The study of the evidence for psychological phenomena, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis, that are inexplicable by science.
parapsychological par'a·psy'cho·log'i·cal (-sī'kə-lŏj'ĭ-kəl) adj.parapsychologist par'a·psy·chol'o·gist n.
|
Results for parapsychology
|
On this page:
|
The study of the evidence for psychological phenomena, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis, that are inexplicable by science.
parapsychological par'a·psy'cho·log'i·cal (-sī'kə-lŏj'ĭ-kəl) adj.For more information on parapsychology, visit Britannica.com.
The study of allegedly paranormal phenomena. Also known as psychical research.
Parapsychology, a term denoting the organized experimental study of purported "psychic" abilities, such as telepathy (the knowledge of human thoughts without sensory communication), clairvoyance (the knowledge of physical objects without sensory aid), psycho-kinesis (the ability to influence an object physically without contact with it), and precognition (the knowledge of future events). The term, originally German, found its way into English in the 1930s and has supplanted the older term "psychical research" in America and to a degree in Great Britain.
Organized psychical research came into being in the United States in 1885, at the height of popular interest in spiritualism, with the founding of the American Society for Psychical Research. The most prominent American supporter of psychical research at this time was William James, although most American psychologists were, and are, hostile to the subject. Many famous mediums were studied, the most noteworthy being Leonora E. Piper, extensively investigated by James himself. The three principal leaders of American psychical research in its early years were Richard Hodgson, James Hervey Hyslop, and Walter Franklin Prince.
Funds and fellowships for the conduct of psychical research were established in three American universities—Harvard, Stanford, and Clark—in the first two decades of the twentieth century, but the work done there was greatly overshadowed by the work done in the early 1930s by Joseph Banks Rhine with associates in the Psychology Department of Duke University. Rhine ran thousands of tests with Duke students, some of whom achieved striking extra-chance results in card guessing. The results were published in 1934 in Extra-Sensory Perception; the methods described there soon became standard experimental procedure, and Rhine's term ESP (extrasensory perception) has become a common label for psychic abilities. Rhine established the Journal of Parapsychology in 1937, and in the 1940s he carried his investigations at his laboratory at Duke into the fields of psychokinesis and precognition.
Parapsychology aroused controversy and hostility in scientific and academic quarters; objections were made both to its experimental and statistical methods and to its philosophical implications. Fifty years after university studies began, the subject was still not yet well established academically and had not yet developed a clear professional structure and status. In the popular mind, and to some degree in the field, the connections with spiritualism and the occult remained close. Scientific clarity seemed an especially distant goal in the 1970s and 1980s, as parapsychology merged with popular curiosity in UFO and alien abduction lore, witchcraft, and New Age alternative religions and concepts of holistic health. But the revival of interest in occultism created a wide information network, and during these decades, research in parapsychology was being pursued at various academic centers, including the University of Virginia, the City University of New York, and Maimonides Hospital in New York City, as well as at the American Society for Psychical Research and at private foundations in Durham, North Carolina, and elsewhere. This later experimental work was broadly diversified, with researchers attempting to bring physiology, psychiatry, and studies of animal behavior to bear on parapsychology.
Bibliography
Beloff, John. Parapsychology: A Concise History. London: Athlone Press, 1993.
Griffin, David R. Parapsychology, Philosophy, and Spirituality: A Postmodern Exploration. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997.
Bibliography
See S. Coblentz, Light Beyond: The Wonderworld of Parapsychology (1981); A. P. Dubrov and V. N. Pushkin, Parapsychology and Contemporary Science (1982); H. Edge et al. Foundations of Parapsychology (1986); A. Berger, Lives and Letters in American Parapsychology (1988).
The name given to the scientific study of psychic or paranormal phenomena. The Parapsychological Association, refers to it as, "The scientific and scholarly study of certain unusual events associated with human experience." The association also pointed out in its Parapsychology FAQs, on its website in 2000, that:
In spite of what the media often imply, parapsychology is not the study of 'anything parnormal' or bizarre. Nor is parapsychology concerned with astrology, UFOs, searching for Bigfoot, paganism, vampires, alchemy, or witchcraft.
