spacebrother
Greg Bishop
A paper reporting on experiments in precognition has passed peer review and will be published in the next issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
The author basically repeats what researchers like JB Rhine, Puthoff and Targ, and Dean Radin have said already, but for some reason, his methodology has apparently stood the test of peer review better than others. This also may be due to the fact that the old guard is disappearing and new research is being looked at with true skepticism, rather than doctrinaire refusal.
Daryl Bem, the researcher, did something so simple, it was surprising that no one had thought of it before. His paper
...describes a series of experiments involving more than 1000 student volunteers. In most of the tests, Bem took well-studied psychological phenomena and simply reversed the sequence, so that the event generally interpreted as the cause happened after the tested behaviour rather than before it.
The article from New Scientist leads with a statement that "events that haven't yet happened can influence our behaviour." This cause/ effect perspective may be limiting, but perhaps replication of the experiment by brave and methodical researchers will attract more attention and support.
Findings "above chance" are significant, but won't become well-known until real-world applications are developed.
The author basically repeats what researchers like JB Rhine, Puthoff and Targ, and Dean Radin have said already, but for some reason, his methodology has apparently stood the test of peer review better than others. This also may be due to the fact that the old guard is disappearing and new research is being looked at with true skepticism, rather than doctrinaire refusal.
Daryl Bem, the researcher, did something so simple, it was surprising that no one had thought of it before. His paper
...describes a series of experiments involving more than 1000 student volunteers. In most of the tests, Bem took well-studied psychological phenomena and simply reversed the sequence, so that the event generally interpreted as the cause happened after the tested behaviour rather than before it.
The article from New Scientist leads with a statement that "events that haven't yet happened can influence our behaviour." This cause/ effect perspective may be limiting, but perhaps replication of the experiment by brave and methodical researchers will attract more attention and support.
Findings "above chance" are significant, but won't become well-known until real-world applications are developed.
