Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michel H said:
Even if people tend to favor certain numbers (however, I have been doing online telepathy tests for several years, and I generally didn't find that this was happening), this will not lead to "false telepathy signals", because the target number is also random. For example, if people always answer 3, and the probability distribution of the target is uniform, the correct answer rate will remain equal to 25%.
Click to expand...

We are not talking about false telepathy signals - we are talking about how random distributions work. Your methodology remains flawed, as previously explained.

The last sentence of your post is so patently untrue that it beggars the imagination. It's a flat-out contradiction.

To repeat a statement from one of my previous posts: You are not a subject-matter expert in probability and testing methodologies. Why are you not listening to the advice of those that are?
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
I have explained before when and why I find an answer not-credible
Click to expand...

Just out of interest sake, do you find my answer in your present test credible? A yes or no will do.

Because another factor you may delve into is how anybody who responds to your current test reacted to previous tests, and you might chase up the history of those posting on this "poll", against responses to previous polls, if anybody seriously bothers to follow your protocol, to cross check for credibility. This brings up a serious and genuine bias issue.

Thus you fail again. Apart from other problems, already exposed by members here, you need a completely new audience where you cannot refer to a members history to ascertain your version of credibility.

Norm
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
If I was looking for the word "nonsense", I don't think I would have to look for it for very long, because I think I have already seen it in your posts in this thread.

I have explained before when and why I find an answer not-credible:
Click to expand...


That's not how social science works. Do you have any actual evidence that answers that meet your made-up criteria are any less credible than any others?
Do you have a scoring rubric? Do you have any reason why credibility would matter in this kind of test?

You do not. You're methodology is flawed.
 
AdMan said:
I still cannot understand how you can keep defending your "credibility rating" nonsense after it's been explained to you multiple times that such a thing has no place in any kind of supposedly scientific test.

In a previous test, you even assigned a high "CR" to a post that was very obviously mocking you and/or the test, because you didn't realize that.

Your tests are a joke.
Click to expand...
I have been doing online telepathy tests for several years, and I generally found a hit rate close to 25% (when there are four possible answers), when I retain all answers (even though I was hoping, and am still hoping for a higher hit rate). Then, I asked myself (roughly): "What happens if I look only at the answers of the guys which seem friendlier in their answers (regardless of the number)". And then, it seemed that I began to see an apparent telepathy effect (i.e., more than 25%). It seems that this idea of credibility is very important in these online telepathy tests (at least, in "my case").


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.
 
Michel H said:
"What happens if I look only at the answers of the guys which seem friendlier in their answers (regardless of the number)". And then, it seemed that I began to see an apparent telepathy effect (i.e., more than 25%). It seems that this idea of credibility is very important in these online telepathy tests (at least, in "my case").
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, when I post on any forum, I usually find that members who agree with me with friendly answers are more friendly than members who do not agree with me.

I wonder how that works, as sometimes the same people agree and disagree with me depending on the subject of the thread. It could not possibly be confirmation bias on my part, could it?

Norm
 
Which party takes credit for being 'telepathic'?: the test taker, or the respondants? Or both?
 
Michel H said:
I have been doing online telepathy tests for several years, and I generally found a hit rate close to 25% (when there are four possible answers), when I retain all answers (even though I was hoping, and am still hoping for a higher hit rate). Then, I asked myself (roughly): "What happens if I look only at the answers of the guys which seem friendlier in their answers (regardless of the number)". And then, it seemed that I began to see an apparent telepathy effect (i.e., more than 25%). It seems that this idea of credibility is very important in these online telepathy tests (at least, in "my case").
Click to expand...


And you never questioned why it was only after inserting an absolutely subjective assessment of each answer you suddenly got better results?

In the last test we saw you negatively change your "CR" for a response after you learned that it was incorrect. That is a joke, not science.
 
Loss Leader said:
...Do you have any reason why credibility would matter in this kind of test?
...
Click to expand...
Yes, it's easy to understand. For example, people who want to attack me may be likely to attack me by giving an incorrect number, and also by putting aggressive stuff in their answers. Therefore, the two aspects are correlated. This is just basic human psychology.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.
 
Michel H said:
Yes, it's easy to understand. For example, people who want to attack me may be likely to attack me by giving an incorrect number, and also by putting aggressive stuff in their answers. Therefore, the two aspects are correlated. This is just basic human psychology.
Click to expand...


Do you really think that people who "want to attack you" actually do perceive your thoughts correctly but choose a wrong number on purpose?
 