Parapsychology largely replaced the earlier term "psychical research," the change indicating a significant shift in emphasis and methodology. The term "parapsychology" is an old one. It appears to have been coined in Germany in or before 1889 by psychologist Max Dessoir (1867-1947). Dessoir first used the term in an article the June 1889 issue of the German periodical Sphinx. Dessoir's use of the term "parapsychology," as also the term "parapsychic," predates the later use of the term by Emile Boirac (1851-1917) in a book in 1908.
The term "parapsychology," as used currently was popularized by J. B. Rhine (1895-1980) and fellow pioneers William McDougall and Louisa E. Rhine to distinguish the laboratory based study, including the use of careful experimental methodology, of psychic phenomena in both its mental (telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition) and physical (psychokinesis) form. In 1927, McDougall and the Rhines began research on mediumship, survival, and telepathy in the Department of Psychology at Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Rhine established the now familiar outlines of laboratory method with card-guessing and dice-rolling experiments. Card-guessing had been used already in scientific tests implemented by psychical researchers in Britain. It was Rhine who popularized the use of Zener cards, devised by his colleague psychologist Karl Zener. This experiement of sorts consisted of holding 25 cards bearing simple symbols in groups of five of a kind: star, circle, square, cross and waves. The pack simplified the mathematical calculations involved in evaluating chance factors in guessing.
In addition to this work, Rhine popularized the terms "parapsychology," "extrasensory perception" and "psi." In the 1930s his attempts to find a statistical validation of ESP transformed parapsychology into a legitimate area for scientific research for many who had eschewed psychical research previously.
Assisted by J. Gaither Pratt, who later became a prominent parapsychologist himself, Rhine looked for psychically gifted people to study. One prominent subject was a Duke student, Hubert E. Pearce. In a significant set of 74 runs which Rhine named the Pearce-Pratt Series, the odds against the successful guesses being merely chance were estimated as 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Many variants in experimental setup were developed in card-guessing, and the results were often significantly above chance expectation.
The idea for the classic psychokinetic (PK) experiments developed after a casual visitor to Duke boasted that he could will dice to fall so that he could get the numbers he needed to win. Experimental techniques were devised in which subjects threw dice for the face of their choice The results were analyzed mathematically. The results over several years indicated strong evidence for the reality of PK. Such findings were later confirmed by experimenters elsewhere, using a variety of experimental techniques. Various methods were developed to ensure that PK tests with dice were not influenced by mechanical factors (weight of dice, etc.) or unconscious skills in throwing. Apparatus was designed which threw dice automatically.
Some special terms that have developed in the study of PK are: PK-MT (psychokinetic effect on moving targets such as dice); PK-LT (influence on living matter, such as growth in plants, healing, influencing animals); PK-ST (influence on static targets). Another initialism that grew up in evaluating PK was "QD," which indicated the division of record sheets into four equal quarters. Study of quarter divisions showed a consistent pattern of fall-off in scoring results as between upper left and lower right quarters of the record sheet, with the other two quarters bridging the gap in success fall-off. It became clear that this fall-off in success during the course of a series of tests was a characteristic feature of PK, suggesting the operation of some unknown mental process which affected the continuity of PK achievement.
In 1934, Rhine published his first book, Extrasensory Perception, which caused something of a furor in scientific and academic circles. For a time it was fashionable to attack his preliminary findings favoring ESP. The scientific community especially, and a large portion of the general public, were still much opposed to, and highly suspcious of parapsychology as a study. The identification of Duke University with such controversial and scientifically marginalized research, was also highly criticized; and eventually Rhine was obliged to open a separate Parapsychology Laboratory, seeking outside sponsorship for research. The persistent patient work of Rhine, his associates and other parapsychologists over decades eventually established a place for parapsychology as a proper scientific study, however many skeptics stood by with disbelief.
The early years of parapsychology were chronicled in a book by Rhine and others: Extrasensory Perception after Sixty Years; a Critical Appraisal of the Research in Extrasensory Perception (1940). In it they detailed the ESP research at Duke University from 1927 through 1940 in the context of the former period of psychical research from 1882 to 1927. Valuable scientific investigation of ESP and related phenomena and some laboratory research had been conducted during this earlier period by both the Society for Psychical Research, founded in London in 1882, and the American Society for Psychical Research, founded in 1885. For example, from 1921 on, an important series of card tests was conducted by G. N. M. Tyrrell in Britain. The British experimenter W. Whately Carington did important tests on telepathy and PK and developed a stimulating "association theory" of telepathy. Other British experimenters included: G. W. Fisk and Donald J. West working on PK scoring, S. G. Soal, and Kathleen M. H. Goldney.
