Parapsychology

Encyclopedia : P : PA : PAR : Parapsychology

---

[Verifiability>sources or references] that appear in a [Reliable sourcescredible publication] and are not primary sources, such as websites and publications affiliated with the subject of the article. You can [WikiProject Fact and Reference Checkhelp] Wikipedia by including appropriate citations.

Parapsychology is the study of mental awareness or influence of external objects without interaction from known physical means. Most objects of study fall within the realm of "mind-to-mind" influence (such as extra-sensory perception, folie a deux and telepathy), "mind-to-environment" influence (such as psychokinesis) and "environment-to-mind" (such as hauntings). Collectively, these abilities are often referred to as "psionics".

The scientific validity of parapsychology research is a matter of frequent dispute and criticism. It is widely regarded as a pseudoscience, but, obviously, supporters of parapsychology reject this term. A number of academic institutions now conduct research on the topic employing the scientific method, and the field of psi research is not without high level support, with a number of eminent scientists being of the belief that the field is worthy of analysis, such as Wolfgang Pauli, Hans Eysenck, Robert G Jahn , and Rupert Sheldrake.

History, claims, and evaluation

Main articles: History of parapsychology and Claims of parapsychology

Status of the field

The standing of the field of parapsychology has always been controversial within the scientific community.

As its name indicates, parapsychology is sometimes considered a sub-branch of psychology, and this has arisen historically since it involved the study of apparent mental faculties. In its modern form, parapsychology is an interdisciplinary field, which has attracted physicists, engineers, and biologists, as well as psychologists and those from other sciences. (For an argument that parapsychological phenomena may not in fact be psychological, see Peter J. King's ["Parapsychology without the 'Para' (or the 'Psychology')"] (Think 3, 2003, pp 43 53).)

Parapsychology often involves the use of new and untested technologies and methods such as neurofeedback, Neuro-linguistic programming, past life regression and so on.

Many people are not satisfied with the term, and have proposed alternatives, such as "psi research" (similar to the older term "psychical research"), but "parapsychology" is the term that has gained the greatest acceptance today.

One organization involved in the field, the Parapsychological Association is an affiliate of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). [link]. At present (2006) there are about two hundred and seventy five members in the Parapsychological Association.

Parapsychology in the scientific community

In the scientific disciplines, there is a belief that all claims should be treated with scientific skepticism. Opponents believe that parapsychology is not a real science, that psi phenomena do not exist, and that parapsychology is a pseudoscience; however, a recent paper by Marie-Catherine Mousseau states:

"Though certain quantitative differences were noted, qualitative distinctions were not found that could justify classification of para-psychology as pseudo-science" [link].

Skeptical observers of the field believe that some parapsychologists knowingly commit fraud; that some are incompetent or misled by their own hopes or desires; and that some are naïve and therefore easily deceived by fraudulent participants; or perhaps some combination of the above. One of the most famous cases in psychology that illustrates being misled by one's hopes is that of Clever Hans. Mr. Wilhelm von Osten, who promoted the horse, did not intend to defraud anyone, but he fooled himself and large audiences nevertheless. [link]

Parapsychologists disagree with this assessment. Many have been formally trained in science, and are familiar with the scientific method. Statistician Jessica Utts has shown in a number of papers that:

"Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted."[link]

The precise percentage of scientists holding negative views about parapsychology is unclear, since surveys targeting this group are far less common than those targeting the general population. In his article [Save Our Science: Paranormal Phenomena and Zetetics], skeptic Henri Broch complains:

"These data are based on an investigation on the belief in parasciences among Frenchmen (published in 1986). [...] Contrary to what might have been thought, the level of belief in the paranormal is directly proportional to the level of education, whatever the religious persuasion may be. Those with higher scientific degrees fare slightly better, although their level of belief is superior to [greater than] the average!"

