Hi all,
Chuck Huff wrote:
>Colleagues,
>I have recently read the controversial paper by Daryl Bem on his
>meta-analytic strategy to confirm a reliable psi- effect. It can be found at:
>
>http://www.psych.cornell.edu/dbem/online_pubs.html
>
>This seems to me to constitute what we would call a replicable
>effect. Yes, there are some (pretty complicated) alternative explanations.
In fact, the effect is not so replicable. Milton & Wiseman (1999; Psych
Bulletin) did a follow-up
meta-analysis of 30 ganzfeld studies conducted since 1987 (the Bem &
Honorton paper was
published in 1984). The data came from 14 papers out of 7 different labs,
and included 1,198
individual trials. Hit rates were NOT significantly different from
chance. In addition, several
"sub-plots" that were suggested to be significant in the Bem & Honorton
analyses (such as
dynamic targets allowing better psi-information-transfer than do static
targets) were not replicated
in the more recent data.
-Mike
************************************************
Michael J. Kane
Department of Psychology
P.O. Box 26164
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Greensboro, NC 27402-6164
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 336-256-1022
fax: 336-334-5066
