Psi paper with "99.9%" results?

[afree87]

My parapsychologist friend from another forum submitted his paper for me to look at. I'm currently reviewing it, but the large amount of content (it's a term paper) is overwhelming me.

Take a look for yourself:
http://www.doomwave.com/psipaper.zip

I'd have to go to the library to find reviews of the scientists he cites, not having an in-depth study of parapsychology in my own library. I do recognize some recent psi buzzwords ("negative psi", ho ho ho).

The flaw of small sample is apparent in his study, but do you see any others?

The idea was to use auditory binaural beats in a psi test that we could verify ("we" being my roommate, who was a PhD student at the time, and myself, a researcher). Binaural beats can be created from any sound that is manipulated so the right and left channels create an interference pattern that, when listened to with headphones, will cause the listener's entire brain to synchronize itself to the pulse. Our hypothesis was that intuitive abilites would be increased as a person's brainwave levels lowered to a state of awake lucid-dreaming (Theta brainwave state between 3.5-7 Hertz). I can post the audio file to this if anyone is interested, and can create custom brainwave entrainment tracks for anyone that is interested and can provide hosting.

The way we tested this was a Zener card test, which is just 5 cards with different pictures that a program selects blindly & at random AFTER the subject chooses which will be the one selected (if the card is selected by the subject BEFORE the computer, clairvoyance is being tested). The test was repeated 4 times for each subject, and a statistical result of correct guesses was established.

One thing to keep in mind is that this was not published because for scientific results, a 99.9% statistical result is required, and since this was for a final in a class, and we did not do that many tests (because didn't want to do 10,000 test sessions with each person), so take the results as you will.

One notable observation in psi is that people who believe in psi phenomena almost without exception do better than those who do not. Not only that, but those who DO NOT believe in psi phenomena have a statistically significant number of INCORRECT guesses, as if they were reforcing their negative belief by subconsciously sabotaging their results. I, for one, found this result quite interesting.

This paper has not been publicliy released, and I am only able to do so at the request of the co-author by removing the credits.

To clarify, the main concepts for this paper are from my roommate, who is french and speaks less-than-publishable english. My contribution was half the workload and writing the paper in suitable english as we progressed.

Please don't just say that the entire paper is gibberish, that's not a valid response.

 

[Ed]

I'll read it. Just a quick observation: Anonamous papers are inadmissable in my book.

Then there is this from the front page:

CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN SCIENCE
Graduated School and Research Center

A formal paper that does not have "Graduate School" spelled correctly? Goodness me.

From their President:

Subtle energies can be most simply defined as energies connected to, but distinctly different from, those derived from the four physical forces discussed in the present physics paradigm. Therefore, subtle energies include emotional, mental and spiritual energies, and it is my belief that they will be the primary focus of all of science in the next century.

I will pay you $10 American if this place is accredited.

 

[Rob Lister]

Please don't just say that the entire paper is gibberish, that's not a valid response.

Okay, how 'bout...

Binaural beats can be created from any sound that is manipulated so the right and left channels create an interference pattern that, when listened to with headphones, will cause the listener's entire brain to synchronize itself to the pulse.

Emphasis mine. This is presented as a statement of fact. Where's the evidence?

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

"The way we tested this was a Zener card test, which is just 5 cards with different pictures that a program selects blindly & at random AFTER the subject chooses which will be the one selected (if the card is selected by the subject BEFORE the computer, clairvoyance is being tested)."

So did the program select before or after the subject?

The first part suggests that the subject chooses first, then the program.
The second part (in brackets) appears to contradict that by saying that if you select that way round you are testing clairvoyance.

If they can't explain the testing methodology, can they be relied upon to follow it?

 

[Ed]

I am not sure whether this will be fun or painful.

Abstract

Our main objective in this experiment is to affect psi ability by altering consciousness with auditory binaural beats. The beat frequencies consist of a 15 min modulated Theta induced brainwave activity with primordial sounds. These will be administered in order to cause subjects to filter internally generated pictures and feelings so they will be open to receive psi information during an ESP card test.

This is very poor and not science in the slightest.

The "main objective" is to manipulate something that has not been defined. He i poiting a mechanism with no basis. Primordial sounds? This is not an abstract. It is vague and incomprehensible and says nothing about what results were obtained.

Lest you think that I am being too critical, when a paper is prepaired unprofessionally from the outset it suggests a lack of rigor on the part of both the writer and recipients.

 

[DangerousBeliefs]

I was astonded to see this claim...

The scientific evidence supporting the phenomenon of remote viewing alone is sufficient to show that mind-consciousness is not a local phenomenon.

His support of this appears to be one experiment back in 1979. Since that time, there has been an explosion of discovery in the field of remote viewing?

 

[Rob Lister]

One notable observation in psi is that people who believe in psi phenomena almost without exception do better than those who do not.