In the United States, notable ESP pioneers included Gardner Murphy and Gertrude R. Schmeidler. Murphy joined the Society for Psychical Research, London, as early as 1917. He did graduate work at Harvard University in the field as the Richard Hodgson Fellow from 1922 to 1925, and also served as vice-president and president of the American Society (1940-62).
In 1937, Rhine began publication of the Journal of Parapsychology, devoted to original publication of experimental results and other research findings in extra-sensory perception and psychokinesis.
Rhine's early work with Eileen J. Garrett, a notable psychic whom he tested in the early days at Duke, bore fruit in 1951 when she established the Parapsychology Foundation, in New York City, to promote laboratory parapsychology and fund and sponsor research. From 1953 on, the foundation published a bimonthly newsletter, Newsletter of the Parapsychology Foundation, which was superseded in 1970 by the bimonthly journal Parapsychology Review. Between 1959 and 1968 the foundation also published a valuable International Journal of Parapsychology. The Parapsychology Foundation plays an important role in encouraging parapsychological research in universities and among scholars with established scientific reputations.
The Second Generation
A new day arrived for parapsychology with the founding of the Parapsychological Association in 1957 as the professional society for parapsychologists. The association projected a threefold effort to advance parapsychology as a scientific discipline, engage in public education, and integrate the results of their research with the findings of other branches of science.
By 1957 parapsychology and psychical research had developed a working partnership and tolerance of the particular contributions both made. Boundaries were blurred as individuals worked both areas. Researchers saw the need to investigate the claims and phenomena which emerged in the noticeable revival of the occult and occult religion in the 1960s. As psychical researchers examined a broad range of phenomena (Spiritualism, evidence for survival after death, hauntings, poltergeist occurrences, out-of-the-body traveling, reincarnation, psychical healing, and magical practices) parapsychologists expanded the range of topics covered by laboratory experimentation.
Popular interest in psychic and occult phenomena in the 1960s helped create a general climate of belief in the paranormal at both critical and uncritical levels. The most significant sign of the changing climate was the acceptance of the Parapsychological Association into membership of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in December 1969, after three previous rejections. This improved scientific status of parapsychology owed much to the patient laboratory work on ESP by Rhine and others since the 1930s.
Parapsychology and Fraud
Parapsychology, as science in general, is a very competitive field. The sense of urgency to produce results is heightened in this field. Undergirded as it is with the belief that positive results would necessitate a significant revision of currently operative scientific models of the universe the pressure is great. With such high stakes, the field has had to pay constant attention to improving its methodology and tightening its controls. Consequently, it has also had to watch out for the occasional production of fraudulent reports, especially the altering of laboratory statistics, in order to give significance to mundane or negative experimental results. With parapsychology being such a controversial field, it is not unexpected that ideological critics of the field have seized such revelations of fraud and widely publicized them. Many of these critics of parapsychology organized and affiliated with the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP).
While parapsychology has some well-publicized cases of fraud, the cases must be understood in the larger context of fraud that afflicts every field of science. Most cases of fraud go undetected as they concern peripheral matters of insignificant technological or philosophical consequence. Yet it only would follow that the temptation to fraud is everywhere. This temptation was vividly illustrated by CSICOP itself in their early investigation of the work of Michel Gauquelin in astrology. When CSICOP results confirmed Guaquelin's results, data was changed to conceal that fact. Even after the fraud was pointed out to the committee, the original papers were republished without any reference to the cheating that had occurred. That refusal to deal with internal fraud has blunted much of the usefulness that the committee might have had as a watchdog in the field.
Two revelations of fraud have had the most effect on parapsychology. The first concerned the experiments in telepathy carried out by S. G. Soal with the percipient Basil Shackleton from 1941-1943. They had been regarded as highly evidential for many years. In 1971, serious doubts were raised about the experiments and Soal's handling of them. An article by R. G. Medhurst in the Journal of the S.P.R. in 1971 questioned the method of constructing quasi-random series in the tests. Med-hurst implied inaccuracy (or worse) in Soal's methods. As early as 1960, Gretl Albert, an agent at some of the sittings, had alleged that she had seen Soal "altering the figures" several times on the score sheets. Thus the Medhurst article opened a controversy within parapsychology which resulted in a 1978 article by Betty Markwick in the Proceedings of the S.P.R. Markwick presented an overwhelming case for conscious or unconscious manipulation of data by Soal, based on computer analysis of his records. (Not all parapsychologists agree that Soal was deliberately fraudulent; but the validity of his telepathy experiments with Basil Shackleton has been shown to be inadmissible.)
In another case, the research of Walter J. Levi, Jr., formerly the director of the Institute for Parapsychology offered a rival for the Soal experiments as an instance of fraud. In 1974 J. B. Rhine reported that Levy had been caught falsifying results in an experiment. Levy was asked to resign and left the field. A re-examination of all his research in the field, including independent replication of his experiments, began. His papers were from that time no longer cited as providing any evidence of psi.
During the 1980s a controversy developed around the ganzfeld psi experiments of Carl Sargent at Cambridge University. An article "A Report of a Visit to Carl Sargent's Laboratory" authored by Susan Blackmore (Journal of the S.P.R., vol. 54, 1987) cast serious doubt on the methods and validity of Sargent's experiments. A defense of Sargent against the implication of fraud, "Cheating, Psi, and the Appliance of Science; A Reply to Blackmore" by Trevor Harley & Gerald Matthews, was published in the same issue of the Journal.
Contemporary Parapsychology
The general openness to psychic and occult phenomena that led to the burgeoning of the New Age movement and the acceptance of the Parapsychological Association into the American Association of the Advancement of Science served to create a decade of heightened parapsychological research in the 1970s. The founding of new research organizations such as the Academy of Parapsychology and Medicine (1970); the Institute of Parascience (1971); the Academy of Religion and Psychical Research; the Institute for Noetic Sciences (1973); and the International Kirlian Research Association (1975) created an optimistic climate. It offered promise that new breakthroughs were imminent. The reports of new work in parapsychology at the Stanford Research Institute further inflated the hope.
Parapsychology had become an international affair before World War II. During the last half of the twentieth century it became even more intricately woven into the everyday lives of people the world over. The decade of the 1970s saw further expansion of parapsychology. By the end of the 1980s the Parapsychological Association reported approximately 300 members working in more than 30 countries. In the United States alone by 1990, the organization listed over 150 members, including many professionals and scientists. Additionally, research not affiliated with the association was being carried out in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.
Not surprisingly, both the scope and methods of parapsychology expanded greatly by the end of the twentieth century. Notable new directions included Kirlian photography, remote viewing, the investigation of altered states of consciousness (including alpha-related states and dream experiences) prompted by the influx of spiritual teachers from the East who made extraordinary claims for the abilities produced by meditation and related disciplines; experiments in the paranormal healing of animals; and, possibly the most controversial of all, the work of Ian Stevenson in the investigation of the evidence for reincarnation. The 1970s and 1980s also saw a significant amount of attention paid to the testing of the claims of paranormal feats by psychic Uri Geller followed by the emergence of a number of others, especially in Japan, who claimed similar abilities.
Parapsychologists still found themselves faced with strong opposition from their academic colleagues. Research and teaching positions were difficult to obtain, and unstable at best. No university seemed willing to establish a parapsychological department. Continued opposition both to parapsychological findings and the lack of any formal acknowledgement to the field remained a constant aggravation and threat to the work. The core of the opposition was focused in the Committee for the Investigation of the Claims of the Paranormal, founded in 1976, (CSICOP) and in its periodical, Skeptical Inquirer.
New lines of hopeful research soon proved to be dead-ends. The effects of Kirlian photography disappeared as more stringent controls were applied, as did most of the effects produced by Geller and his imitators. Stevenson was unable to pass on the enthusiasm he had for his reincarnation research. The Stanford Research Institute abandoned its parapsychological research. The Academy for Parapsychology and Medicine disbanded and the problem of the nonacceptance of parapsychology by the academic world continued to provoke concern and debate in parapsychological circles.
