Ganzfeld vs. Non-Ganzfeld studies

[Maaneli]

I recently compiled all the studies from the Storm/Tressoldi/Di Risio database that used normal, waking states of consciousness, with a 4-choice design, and compared their combined results to those of their 30 Ganzfeld study database. Below are those results for those interested (though Linda, please don't bother).

Gz: 29 studies (1997 - 2008), N = 1634, X = 542, X/N = 33.2% with exact binomial p = 8.63*E-14. # independently significant studies at the 5% level = 8/29 (27.6% vs. 5% expected by chance) with exact binomial p = 6.49E-5.

NGz: 15 studies (2000 - 2008), N = 1930, X = 472, X/N = 24.5% with exact binomial p = 0.30 (nonsignificant). # ind-sig studies at the 5% level = 0/15 (0%) with exact binomial p = 0.46 (nonsignificant).

Difference between 33.2% and 24.5% hit rates is hugely significant - Fisher's exact p < 0.0001 (one-tailed).

Difference between unselected participants Gz studies (15 studies, 27.3% in N = 886) and NGz studies is borderline significant - Fisher's exact p = 0.058 (one-tailed).

Difference between selected participants Gz studies (14 studies, 40.1% in N = 748) and NGz is hugely significant - Fisher's exact p < 0.0001 (one-tailed).

I used these calculators for the exact binomial p-values and Fisher's exact p:

Probability calculator

GraphPad QuickCalcs: Analyze a 2x2 contingency table.

On the basis of this data, there is no evidence of ESP in 4-choice design studies which use normal, waking states of consciousness for the receivers. This confirms that we can reliably regard normal, waking state conditions as a control condition for the Ganzfeld condition, but only reliably so if we use only selected participants in the Ganzfeld condition, or mix selected participants with unselected participants in the Ganzfeld condition. In fact, 3 of the NGz studies were part of explicit comparisons to Ganzfeld studies.

[Open Mind]

Excellent ....it confirms the success of the Ganzfeld. Honorton (and others) believed in testing the hypothesis that reducing normal waking sensory stimuli and entering a deeper state of consciousness would increase psi. It works.

Perhaps the clues were always there in the history ... whether in the cases of eastern meditators with special abilities, psychic somnambulists, some western trance mediums ...... or dream telepathy experiments ... or even NDEs which do not occur in a normal waking state..

This information also helps budding debunkers

Put pressure on the psychic under test. Anything that makes the subject less likely to enter a psi conducive state is the goal. Prize challenges are ideal.

[Maaneli]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

Excellent ....it confirms the success of the Ganzfeld. Honorton (and others) believed in testing the hypothesis that reducing normal waking sensory stimuli and entering a deeper state of consciousness would increase psi. It works.

Yes, it seems so. It also seems to make the skeptical position about the Ganzfeld effect (i.e. that it could just be due to rampant fraud or sloppy protocol implementation) further untenable, in my view.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Okay, so now we can blow off all the psychics who are awake while doing their readings. And we can suggest to people who think they have psychic experiences while awake that they most likely do not.

Parapsychologists should focus on Ganzfeld. Time to propose some more specific theories and conduct experiments derived from them. Time to determine which variations on the protocol help and which hinder.

~~ Paul

[fls]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Okay, so now we can blow off all the psychics who are awake while doing their readings. And we can suggest to people who think they have psychic experiences while awake that they most likely do not.

Parapsychologists should focus on Ganzfeld. Time to propose some more specific theories and conduct experiments derived from them. Time to determine which variations on the protocol help and which hinder.

~~ Paul

You aren't "asleep" during the ganzfeld. The EEG work by Wackermann suggests that it's similar to a vigilant awake state.

Brain electrical activity and subjective... [Int J Psychophysiol. 2002] - PubMed - NCBI

(Not a comment on the OP.)

Linda

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by fls

You aren't "asleep" during the ganzfeld. The EEG work by Wackermann suggests that it's similar to a vigilant awake state.

I didn't mean to imply that the subjects are asleep. I was simply contrasting it to the "normal" awake state. Apparently, those psychics need to enter the ganzfeld state before doing their readings.

The paper you cited is interesting. Perhaps it points to a direction for a theory of the ganzfeld.

~~ Paul

[billw]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Okay, so now we can blow off all the psychics who are awake while doing their readings.

Not necessarily. Being someone who claims to be overtly psychic wasn't a requirement for Ganzfeld subject selection, was it? It may be the case that they are able to do this, whereas regular subjects require different conditions to elicit it.

Cheers,
Bill

[Johann]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Okay, so now we can blow off all the psychics who are awake while doing their readings. And we can suggest to people who think they have psychic experiences while awake that they most likely do not.

I strongly doubt that this is a tenable conclusion to reach; in a ganzfeld experiment, a single object, image, or thing is being sent to another person, who, for thirty minutes, tries to interpret what it is. If we accept that psi comes in flashes of insight and inspiration, and that it is prone to being affected by analytic overlay (term used in remote viewing to indicate excessive mental material), then we can assume that, in a waking state where the analytic overlay is likely to be strongest, it would be highly unreliable to attempt the retrieval of a single image for a full thirty minutes; the signal would be completely wiped out by mental noise.

Psychics, from the little experience I have of them, never attempt such a task. Rather, they quickly relate to their subjects all the impressions they "feel". The situations have little in common.

- Johann

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by billw

Not necessarily. Being someone who claims to be overtly psychic wasn't a requirement for Ganzfeld subject selection, was it? It may be the case that they are able to do this, whereas regular subjects require different conditions to elicit it.

But among the regular subjects might be some who are psychic and don't know it. Tough to control for that.

Originally Posted by Johann

Psychics, from the little experience I have of them, never attempt such a task. Rather, they quickly relate to their subjects all the impressions they "feel". The situations have little in common.

Okay, so now we have to assume that there are two different mechanisms whereby people can pick up the thoughts of other living people, plus another mechanism for picking up the thoughts of dead people. And perhaps some Ganzfeld subjects are using the alternate method for living people, not the Ganzfeld method.

It's getting very complicated. But point taken.

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Johann

... then we can assume that, in a waking state where the analytic overlay is likely to be strongest, it would be highly unreliable to attempt the retrieval of a single image for a full thirty minutes; the signal would be completely wiped out by mental noise.

How are we controlling for lack of analysis during Ganzfeld?

~~ Paul