESP exists? In part, such beliefs may stem from understandable misperceptions, misinterpretations, and selective recall. But some people also have an unsatisfied hunger for wonderment, an itch to experience the magical. In Britain and the United States, the founders of parapsychology were mostly people who, having lost their religious faith, began searching for a scientific basis for believing in the meaning of life and in life after death (Alcock, 1985; Beloff, 1985).

Skeptic Susan Blackmore also states that "People's desire to believe in the paranormal is stronger than all the evidence that it does not exist."

Proponents of parapsychology argue that those who hold these views have not had sufficient contact with the published literature of the field such as that which can be found in the Journal of Parapsychology, the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, or in the proceedings of the annual convention of the Parapsychological Association. Instead, many skeptics have relied on the analyses made by members of the skeptical community, who wrongly assume that all parapsychological experiments suffer from flaws, and therefore no parapsychological experiment may be considered conclusive. Working psi researchers often welcome criticisms which are not psychologically or ideologically biased and which are based on knowledge of the peer-reviewed, published literature of the field. Criticisms which consist of blanket statements are not encouraged. (Radin, 1997: 205-227)

However, even "insiders" in the parapsychological community worry about the possible harm that naive belief in paranormal phenomena can have on individuals, culture and societies. A great deal of effort has been put into the development of expertise in dealing with reported experiences both in a clinical sense, and as a topic of investigation. J.B. Rhine warned that

Parapsychologists had better give some thought to the fact that their kind of psi is no longer nearly as securely under their own social control as in the past. The time has come when we who work with psi need to decide whether we really do know where we belong and just what our territory is. - - - Is there any other experimental science that rests on such a slight basis of uniformity and standardization? (Rhine, 1972, 175).

One point raised by both proponents and skeptics of parapsychology is the need to be critical of the theory, methods, and conclusions of all persons who investigate or comment on parapsychology as a science, no matter what point of view they represent. In order to be an objective professional, a commentator must understand the vast past and present published scientific literature in the field of parapsychology, have a respect for the art of conjuring and its masters, and an unbiased attitude. Selective and historically uninformed armchair cheerleading and armchair skepticism are equally useless in all fields of inquiry and science. (Radin, 1997: 205-227)

General criticism and response

• Skeptics say that parapsychology relies on Anecdotal evidence, which is inherently unreliable. Anecdotes may have natural, non-anomalous explanations such as random coincidence, fraud, imagination, or auto-suggestion. Therefore any parapsychology research (or any scientific research) relying purely on anecdotal evidence is worthless.

Parapsychological response: the hard evidence for psi phenomena today is founded on laboratory experiments and not anecdotal evidence. Although anecdotal evidence is considered valid in law and many other fields, it is not necessary to use it to prove the general existence of psi.

• Skeptics say that many experiments in parapsychology have not been controlled to prevent fraud, and thus parapsychological results cannot be trusted. This is especially so given the fact that a number of people who claimed to possess psi abilities were later proven to be frauds.

Parapsychological response: there is no such thing as a completely foolproof experiment in any field of science, and it is unreasonable to hold parapsychology to a higher standard of epistemology than the other sciences. In point of fact, standards in the field of parapsychology are usually higher than in other fields.

PARAPSYCHOLOGY, widely dismissed as a sloppy pseudoscience, makes far more use of rigorous experimental methods than other scientific disciplines, according to a study of the prevalence of "blind" methodology in research.

In the words of skeptic Ray Hyman, speaking in 1984 on the science program Nova,

Hansel has a tendency to believe that if any experiment can be shown to be susceptible to fraud, then that immediately means it no longer can be used for evidence for psi. I do sympathize with the parapsychologists who rebut this by saying, well, that can be true for any experiment in the world, because there's always some way you can think of how fraud could have gotten into the experiment. You cannot make a perfectly 100 percent fraud-proof experiment. This would apply to all science. (From a transcript quoted in Radin 1997: 222)

Fraud and incompetence in parapsychology is addressed in the same way it is addressed in any other field of science: repeating experiments at multiple independent laboratories; publishing methods and results of studies in order to receive critical feedback and design better protocols, etc. There is no evidence of a greater degree of fraud in parapsychology than in other areas of science. Also, in the words of skeptic Marcello Truzzi, a founder of the Society for Scientific Exploration, director for the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research and founding co-chairman of the skeptical organization Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (now the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry),

In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved.Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic. (On Pseudo-Skepticism by Marcello Truzzi)

• Skeptics say that parapsychology experiments which have had positive results lack replication at independent laboratories. Ray Hyman contends that

Before we abandon relativity and quantum mechanics in their current formulations, we will require more than a promissory note. We will want, as is the case in other areas of science, solid evidence that these findings can, indeed, be produced under specified conditions.