Michel - Okay, now people know your protocol of selecting friendly response numbers only. What if people fake being friendly?
Have you ever tried walking up to strangers and asking them what number you are thinking of from 1 - 4? That way you would eliminate conspiracy bias amongst forum members.
 
Michel H said:
Yes, it's easy to understand. For example, people who want to attack me may be likely to attack me by giving an incorrect number, and also by putting aggressive stuff in their answers. Therefore, the two aspects are correlated. This is just basic human psychology.
Click to expand...


You know, this very much reminds me of this thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112896

ETA: Michel, you should still read through that thread, but to summarize, golfy is/was a member who thought he could transmit his thoughts telepathically, but everyone else lied about receiving them, so he wanted a test in which he would hook up someone else to a polygraph to show they were lying when they denied hearing his thoughts. See any parallels? At least he wanted to use a (somewhat) more objective tool, rather than a wholly subjective assessment.
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
Yes, it's easy to understand. For example, people who want to attack me may be likely to attack me by giving an incorrect number, and also by putting aggressive stuff in their answers. Therefore, the two aspects are correlated. This is just basic human psychology.
Click to expand...

...and this is another reason why you methodology is wrong. On one hand you dismiss the psychology behind why people choose certain numbers in a restricted range of choices, yet on the other hand you adopt an arbitrary and subjective filter "because psychology".
 
Michel H said:
If there is no telepathy, and if credibilities are assigned in a "blinded way", like in this current test, the hit rate should be equal to about 25%, within the subset of answers which seem credible to me (even if I am a little subjective in assigning credibilities). If it is not, this might indicate telepathy.
Click to expand...
It might. More likely it will indicate a crappy protocol. Use your telepathy on me to see where my money is.
 
Michel H said:
I have been doing online telepathy tests for several years, and I generally found a hit rate close to 25% (when there are four possible answers), when I retain all answers (even though I was hoping, and am still hoping for a higher hit rate). Then, I asked myself (roughly): "What happens if I look only at the answers of the guys which seem friendlier in their answers (regardless of the number)". And then, it seemed that I began to see an apparent telepathy effect (i.e., more than 25%). It seems that this idea of credibility is very important in these online telepathy tests (at least, in "my case").


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.
Click to expand...

This caught the "expert" parapsychologist Dr Rhine too. He thought that some of his test subjects were pulling his leg on some tests by deliberately giving the wrong answers. So he threw these results out.

And received "positive" results overall, though they were very small. :cool:

The exercise of explaining as to why this is hilarious is left to people who understand statistics. :deadhorse
 
fromdownunder said:
Funnily enough, when I post on any forum, I usually find that members who agree with me with friendly answers are more friendly than members who do not agree with me.
Click to expand...
Don't listen to fromdownunder, Michel. He's just a quarrelsome git who lies through his teeth at every opportunity. I should know because we're BFFs.

:) :) :)
 
AdMan said:
You know, this very much reminds me of this thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112896

ETA: Michel, you should still read through that thread, but to summarize, golfy is/was a member who thought he could transmit his thoughts telepathically, but everyone else lied about receiving them, so he wanted a test in which he would hook up someone else to a polygraph to show they were lying when they denied hearing his thoughts. See any parallels? At least he wanted to use a (somewhat) more objective tool, rather than a wholly subjective assessment.
Click to expand...
Yes, I've already seen this big thread. This may be an example of a "copycat" pseudo-telepath. In other words, my case ("the very big one", sorry if I sound arrogant here, this is not my intention) may have provided the inspiration to him. Another possible example was the Chinese guy who posted on this forum a few days ago to talk about telepathy.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.
 
Iamme said:
Michel - Okay, now people know your protocol of selecting friendly response numbers only. What if people fake being friendly?
...
Click to expand...
This is a possibility, which probably happens from time to time, but somewhat rarely, I think. It seems it is not the basic nature of the human being, to be very perverse in that way. Such an answer would probably get a low quality rating in my test (if I give one).


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.
 
Michel H said:
Yes, I've already seen this big thread. This may be an example of a "copycat" pseudo-telepath. In other words, my case ("the very big one", sorry if I sound arrogant here, this is not my intention) may have provided the inspiration to him. Another possible example was the Chinese guy who posted on this forum a few days ago to talk about telepathy.
Click to expand...


Have you considered the possibility that all of you may be deluding yourselves due to perhaps related medical conditions that may be treatable?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom