I think psychologists own expectation can also make them misinterpret or misreport what really occurred.
In the 1980s, Steiner fooled many sceptics at a CSICOP conference by claiming he could detect extremely subtle sensory cues (also known as 'cold reading'). They probably believed him because they believe psychics when successful are doing this, in other words the sceptics were willing to believe a very implausible cold reading type act as real.
(AFAIK there has never been proper controlled trials to test just how accurately magicians can 'cold read' it is possibly far less impressive than skeptics think because professional mentalist's have been known to cheat (i.e. hot reading) when presenting it as what mediums do. )
Similarly President of the Society for Psychical Research in the 70s and 80s, Professor Arthur Ellison (trained in both electronics and psychiatry) when giving a lecture would occasionally pre-arrange for an ordinary-looking bowl of flowers to be placed on a table in front of him to be secretly raised electro-magnetically so it floated upwards, levitated and then descended. He would get the audience to 'aum' to hide the electromagnet hum
The 'aum' also helped disenchant debunkers
.
On one occasion 5 out of 6 sceptical witnesses claimed the bowl of flowers didn't levitate... but it did
So while some believers tended to add frills rather than just report what they saw at the other extreme some sceptics entered denial.
Professor Marcello Truzzi once wrote .......
'There are some myths about science and scientists that need to be dispelled. Science gets mistaken as a body of knowledge for its method. Scientists are regarded as having superhuman abilities of rationality inside objectivity. Many studies in the psychology of science, however, indicate that scientists are at least as dogmatic and authoritarian, at least as foolish and illogical as everybody else, including when they do science. In one study on falsifiability, an experiment was described, an hypothesis was given to the participants, the results were stated, and the test was to see whether the participants would say, "This falsifies the hypothesis". The results indicated denial, since most of the scientists refused to falsify their hypotheses, sticking with them despite a lack of evidence! Strangely, clergymen were much more frequent in recognizing that the hypotheses were false.
The problem is 'expectation'. And the problem with regard to psychologists is that most have expectations that paranormal phenomena never occur and there is a 'normal' psychological explanation. This makes many psychologists vulnerable to misinterpretation too IMHO.