Parapsychological response: while (as is the case in other fields of science such as psychology) there is no definitive experiment in parapsychology which will give 100% positive results 100% of the time, there are very high numbers of replications of basic laboratory parapsychological experiments. This is why it is possible to do meta-analyses of these studies. For instance, the results of the Stanford Research Institute, remote viewing experiments undertaken between 1973 and 1988 which returned odds against the hypothesis that the results were due to chance of more than a billion billion to one, were replicated by the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory. (Radin 1997:91-109) (Radin 2006: 278)

• Skeptics say that there may be a "file drawer" problem in the field of parapsychology. A "file drawer" problem arises when only positive study results are made public, while studies with negative or null results are not made public.

Parapsychological response: there are statistical methods to control for such possible studies, and when this is done using standard statistical procedures, the file drawer problem does not, by an extremely wide margin, eliminate the statistical significance of parapsychological statistical analyses. (Radin 2006:104, 112-115)

• Skeptics say that positive results in psi experiments are so statistically insignificant as to be negligible, i.e. indistinguishable from chance.

Parapsychological response: there are certain phenomena which have been replicated with odds against chance far beyond that required for acceptance in any other science. Meta-analyses show that these cannot be accounted for by any file drawer problem. Also, the same thing can be said concerning nearly all experiments in sociology, biomedicine, psychology, and biology. (Radin 1997: 219)

• Skeptics say that parapsychology suffers from what is called The psi assumption. Just because there exist currently inexplicable positive results of apparently sound parapsychological experiments does not prove the existence of psi. Rather, the assumption that any statistical deviation from chance is, strictly speaking, only evidence that either this was a rare, statistically unlikely occurrence that happened by chance, or that something was causing a deviation from chance. Flaws in the experimental design are a common cause of this, and so the assumption that it must be psi is fallacious.

According to Ray Hyman,

we were to find that we could reproduce the findings under specified conditions, this would still be a far cry from concluding that psychic functioning has been demonstrated. This is because the current claim is based entirely upon a negative outcome -- the sole basis for arguing for ESP is that extra-chance results can be obtained that apparently cannot be explained by normal means.

Parapsychologists respond that, while there are many potential theoretical explanations of psi, parapsychology as a science does not claim to understand what psi is, but

Instead, design experiments to test experiences that people have reported throughout history. If rigorous tests for what we have called "telepathy" result in effects that look like, sound like, and feel like the experiences reported in real life, then call it what you will, but the experiments confirm that this common experience is not an illusion. (Radin 1997: 210)

"Psi" is the name for an unknown factor, not necessarily for a force or factor outside the current range of scientific knowledge. However, it does seem that psi has some features which may be outside the range of current scientific theory. For instance, the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory often included a precognitive aspect, and the studies obtained very highly significant results. (Radin 1997:91-109) Skeptics and parapsychologists generally agree that, as per Occam's Razor, simple explanations should be preferred for any resulting theories of psi. Some parapsychologists are critical of skeptics' explanations of parapsychological results (for instance that they are the result of fraud) specifically because such explanations are un-parsimonious. It often stretches the imagination to believe that parapsychological results are due to fraud or other conventional explanations. Conventional explanations, many parapsychologists believe, should also conform to Occam's Razor. Then there are others, both skeptics and proponents, who agree that nature itself is frequently un-parsimonious. After all, it would be much simpler if nothing at all existed, or if only one type of particle existed, or if there were only one dimension of space (as may exist in a black hole).

• Skeptics say that psychics could make a lot of money predicting or even controlling (via PK) the outcomes of boxing matches, football games, roulette wheel spins, individual stock price changes, and so on, but none of them seem to do so. This indicates that psychic powers do not exist.