Some skeptics believe that there is a tendency for parapsychology researchers to select "good days" and discard "bad days" for the people in the test samples. But the "Theory of Runs" shows that the chance of a long run of successes (or failures) increases drastically when the periods of success or failure are selected as part of a larger sample. See: Feller, William (1968), An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, vol. I, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, p. 86. For a more recent discussion of the theory and the "arcsine law" see [link] or []

Andrew Greeley, a Catholic priest and a sociologist from the University of Arizona, studied surveys on belief in ESP from 1978 through 1987, and 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. [link]

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 to make 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[link].)

The most important point that both proponents and skeptics raise is the need to be critical of the theory, methods, and conclusions of any one who investigates or comments on parapsychology as a science, no matter what point of view they represent. In order to be an objective professional, one must have a first-hand knowledge of the vast past and present published scientific literature in the field, primary and scholarly sources of its age whenever possible, and -- even more important -- have first-hand experience as an experimenter or investigator and a respect for the art of conjuring and its masters. The hands-on approach is essential to scientific progress in the field, whether one approaches it from a "paranormalist" or a "conventional theorist" point of view. Selective and historically uninformed armchair cheerleading and armchair skepticism are equally useless in all fields of inquiry and science.

Interpretation of the evidence

Scientists skeptical 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. Frequently, however, proponents argue that those who hold this view 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 (see for example, The Conscious Universe by Dr Dean Radin). Instead, they 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 evidential even in the weak sense of the term. Working psi researchers welcome criticisms that are based on knowledge of the peer-reviewed, published literature of the field. Criticism and blanket statements based on hearsay are not productive and not encouraged in any area of science.

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. [link] Others believe that a great deal of evidence has been collected, which, if it addressed more conventional phenomena, would be sufficient to provide proof.

Criticisms of parapsychological research

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

• If an experiment is not controlled to prevent fraud, then the results may not 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.

• Skeptics claim that parapsychology experiments are poorly designed and have a lack of proper controls, allowing paths of intentional or unintentional information leakage through normal means, etc.

• Parapsychology experiments require replication with positive results at more independent laboratories than is currently occurring.

• Positive results in psi experiments are so statistically insignificant as to be negligible, i.e. indistinguishable from chance. For example, parapsychology may have a "file drawer" problem where a large percentage of negative results are never published, making positive results appear more significant than they actually are.

• Currently inexplicable positive results of apparently sound experiments do not prove the existence of psi phenomena, i.e., normal explanations may yet be found.

• Psi phenomena cannot be accepted as explanation of positive results until there is a widely acceptable theory of how they operate.

• Parapsychologists may prefer and write selective history. The whole story may be avoided.

• Parapsychology spends too much time simply trying to show that certain phenomena occur, and too little time trying to explain them — yet it is explanation that constitutes the heart of scientific enquiry, and wider, scientific acceptance of parapsychological phenomena would come only with the provision of explanation. (See King (2003) cited above.)

• People who are considered noteworthy 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. Why not?

Responses from parapsychologists to criticisms

• The hard evidence for psi phenomena today is founded on repeatable experiments and not anecdotal evidence.

• Anecdotal evidence is considered valid in law and many other fields. The validity of anecdotal evidence does not depend upon the opinion of those listening to it. Memory studies by Elisabeth Loftus show that while memory can be capricious, a majority of people are not affected by many controlled memory manipulations. (See [link] for data.)

• 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. [link]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 in order to receive critical feedback and design better protocols, etc.

• Experimental protocols have been continually improved over time, sometimes with the direct assistance of noted skeptics. Meta-analyses show that the significance of the positive results have not declined over time, but instead have remained fairly constant.

• 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. Dr Dean Radin, in his book Entangled Minds, discusses methods of detecting 'file drawer' errors using a funnel plot.

• Anomalous phenomena do not disappear for lack of a theory. There have been many instances in the history of science where the observation of an anomalous phenomenon came before an explanatory theory, and some commonly accepted non-psi phenomena (e.g. gravity) today still lack a perfectly satisfactory, undisputed theory. Isaac Newton, when formulating his theory of gravity, stated that he could not hypothesize a mechanism for it - but it still became a foundation of physics.

• Theories abound in parapsychology for aspects of psi phenomena, though there is not any one that is comprehensive and widely accepted within parapsychology.

• It is not necessary to be a licensed psychiatrist or acquainted with clinical psychology to test the validity of psi. The field of parapsychology overlaps many disciplines, including physics and biology, and often physicists, engineers and others trained in the hard sciences, in conjunction with stage magicians and other experts in deception, are in a better position to design experiments for certain types of phenomena than are psychiatrists or psychologists.

• Concluding inexplicability from lack of existing explanation constitutes the well-known fallacy Argument from Ignorance.

The opinion of parapsychologists regarding the overall evaluation of the body of evidence to date is divided. As noted above, some parapsychologists are skeptic and do not believe that there is anything observed so far which cannot ultimately be explained within the existing framework of known science. Probably a majority of parapsychologists believe in the likelihood, or at least the possibility, of actual psi phenomena, though there is a range of attitudes toward the evidence.

Regarding the evidence, the rule of the thumb of the skeptical community is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Since skeptics may consider paranormal claims extraordinary, they may think that the evidence needs to be better than what normally would be required. However, this puts the responsibility for investigating seemingly paranormal phenomena squarely on the shoulders of proponents and "internal" skeptics. Not only is research conducted by "external" critics and skeptics useful to the field as a whole, but it also imparts a kind of craft knowledge to critics and skeptics that makes their criticism and counter-hypotheses more productive and more useful. Further many of the counter-hypotheses proposed by skeptics are so unparsimonious as to be extraordinary claims as well, and in that case, those counter-hypothesis, also require extraordinary evidence.

Most people use this approach to evidence in everyday life. For instance, if the news reports that the president of the USA has just arrived in South Korea for a state visit, most people will take this at face value. The news is considered a fairly reliable source of information, and the president visiting a country such as South Korea is not an extraordinary claim. However, if the same news broadcast later mentioned that a 92-year-old man has improved the world record time on the marathon by half an hour, many reasonable people would require more evidence, even despite the assumed reliability of the source, since the claim is extraordinary. This analogy might be flawed, however. In the case of the 92 year old man, we have positive evidence gained from a lifetime of experience and the reassurance of physiologists that this feat is indeed extraordinary (i.e., improbable). When it comes to parapsychology, however, some would argue we have no positive evidence that it is improbable, only our own cultural bias and a subjective sense that Psionic powers are extraordinary. Hence, some would argue, it is not the sort of extraordinary claim which necessarily needs more evidence than a mundane claim.

Some parapsychologists agree with critics that the field has not yet reached the degree of consistent repeatability of experimental results needed for general consensus. John Beloff, in his book Parapsychology: A Concise History, notes the evanescent – some have said the apparently evasive – nature of psychic phenomena over time, and that the range of phenomena observable in a given era seems to be culturally dependent.

For example, in earlier times, psychic research studied physical phenomena demonstrated by spiritualist mediums that, according to the reports passed down to us in the literature, far surpassed anything that any of today's "psychics" can demonstrate. Skeptics consider this more evidence of the non-existence of psi phenomena. Frequently this particular claim is the result of the proponent community having cut itself off, because of political pressures of conforming to the scientific Zeitgeist, from the community of modern mediums and psychics who operate today. Whether or not the phenomena being exhibited by modern day mediums can provide proof of traditional notions of spirituality or can be attributed to the operation of mundane psychological processes is mostly an open question, due to the lack of research. So it is possible that physical phenomena is being exhibited today, but to what cause the effects may be attributed is an open question, even among parapsychologists.

Many people, especially like John Beloff and Stephen E. Braude, cannot easily dismiss the entirety of all the positive accounts – many of which came from scientists and conjurors of their day. Many began as skeptics - but then changed their minds to become believers and supporters of psychic phenomena when they encountered the inexplicable; and so believe that continued research is justified. Easily recovered critical historical research reveals these individuals were certainly out of their league when it came to the close up deceptions of fraudulent mediums and adept charlatans. (Podmore, 1910 & Price and Dingwall, 1975)

Other parapsychologists, such as Dean Radin and supporters such as statistician Jessica Utts, take the stance that the existence of certain psi phenomena has been reasonably well established in recent times through repeatable experiments that have been replicated dozens to hundreds of times at labs around the world. They refer to meta-analyses of psi experiments that conclude that the odds against chance (null hypothesis) of experimental results far exceeds that commonly required to establish results in other fields, sometime by orders of magnitude.

Skeptics say that this is an old argument (eg. see Rawcliffe 1952, pages 441 & 442). For meta-analyses to be useful, the question of whether or not each of these experiments themselves have been efficiently carried out must be addressed. In the unsophisticated "language of the street" this would be known as "garbage in garbage out". All of the early experiments that were conducted by noted men of science in Italy and Germany with Eusapia Palladino "proved positive". The parapsychologists counter this claim by the claim that even after a significant cutting for experiments that the conditions were not known to be completely stringent, ones with highest scores and other reasons, the results still score highly above that which is expected by chance by the magnitude of 3050-1. see entangled minds by dean radin.

Skeptics say that 'enthusiastic' parapsychologists prefer to dismiss proof-oriented research, intended primarily to verify the existence of psi phenomena and, as in the past, jumped to "process-oriented" research, intended to explore the parameters and characteristics of psi phenomena. The past history of repeated psi failures and short comings has given parapsychology a poor reputation.

Other objections to parapsychology

There are a variety of other objections to parapsychology as well.

• Psi Phenomena as a Violation of the Laws of Physics or Nature

Some critics claim that the existence of psi phenomena would violate "the known laws of physics", and some of these critics believe that this is reason enough that such phenomena should not be studied. Parapsychologists respond that "laws of nature" are simply summaries of existing scientific knowledge and do get revised from time to time during the course of scientific progress, in addition they are not so well understood that with them one could confidently predict the non existence of Psi (Consider quantum mechanics). If the existence of psi phenomenon were ever proved, explaining how they work might require revising or extending the known laws of physics. Precognition, for example, would challenge commonly held notions about causality and the unidirectional nature of time. However, these commonly held notions are often not physical laws, and are already being challenged by modern physical theories, quite apart from psi phenomena. Skeptics and parapsychologists alike 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' frequently-uninvestigated claims about fraud, or the application of conventional hypotheses specifically because these claims are unparsimonious. Conventional explanations, many parapsychologists believe, should also conform to Occam's Razor. Then there are others, both skeptics and proponents, who agree that even in mainstream science nature itself is frequently unparsimonious.

• Parapsychology as Taboo

Some believe that paranormal phenomena should not be studied, either because they are forbidden by their religious orientation, or because they believe that to do so opens the investigators to some sort of "spiritual attack". Parapsychology is also seen as a taboo subject in science and the academy and individuals who show an interest in studying seemingly psychic phenomena, even from a skeptical point of view, often find themselves losing or being pushed out of employment, or denied funding. Anthropologist of science, David J. Hess, has written on this topic.[link]

• Parapsychology as a Danger to Society

Some believe that parapsychology should not be pursued because it somehow represents a danger to society. As is stated in the Y2000 NSF report Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding: Belief in the Paranormal or Pseudoscience[Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding: Belief in the Paranormal or Pseudoscience], National Science Foundation, 2000.:

Even "insiders" in the parapsychological community worry about the possible harm that naive belief in paranormal phenomena can have on individuals, on culture and on societies. A great deal of effort has been put into the notion of developing expertise in dealing with reported experiences both in a clinical sense, and as a topic of investigation. Unfortunately organized skepticism and the "taboo" that exists against serious research on such phenomena has impeded the ability of many researchers -- both skeptics and proponents -- from doing the kinds of research that would allow evidence-based therapeutic interventions.

• Parapsychology as a Waste of Resources

Some believe that parapsychology should not be funded because it is a waste of resources that would be better spent on other activities. Some of these critics feel so strongly about this that they engage in activism to try to prevent or remove funding from psi research. Psychic detectives may waste valuable police resources. One of the negative -- and probably unintended -- consequences of this point of view is that while 10% of the world's population (over 400 million individuals on the planet) may experience what they believe are psychic phenomena, and may suffer in their daily lives from psychological problems caused by their experiences, few scientists on the planet are able to find the resources to really investigate the phenomena, and therefore very little real knowledge exists that can be used to help these experiencers. While even most parapsychologists would agree there are more urgent problems to solve, having no research address these reported experiences does a grave disservice to people everywhere.

Other interesting facts

• German psychiatrist Hans Berger originally used the electroencephalograph (EEG) on humans in 1929 as a tool to study whether telepathy might be explained by brain waves. (Beyerstein, B. L. [link] 1999)
• The first and only Ph.D. in Parapsychology awarded by any American university, was the University of California, Berkeley awarding the PhD to Dr Jeffrey Mishlove in 1980. Subsequently some activists unsuccessfully lobbied the Berkeley administration to revoke the degree. [Reportedly,] as many as 46 people in the UK have doctorates in parapsychology. However, with the exception of Dr. Mishlove, mentioned above, the so-called "46 people in the UK" have doctorates in other disciplines, principally in psychology, but completed doctoral thesis work which included or were devoted to research projects in parapsychology. Such individuals are also expected to be competent in the disciplines in which they received their degrees. Examples of these individuals include: Dr. Susan Blackmore (it says "PhD in Parapsychology, University of Surrey, 1980" on her webpage CV [link], though), Dr. Richard Broughton, Dr. Deborah Delanoy, Dr. Serena-Roney Dougall, Dr. Chris Roe, Dr. Simon Sherwood, Dr. Christine Simmonds, Dr. Matthew Smith, Dr. Carl Williams, Dr. Richard Wiseman, among others. [link]
• Patent #5830064, "Apparatus and method for distinguishing events which collectively exceed chance expectations and thereby controlling an output," was granted by the US Patent Office on Nov 3rd, 1998 to inventors including several researchers from the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) center. The patent in no way relies on the existence of psi phenomena, but in the description the inventors do suggest that "One application of the present invention is the investigation of anomalous interaction between an operator and random physical systems, whether by serious scientists or curious members of the public who would like to conduct experiments on their own."
• Throughout the history of the investigations of physical mediums there seems to be no record of simply applying wet paint to a medium's hands and feet to ensure control and eliminate fraud. However, it is naive to think one control would cover all cases.
• Joseph B. Rhine began examining psychic abilities after hearing, and being deeply impressed, by a lecture given by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, about the scientific reality of having established contact with the dead. (Rinn 1950)
• In reviewing the history of parapsychology from the present back to its birth from 19th century spiritism it becomes apparent that there was a preconceived belief in the existence of psychic phenomena by members of science that led to poor testing conditions, and loosening of controls, so phenomena would be produced and validated, rather than a genuine curious search to discover whether or not psychic phenomena existed at all. (Rawcliffe 1952, Podmore 1963, Christopher 1979)
• In early psychic research the advice of master conjurors, such as the sterling case of Houdini, on establishing control has been very valuable, but not appreciated by scientific investigators who had become close and fond of their subjects and their produced phenomena. There are many past examples where serious mistakes were made. (Christopher 1970, Rinn 1950, Hyman 1989, Podmore 1975, Price & Dingwall 1975) As long as this breach continues between master conjurors and scientific parapsychologists, parapsychologists are likely to repeat the same mistakes. The success of James Randi's Project Alpha is a prime example.
• Some early and mid 20th century psychologists concluded Psychical research represents a reversion to occult beliefs which have had their origins in the earliest of human cultures.(Rawcliffe 1952)
• In the 1984 fictional film Ghostbusters Dr. Peter Venkman claims to have Ph.D.'s in both Psychology and Parapsychology when asked by overzealous EPA inspector, Walter Peck.
• In the city of Eastpointe, Michigan, a person claiming to be a psychic, astrologer, palm reader, and other metaphysical readers may soon be required to have a business license. Anyone with a criminal history of pandering, extortion or fraud would not be accepted. (Detroit News, page 4B, 22 May 06)