If you don't believe it, just ask them.

edit: ubb

 

[LFTKBS]

From the paper: Oriental sages have always maintained that psychic capacitites emerge naturally as we get in touch with ever deeper levels of our inner being.

Well, duh.

 

[Jeff Corey]

The statement, "for scientific results, a 99.9% statistical result is required." is gibberish and shows no comprehension of statistics.

 

[Ed]

OK, too much time already.

The use of z scores is either sloppy or deliberately misleading.

I redid the analysis using a t-test for unpaired data. I guess you could have done a paired test but you would have to have known about the design a bit more. Anyhoo, t=0.150861634 which is breathtakingly close to zero which means that there is no difference nohow between test and control. p would be like .4 something which mean that this silly result would be expected to occur by chance 40% or more of the time.

I blame the institution and feel sorry for the kid.

Net, aide from the arm waving and questionable stat approach, there is nothing there.

The giveaway that this was junk occured in the abstract: The writer knew what he was going to find before he started.

Grade: As science F

As paranormal research Average

 

[Thomas]

The use of z scores is either sloppy or deliberately misleading.

Oh yea, you can say that alright. Lets have a look at the conclusion of the paper:

As shown in graph 3 this experiment is statistically significant, with the experimental group twice the amount of hits than in the control group.

And then lets look at the actual hits:

Experimental group: 477 Hits

Control group: 438 Hits

Diffrence: 8.2 %

This is not in any way twice the amount of hits, the z-index is rigged.

Pseudoscience is what that report is. I can't help but wonder if anyone would ever have seen that report outside the house if the result had been reversed. I belive they could have played dice for that result instead of wasting the time of the subjects.

 

[Ed]

I belive they could have played dice for that result instead of wasting the time of the subjects.

Subjects?

 

[LFTKBS]

1) afree87, you should have your friend come in here and defend his paper.

2) My friends who are, you know, actually scientists don't seem to want anonymity when they publish. What's up with that?

 

[Ed]

My parapsychologist friend from another forum submitted his paper for me to look at. I'm currently reviewing it, but the large amount of content (it's a term paper) is overwhelming me.

OK, jokes over. You wrote it, didn't you, ya big galoot. Fess up now.

Seriously, I created an excel spread sheet with the data if anyone wants it. Why anyone would want it is another story.

 

[Ed]

1) afree87, you should have your friend come in here and defend his paper.

2) My friends who are, you know, actually scientists don't seem to want anonymity when they publish. What's up with that?

Better yet, ask him to read the thread. Let him submit it to his school. Ask him what he would think about his school if he gets an A.

 

[Thomas]

The flaw of small sample is apparent in his study, but do you see any others?

You can tell your friend to put that paper in his crackpipe and smoke it. The diffrence between the number of hits is 8.2%, and not twice the amount. His conclusion is nothing but baloney.

Experimental group average: 23.8% hits

Control group average: 21.9% hits

The experimental group did 1.9% better than the control group in average.

Not very impressive is it?

 

[Thomas]

I have just tried a Zener Card ESP test. I did it the exactly same way the subjects in that report did it. Guessed 100 times with 1/5 chance of successful hit. My hit rate was 32% + 24% + 28% + 28% = 28% avg.

This is a table to judge if you are dancing with the laws of probability, or if you have a special gift. I wouldn't even have passed the preliminary test according to that table, and I scored higher than the average of the experiment group in the 'Effect of Theta Binaural Beats on Precognitive Psi Ability'-experiment. Go figure.

 

[afree87]

Re: Re: Psi paper with "99.9%" results?

OK, jokes over. You wrote it, didn't you, ya big galoot. Fess up now.

No, I didn't write it. It was posted to the SA forums, which cost $10 to register; you might be able to see the thread though:

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1053460&pagenumber=2

I am "Shii", I'm sorry to say that initially I just delivered a scathing blast of ad hominem accusations. I'm going to relay the comments made so far as well as what I thought of the paper myself, and once he continues the discussion on a formal forum (GBS is sort of like the "Community" forum on JREF and is not very serious) I might forward him to this thread.

I'm wondering, the sample size is so small as to be useless. Is that forgivable on school papers, or does it make the entire test a farce?

edit: What is "p=10-24"? I've never taken statistics, but I thought p was a percentage.

 

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Attempts to find paranormal evidence are futile due to the impossibility of finding valid evidence supporting a non-existent phenomenon!


Consciously and subconsciously our intellectual arrogance should leave no room for afterlife realms!

 

[Tricky]

Okay, how 'bout...

Binaural beats can be created from any sound that is manipulated so the right and left channels create an interference pattern that, when listened to with headphones, will cause the listener's entire brain to synchronize itself to the pulse.

Emphasis mine. This is presented as a statement of fact. Where's the evidence?

Yeah, I wondered about that too. How does one measure brain synchornicity? How can you tell a synchronized brain from an unsynchronized one?