Parapsychological response: in the words of Dean Radin, "Except for being profit-oriented, many gambling games are essentially identical to psi experiments conducted in the laboratory." (Radin 1997: 175). However, while psi effects do occur, real psi anomalies usually have only a very weak effect, which is not sufficient to overcome the bias against the gambler introduced by gambling houses. (see Radin 1997: 175-189). Additionally, in rare instances, there is anecdotal evidence that psychics have indeed won rewards by accurate prediction.

• Skeptics say that that the existence of psi phenomena would violate "the known laws of physics".

Parapsychological response: human knowledge of the "laws of physics" is incomplete. For instance Newtonian Mechanics, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, even when taken together, do not add up to a complete description of how the universe works (see standard model). A "physical law" is only a mathematical description of the way natural systems behave. If natural systems are seen to behave differently than predicted by physics, then physics needs to be revised (see scientific method). Also, it is unknown whether the laws of physics as currently understood are actually violated by psi, or whether psi simply operates in a manner which current physics does not describe, much as the workings of the interior of an atom cannot be described by Einstein's theory of general relativity. So if the existence of psi phenomenon are ever undeniably proved, explaining how they work might not require revising the known laws of physics, but might merely require their extension. Precognition, for example, would challenge commonly held (though unproved) notions about causality and the unidirectional nature of time on a macroscopic scale. But such notions do not hold the status of "Physical Laws," as for example in the case of the law of conservation of energy. Beliefs about how nature works are already being challenged by modern physical theories, quite apart from psi phenomena (see string theory). (see Radin 1997: 221-222)

• Skeptics say that the paranormal is culturally very popular and profitable. This has led to the production of vast amounts of material on topics such as ESP. Skeptics have been able to show that some of the pro-paranormal material is unreliable, misleading or innaccurate. However, its producers continue to market it in spite of such serious shortcomings. Skeptics have therefore claimed that the market is biased in favour of books, TV specials, etc. which support paranormal interpretations, and that this leaves the public poorly informed..

Parapsychological response: parapsychologists have often been concerned that the science of parapsychology may be confused in the public mind with paranormal claims which are not scientifically justified, to the detriment of the field's standing. Those of the Rhinean School of parapsychology felt that the

only firmly settled parapsychological subject matter consists of extrasensory perception (ESP) and psychokinesis (PK). This explains why Rhine considered the "occult wave" (Bender, 1976, 7) which became prominent in the Western countries during the seventies and included acupuncture, Kirlian photography and astrology, as very dangerous for the image of parapsychology as an experimental science.

Other skeptical claims

Some skeptics believe that parapsychology should not be pursued because it represents a danger to society.

Noted parapsychologists

List of parapsychologists

• Dean Radin
• Charles Tart
• Joseph B. Rhine
• Jessica Utts
• Charles Honorton
• Carl Sargent
• William Crookes
• Max Dessoir
• Hans Bender
• Giuseppe Calligaris
• Oliver Lodge
• Thelma Moss
• Julian Ochorowicz
• Harry Price
• Charles Robert Richet
• D. Scott Rogo
• Helmut Schmidt (parapsychologist)
• Gary Schwartz
• Ian Stevenson
• Ingo Swann
• William G. Roll

Noted critics of parapsychology

• Ray Hyman
• Richard Wiseman
• Susan Blackmore
• Marcello Truzzi (deceased)
• Banachek
• Derren Brown
• Milbourne Christopher
• Martin Gardner
• James Randi
• Ehrich Weiss (Harry Houdini)

