The protocol is fine ... however if for Richard Wiseman to conduct he has already pretty much done that (along with Ciaran O'Keeffe) . They used 5 mediums otherwise the protocol is very similar.
The result ..... the mediums failed.
End of story? There have been successes too .....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Mind  Positive results supportive of mediumship claims
- Dr J. G Pratt (1936) 'Towards a method of evaluating mediumistic material' Bulletin of the Boston Society of Psychical Research, 23
- J. G. Pratt & W. R. Birge (1948) 'Appraisal of verbal test material in parapsychology Journal of parapsychology. 12, 236-256
- Professor Getrude Schmeidler (1958) Analysis and evaluation of proxy session with Mrs Caroline Chapman . Journal of Parapsychology 22 137- 155
- Professor Archie Roy & Patricia Robertson (2001) A preliminary study by the acceptence of non-recipients to medium's statement to recipient Journal of the Society of Psychical Research 65.2, 863, 91-106
- Professor Archie Roy & Patricia Robertson (2004) Results of the application of Roberston-Roy protocol to a series of experiments with mediums and participants ' Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 68.1, 874, 18-34
Also see the research by Gary Schwartz
Note: All of the above are referenced in a 2005 book by Professor David Fontana 'Is there an afterlife? A comprehensive overview of the evidence' .... Highly recommended read
A negative result not supportive of mediumship claims
O'Keeffe, C. & Wiseman, R. (2005). Testing alleged mediumship: Methods and results. The British Journal of Psychology, 96(2), 165-179. |
I reckon the quality of mediums chosen are the most critical factor, the shorter the trials the better the mediums need to be. The trials may require preliminaries just to try find better than average ones. Much like there are plenty of people who audition believing with confidence they are good singers, one is more likely to encounter confident untalented singers than talented ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyemsougly If at least 5 of the sitters get it correct then we should try to see if the results can be repeated. Anything less than 5 and we will call the experiment a failure and we can move on to something else. |
Perhaps we shouldn't expect sciences of the mind like psychology, parapsychology, etc. to produce the same endlessly replicable results as in the physical sciences like physics, chemistry etc. (Assuming these are, the experiments are seldom blind) Medicine is in trouble if we demand success in short trials.
Instinctively we all tend to regard truth as stable results, science seeks the stable, the scientific philosophy is the belief that the stable is more fundamental than the unstable, commerce needs only stable inventions and discoveries or it is of little practical use and interest to most ..... Perhaps weak on average psi has already been established in lab parapsychology, perhaps stronger erratic psi has been established in psychical research. More stable results would interest everyone more.