Fraud in parapsychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mainstream scientists say that some of the positive results of parapsychological experiments are probably due to fraud, though they may sometimes be due to design flaws.

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)."^[1]

Other skeptics, such as Ray Hyman, say that some parapsychological studies may have merit:

I have argued that the case for the existence of anomalous cognition is still shaky, at best. On the other hand, I want to state that I believe that the SAIC experiments as well as the contemporary ganzfeld experiments display methodological and statistical sophistication well above previous parapsychological research. Despite better controls and careful use of statistical inference, the investigators seem to be getting significant results that do not appear to derive from the more obvious flaws of previous research.^[2]

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 over a prolonged period. 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.^[3]

Contents 1 Reported instances of fraud in parapsychology 1.1 The Soal-Goldney experiments 1.2 Eusapia Palladino 2 See also 3 References

[edit] Reported instances of fraud in parapsychology

[edit] The Soal-Goldney experiments

Dates run: 1941-1943

Experimental philosophy: The subject is asked to guess the image on cards viewed by a sender. Answers are also compared to cards one or two places before and after the current card, checking for temporal displacement effects. In this experiment, telepathy is assumed to be weak, and only expected to give a small deviation towards correct answers.^[4]

Experimental design: The experimenter and sender sit in one room, which adjoins another room in which the receiver sits. The door is left ajar, allowing aural communication but not giving the receiver a line of sight to the experimenter or sender. Five cards, with pictures of an elephant, giraffe, lion, pelican, and zebra are shuffled and then placed in a box that can be accessed by the sender, but which cannot be viewed by the experimenter or any observers. The experimenter and sender are separated by a screen, which has a small square hole in it.

The experimenter would consult a list of random digits from 1 to 5 for each trial, and then hold up a card with that number printed on it to the hole in the screen, allowing the sender to see it. The sender would then select the card in his box corresponding to that number (the card farthest to the left was 1, and they ascended to the right), and then attempt to mentally send that image to the receiver. After a few moments, the experimenter would call out to the receiver and ask for a guess. The guess is recorded, and at the end of the run (generally 50 guesses), the sender reveals their cards, and the guesses are converted into their corresponding numbers.

The guesses are compared to the random digits for each trial, and a statistical analysis is performed. Any significant, positive deviation from chance is assumed to be caused by telepathy. This is then repeated by comparing the guesses to the random digits one and two places ahead of and behind that trial.

Results: In Soal's first experiment, he was not searching for displacement effects, and found no subjects who exhibited a better-than-chance hit rate. When advised by a colleague to check for displacement effects, he rechecked the data and found two subjects who scored significantly better than chance at predicting the card that would be chosen after the one they were supposed to be guessing. Soal then designed a new experiment which declared displacement effects as part of the tested data, per scientific procedure.^[5]

In many of the sittings in the second experiment, the receiver performed significantly above chance. In one sitting, the odds against chance of these results were calculated to be 10³⁵ to 1. The results were so striking that some skeptics immediately accused Soal of fraud.^[6]

Criticism: The criticism of these results was very focused, and claimed simply that Soal had fudged his data in order to increase the hit rate. Several points were used to back up this claim:

• Soal claimed to have developed his lists of target numbers randomly, but no one was ever allowed to see how he did it.

• In one sitting, the sender accused Soal of changing 1's to 4's and 5's on the target sheet.^[7]

• In 1973, Scott and Haskell tested these claims by examining the target and guess lists. They theorized that if the accusations were true, they would find:
  • An excess of 4's and 5's in the target list
  • A deficiency of 1's in the target list
  • An excess of hits on 4's, and 5's
  • A relative excess of hits on 1's
• All of these were found in the data for the sitting in which the subject's accusation took place, as well as two other sittings with different senders.^[8]

• The target lists used by Soal were later matched by computer with strings of digits found in log tables, except the target lists often had a 4 or 5 where the log tables had a 1. ^[9]

Notes:

• Due to the strength of the evidence for fraud in this experiment, it is generally considered to be the case today that Soal did indeed alter his data.^{[10] [11]}
• This experiment was offered by Alan Turing when questioned on why he believed in telepathy, saying that this had proved it.^{[citation needed]} He was apparently unaware of the significant evidence of fraud in the experiment.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Eusapia Palladino

In 1908, the Society for Psychical Research appointed a committee of three to examine Eusapia Palladino in Naples. This committee consisted of Mr. Hereward Carrington, investigator for the American Society for Psychical Research and an amateur conjurer; Mr. W. W. Baggally, also an investigator and amateur conjurer of much experience; and the Hon. Everard Feilding, who had had an extensive training as investigator and "a fairly complete education at the hands of fraudulent mediums."

The subject of physical mediumship is well summed up by this investigating committee in the following words: "It is understating the case to say that the vast majority of these modern wizards and witches are the merest charlatans - sometimes, indeed, using mechanical and scientific apparatus of extreme ingenuity, but as a rule relying merely on the simplest devices, with an insolent confidence in the avid simplicity of their dupes. Yet every now and then a personality arises whose claims to something beyond such manifest imposture it has seemed impossible to dismiss thus curtly".[17]

[edit] See also

• Parapsychology

[edit] References

1. ^ http://skepdic.com/parapsy.html Skeptics Dictionary on Parapsychology
2. ^ http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/refs/science/air/hyman.html The Journal of Parapsychology, December, 1995, Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena By Ray Hyman Retrieved January 5, 2007
3. ^ 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
4. ^ Hansel, C.E.M. (1989). The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisited. Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-533-4. 
5. ^ Haynes , Renée (1982). Biography of S.G. Soal. The Society for Psychical Research. Retrieved on June 26, 2006.
6. ^ Price, G.R. (April 1955). "Science and the Supernatural". Science. 
7. ^ Alcock, James E. (1981). Parapsychology: Science or Magic?. Pergamon Press. ISBN 0-08-025772-0. 
8. ^ Scott, C. & Haskell, P. (September 1973). ""Normal" explanation of the Soal-Goldney experiments in extrasensory perception". Nature (245): 52 - 54. DOI:10.1038/245052a0. 
9. ^ Hansel, C.E.M. 1989, 114-115
10. ^ Hansel, C.E.M. 1989, 100-116
11. ^ Paul Kurtz (editor) (2001). Skeptical Odysseys: Personal accounts by the world's leading paranormal inquirers. Prometheus Books, 69. ISBN 1-57392-884-4.