References

1. ^ Encyclopedia of Occultism & Parapsychology edited by J. Gordon Melton Gale Research, ISBN 0-8103-5487-X
2. http://www.medicalglossary.org/psychological_phenomena_and_processes_parapsychology_definitions.html Medical Glossary.org
3. http://www.mdani.demon.co.uk/para/paraglos.htm#P Psychic Science.com
4. http://www.parapsych.org/glossary_l_r.html#p The Parapsychological Association, Inc. (PA) is the international professional organization of scientists and scholars engaged in the study of ‘psi’
5. ^ The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena by Dean I. Radin Harper Edge, ISBN 0-06-251502-0
6. Parapsychological Association. "What is the PA? Mission Statement"
7. http://www.parapsych.org/faq_file1.html#6
8. ^ http://www.parapsych.org/glossary_a_d.html
9. http://www.sheldrake.org/papers/Staring/JCSpaper1.pdf The Sense of Being Stared At And Other Unexplained Powers of the Human Mind Part 1: Is it Real or Illusory? By Rupert Sheldrake
10. http://www.siib.org/Downloads/Schmidt_EDA_DMILS_MA_BJP_2004.pdf Distant intentionality and the feeling of being stared at: Two meta-analyses By Stefan Schmidt, Rainer Schneider, Jessica Utts and Harald Walach
11. The Presence of the Past: Morphic Resonance & the Habits of Nature By Rupert Sheldrake
12. http://www.parapsych.org/faq_file1.html#6
13. http://www.parapsych.org/faq_file1.html#10
14. DISCIPLINING HETERODOXY, CIRCUMVENTING DISCIPLINE: PARAPSYCHOLOGY, ANTHROPOLOGICALLY By David J. Hess In David Hess and Linda Layne (eds.), Knowledge and Society Vol. 9: The Anthropology of Science and Technology. Greenwich, Ct.: JAI Press. Pp. 191-222. Electronic version available at http://www.davidjhess.org/DiscHet.pdf
15. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,560604,00.html Royal Mail's Nobel guru in telepathy row by Robin McKie, science editor of The Observer Sunday September 30, 2001, Retrieved December 17, 2006
16. National Public Radio Scienc Friday, May 1999. See http://lkm.fri.uni-lj.si/xaigor/slo/znanclanki/Wildey2.pdf
17. Lindorff, D. (2004). Pauli and Jung: The Meeting of Two Great Minds. Wheaton, IL: Quest Books.
18. Eysenck, H. J. (1998). Intelligence: A new look. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
19. Dunne, J. B. and Jahn, R. G. (2003). Information and uncertainty in remote perception research, Journal of Scientific Exploration
20. See Bem's web site: http://dbem.ws/
21. Sheldrake, R. (2003). The sense of being stared at: And other unexplained powers of the human mind. New York: Random House.
22. http://www.parapsych.org/faq_file3.html FAQ of the Parapsychological Association, Why is parapsychology so controversial?
23. http://skepdic.com/parapsy.html Skeptics Dictionary on Parapsychology
24. http://www.enlightenment.com/media/interviews/tartall/tart.html#Anchorpsi An Enlightenment Interview with Professor Charles T. Tart
25. http://www.scientificexploration.org/founding-members.html
26. http://www.csicop.org/about/csi.html
27. http://skepticalinvestigations.org/anomalistics/perspective.htm Anomalistics The Perspective of Anomalistics By Marcello Truzzi
28. On Pseudo-Skepticism A Commentary by Marcello Truzzi by Marcello Truzzi in the Zetetic Scholar, #12-13, 1987
29. http://www.anomalist.com/commentaries/pseudo.html On Pseudo-Skepticism A Commentary by Marcello Truzzi Read the article here
30. http://www.angelfire.com/ok/TheDeepSkies/SaganQuotes.html Carl Sagan Quotes
31. http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1996/subtle.html Subtle Connections: Psi, Grof, Jung, and the Quantum Vacuum By Ervin Laszlo
32. http://jeksite.org/psi/jp01.pdf J. E. Kennedy in The Journal of Parapsychology, Vol. 65, September 2001 (pp. 219-246)
33. Cite error: The named reference para3 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
34. Bem, D.J., and C. Honorton. 1994. Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer. Psychological Bulletin 115:4-18
35. http://www.banachek.org/nonflash/project_alpha.htm Project Alpha, The Skeptical Inquirer Summer 1983 The Project Alpha Experiment: Part one. The First Two Years by James Randi
36. ^ Entangled Minds by Dean Radin, Simon & Schuster, Paraview Pocket Books , 2006
37. Psychology (8th ed.) by David G. Myers. (c) 2007 by Worth Publishers, Inc.
38. http://www.davidmyers.org/Brix?pageID=61&article_part=4 Susan Blackmore, "Blackmore's first law, "As Quoted in IS THERE ESP? Putting ESP to the Experimental Test By David G. Myers, Professor of Psychology, Hope College, Retrieved Wednesday, December 13, 2006
39. ^ Criticism and Controversy in Parapsychology - An Overview By Eberhard Bauer, Department of Psychology, University of Freiburg, in the European Journal of Parapsychology, 1984, 5, 141-166
40. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15721171.700.html Retrieved Wednesday, December 13, 2006
41. http://www.scientificexploration.org/founding-members.html
42. http://www.csicop.org/about/csi.html
43. On Pseudo-Skepticism A Commentary by Marcello Truzzi by Marcello Truzzi in the Zetetic Scholar, #12-13, 1987
44. http://www.anomalist.com/commentaries/pseudo.html On Pseudo-Skepticism A Commentary by Marcello Truzzi Read the article here
45. http://www.csicop.org/si/9603/claims.html The Evidence for Psychic Functioning: Claims vs. Reality by Ray Hyman in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine, March/April 1996 Retrieved Wednesday, December 13, 2006
46. http://skepdic.com/psiassumption.html The Skeptic's Dictionary: Psi Assumption By Robert Todd Carroll
47. http://www.csicop.org/si/9603/claims.html The Evidence for Psychic Functioning: Claims vs. Reality by Ray Hyman in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine, March/April 1996 Retrieved Wednesday, December 13, 2006
48. Ernest Taves, The Skeptical Inquirer, 1978, 111(1), p.75-76; Barry Singer, The Humanist, XXXIX (3), 1979, p.44-45
49. [http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind00/access/c8/c8s5.htm Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding: Belief in the Paranormal or Pseudoscience National Science Foundation, 2000.