Critics of parapsychology

• Banachek: Tricked scientists scientists for 2 years, logging 120 laboratory hours and convinced others that he could bend metal with his mind in the much touted 'Alpha Project' experiment.
• Susan Blackmore: Abandoned parapsychology; see her book Adventures of a Parapsychologist.
• Derren Brown: Has a television show that debunks people's self beliefs.
• Milbourne Christopher: Noted historian and master conjuror.
• Martin Gardner: A noted rationalist, puzzler, science writer, and master conjuror, he has written many exposés.
• Ray Hyman: Conjuror and noted research psychologist.
• James Randi: Conjuror and author.
• Ehrich Weiss (Harry Houdini): Early 20th century master conjuror and author. In his will Houdini offered his great library to the American Society for Psychical Research on the condition that research officer and editor of the ASPR Journal, J. Malcolm Bird, resigned. Bird refused. Houdini's collection went to the Library of Congress.
• Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP): An advocacy group of professional (stage) magicians, scientists and rationalist writers arguing for the anti-paranormal point of view.

See also

• Clairaudience
• Clairvoyance
• List of spirituality-related topics
• List of parapsychologists
• Parapsychology basic topics
• Patapsychology
• Prophecy
• Psionics
• Remote Viewing
• The Bélmez Faces
• Transpersonal psychology

References

• 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 0062515020.
• Parapsychology: A Concise History, by John Beloff, St. Martin's Press, 1993, ISBN 0312096119.
• Parapsychology: The Controversial Science, by Richard S. Broughton , Ballantine Books, 1991, ISBN 0345356381.
• Our Sixth Sense, by Charles Richet, Rider & Co., 1937, First English Edition
• The Elusive Quarry: A Scientific Appraisal of Psychical Research, by Ray Hyman, Prometheus Books, 1989, ISBN 0879755040.
• Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Parapsychology, ed. Antony Flew, Prometheus Books, 1987, ISBN 0-87975-385-4
• 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. Pidgeon. 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
• Edgar Cayce on Atlantis by Hugh Lynn Cayce, Castle Books, 1968

Further reading

• Milbourne Christopher, ESP, Seers & Psychics : What the Occult Really Is, Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1970, ISBN 0690268157
• 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 0801878675
• 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 0879753005
• 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 1569247471 There are 2 editions. They are very different. [online]
• 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 0442295766

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.

University research organizations

• [Parapsychology Research Group] at Liverpool Hope University.
• [Koestler Parapsychology Unit] at the University of Edinburgh.
• [Global Consciousness Project] at Princeton
• [The VERITAS Research Program] at the University of Arizona
• [Consciousness and Transpersonal Psychology Research Unit] of the Liverpool John Moores University.
• [Psychology Research Cluster] at University College 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

• [Alternative Topic / Paranormal Articles]
• [Articles on Psychics & Mediums]
• [National Spiritualist Association of Churches]
• [Entry on parapsychology in the Skeptic's Dictionary]
• [Parapsychology links]
• Dean Radin's [A Field Guide to Skepticism] from his book The Conscious Universe.
• [The Project Alpha Experiment]
• [Neuro-Kinetik.com] Proposes the use of realtime MRI (and related instrumentation) to explore the portions of the brain that relate to parapsychological phenomena.
• The online [Library of Exploratory Science] contains the complete text of many of the major peer reviewed journals in parapsychology and psychical research.
• [link] The Need for Responsibility in Parapsychology: My Sixty Years in Psychical Research by Eric Dingwall
• [Parapsychology forum at forteantimes.com]
• [The Kris Chronicles] - an entity channeled in Toronto, Canada
• [Psychic Powers] - enabling views
• [Frontiers of Time: Retrocausation ­ Experiment and Theory]. Symposium at AAAS annual meeting, San Diego, June 2006.

 

---

From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.

Search Titles

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

W

X

Y

Z

?