Further reading

• Parapsychology: Science or Magic? by James E. Alcock, Pergamon Press, 1981 ISBN 0-08-025773-9
• Parapsychology, by Rene Sudre, Citadel Press, NY, 1960, Library of Congress Catalog 60-13928.
• Parapsychology, by Khwaja Shamsuddin Azeemi, Al-Kitaab Publication, 1985.
• The Conscious Universe, by Dean Radin, Harper Collins, 1997, ISBN 0-06-251502-0.
• Entangled Minds by Dean Radin, Simon & Schuster, Paraview Pocket Books, 2006
• Parapsychology: A Concise History, by John Beloff, St. Martin's Press, 1993, ISBN 0-312-09611-9.
• Parapsychology: The Controversial Science, by Richard S. Broughton, Ballantine Books, 1991, ISBN 0-345-35638-1.
• Our Sixth Sense, by Charles Robert Richet, Rider & Co., 1937, First English Edition
• The Elusive Quarry: A Scientific Appraisal of Psychical Research, by Ray Hyman, Prometheus Books, 1989, ISBN 0-87975-504-0.
• Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Parapsychology, ed. Antony Flew, Prometheus Books, 1987, ISBN 0-87975-385-4
• The First Psychic: The Peculiar Mystery of a Victorian Wizard, by Peter Lamont, Little, Brown, UK, 2005 (Daniel Dunglas Home biography)
• Sixty Years of Psychical Research : Houdini and I Among the Spirits, by Joseph Rinn, Truth Seeker, 1950
• The Newer Spiritualism, by Frank Podmore, Arno Press, 1975, reprint of 1910 edition
• Revelations of a Spirit Medium by Harry Price and Eric J. Dingwall, Arno Press, 1975, reprint of 1891 edition by Charles F. Pigeon. This rare, overlooked, forgotten book gives the "insider's knowledge" of 19th century deceptions.
• Mediums of the 19th Century Volume Two, Book Four, Chapter One, Some Foreign Investigations by Frank Podmore, University Book, 1963, reprint of Modern Spiriritualism, 1902
• Occult and Supernatural Phenomena by D. H. Rawcliffe, Dover Publications, reprint of Psychology of the Occult, Derricke Ridgway Publishing co., 1952
• The Paranormal: The Evidence and its Implications for Concsciousness by Jessica Utts and Brian Josephson, 1996
• Edgar Cayce on Atlantis by Hugh Lynn Cayce, Castle Books, 1968
• Milbourne Christopher, ESP, Seers & Psychics : What the Occult Really Is, Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1970, ISBN 0-690-26815-7
• Milbourne Christopher, Mediums, Mystics & the Occult by Thomas Y. Crowell Co, 1975
• Milbourne Christopher, Search for the Soul, Thomas Y. Crowell Publishers, 1979
• Georges Charpak, Henri Broch, and Bart K. Holland (tr), Debunked! ESP, Telekinesis, and Other Pseudoscience, (Johns Hopkins University). 2004, ISBN 0-8018-7867-5
• Hoyt L. Edge, Robert L. Morris, Joseph H. Rush, John Palmer, Foundations of Parapsychology: Exploring the Boundaries of Human Capability, Routledge Kegan Paul, 1986, ISBN 0710-0226-1
• Paul Kurtz, A Skeptic's Handbook of Parapsychology, Prometheus Books, 1985, ISBN 0-87975-300-5
• Carl Edwin Lindgren. (1990, December). The future of parapsychology. Fate, pp. 60-64.
• Jeffrey Mishlove, Roots of Consciousness: Psychic Liberation Through History Science and Experience. 1st edition, 1975, ISBN 0-394-73115-8, 2nd edition, Marlowe & Co., July 1997, ISBN 1-56924-747-1 There are two very different editions. online
• D. Scott Rogo, Miracles: A Parascientific Inquiry into Wondrous Phenomena, New York, Dial Press, 1982.
• John White, ed. Psychic Exploration: A Challenge for Science, published by Edgar D. Mitchell and G. P. Putman, 1974, ISBN 39911342-8
• Richard Wiseman, Deception and self-deception: Investigating Psychics. Amherst, USA: Prometheus Press. 1997
• Benjamin B. Wolman, ed, Handbook of Parapsychology, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1977, ISBN 0-442-29576-6

See also

• Anomalous phenomenon
• Clairaudience
• Clairvoyance
• ESP
• List of spirituality-related topics
• List of parapsychologists
• Paraphysics
• Parapsychology basic topics
• Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP)
• Patapsychology
• PK
• Prophecy
• Psionics
• Reality shifts
• Reincarnation
• Remote Viewing
• The Bélmez Faces
• Transpersonal psychology
• Scientific investigation of telepathy

External links

Independent research organizations

• Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) was founded in 1973 by astronaut Edgar Mitchell to explore the frontiers of consciousness through rigorous scientific research.
• The Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) program was established at Princeton University in 1979 by Robert G. Jahn, then Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science.
• Society for Psychical Research (SPR). The original scientific society founded in London in 1882.
• American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR).
• Rhine Research Center and Institute for Parapsychology, originally part of Duke University, now an independent research center. The accomplished physicist Irving Langmuir, a founder of many studies in atmospheric electricity and plasma physics, visited Rhine at his laboratory in 1934. Rhine admitted (rather proudly and contentiously) to Langmuir that he had discarded data that was "wrong" because it did not support his belief in extrasensory perception. See Langmuir's 1953 talk Pathological Science at Princeton University
• Parapsychology Foundation
• Parapsychological Association This organisation has been a member of the AAAS for over 20 years.
• International Academy of Consciousness

University research organizations

• Koestler Parapsychology Unit at the University of Edinburgh.
• Parapsychology Research Group at Liverpool Hope University.
• Global Consciousness Project at Princeton
• The VERITAS Research Program at the University of Arizona
• Consciousness and Transpersonal Psychology Research Unit of Liverpool John Moores University.
• Psychology Research Cluster at the University of Northampton.
• Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) at Princeton University.
• Division of Personality Studies (DOPS), a unit of the Department of Psychiatric Medicine at the University of Virginia.
• Bigelow Chair of Consciousness Studies at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV).
• Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit (APRU) at the University of Adelaide.
• Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit at Goldsmiths University of London.
• Perrott-Warrick Research Unit in the Psychology Department of the University of Hertfordshire.

Other links

• Entry on parapsychology in the Skeptic's Dictionary
• Dean Radin's A Field Guide to Skepticism from his book The Conscious Universe.
• The online Library of Exploratory Science contains the complete text of many of the major peer reviewed journals in parapsychology and psychical research.

• Parapsychology
• Psychology
• Spirituality
• Paranormal
• Science