Charles Thomas Cayce, the grandson of Edgar Cayce, and director of the Edgar Cayce Foundation, and the Association for Research and Enlightenment, (ARE) reported in 1995 that the foundation's Atlantic University, was expected offer the first Master's Degree in Transpersonal Studies, much of the program directed to the readings of the elder Cayce and the meaning of his psychic revelations. Much of the research that previously had been conducted at Duke University, was being conducted through Atlantic and the ARE, as well as programs and seminars around the United States, and internationally. ARE's approach to studying paranormal phenomena consisted of understanding the whole person. Through holistic medical clinics, spiritual reflection and meditation the work to develop psychic ability must be a lifelong process. Again, the true believers worked hard to overcome the impression the non-believers had that the entire pursuit of uncovering the complexities of the paranormal world was the domain of the non-thinking person. While the Parapsychological Association wanted to specifically exclude paranormal as a part of their ongoing scientific research, and disassociate from the term, "paranormal," many outside the organization insisted on using both the terms and the phenomena in conjunction with any unexplained occurrence that involved the human mind.
Yet if the experts and scientists were skeptical, in 1991, American Demographics, reported that a Gallup poll indicated that people in the age group of 30 to 49, a generation more educated than any previous one in America, were more likely than any other to believe in paranormal phenomena. According to that poll, between 1978 and 1991, certain statistics emerged: 1), the proportion of people believing in ghosts increased to 25 percent from 11 percent; 2), belief in devils increased to 55 percent from 39 percent; 3), belief in deja vu, the belief that a person holds when a new experience gives the feeling that it has already occured, in this life or another, increased to 55 percent from 30 percent; 4) 18 percent of adults believe in the possibility of communicating with the dead; and, 5), 70 percent believe in an afterlife. That poll also indicated a decline in certain paranormal beliefs, including a drop from 51 percent to 49 percent of the people who claimed to believe in ESP. One person who appeared on television sets at the end of the 1990s was James Van Praagh. Van Praagh, a world-famous medium, wrote books and produced audio tapes, recounting his communication with the spirits of dead people. He received wide acclaim, particularly regarding his spiritual approach.
Popular television shows and movies at the end of the twentieth century belied, too, that skepticism was as rampant as CSICOP claimed. In any case, Hollywood especially took advantage of the interest the average person seemed to have in the area of parapsychology—from ghosts to satanic possession. One popular network show, "Unsolved Mysteries," featured at least one piece a week on some paranormal occurrence, right along with their true-crime mysteries of kidnapping, murder, and other crime-related stories. The weekly television series, "The X-Files," had its two fictional heros, FBI agents, experiencing the "out of the ordinary" phenomena as they hunted down mysterious criminals and sometimes supernormal forces. A 1999 hit summer movie, "The Sixth Sense," even won an Academy Award nomination for its 11 year-old star. The line that became most infamous was familiar to those who did not see the movie, as well as those who had. "I see dead people." A line that revealed the perplexed youngster's dilemma, was pronounced on movie trailers for the months surrounding the picture's opening. Indeed, the idea fascinated people enough to give the movie some of the highest ratings and biggest box office sales of the year.
Parapsychological phenomena did not abide by the constraints of time or space, according to those involved in its research. It does not distinguish between mind and matter—both are one, inextricably connected to each other. Still, the majority of parapsychologists believed that all of the unexplained experiences that included, ESP, PK, and the body surviving after death, to name only a few, would eventually be explained scientifically as scientific knowledge expanded.
Sources:
Beloff, John, ed. New Directions in Parapsychology. London, 1974. Reprint, Metchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1975.
Blackmore, Susan. Adventures of a Parapsychologist. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1986.
Boirac, Emile. Psychic Science; An Introduction and Contribution to the Experimental Study of Psychical Phenomena. London, 1918.
Brodeur, Nicole. "Reporter has a close encounter with a psychic." Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service, 16 August 1993.
Dessoir, Max. "Die Parapsychologie, Eine Entgegnung auf den Artikel 'Der Prophet."' Sphinx (June 1889): 341-44. Reprinted as "Parapsychology, A Response to the Article 'The Prophet."' Journal of the S.P.R. 53, 802 (January 1986).
Dougherty, Robin. "It's uncanny! Networks are invaded by 'paranoia shows'." Knight Ridder/Tribune News Sercie, 18 Sept.1996.
Edge, Hoyt L., Robert L. Morris, John Palmer, Joseph H. Rush. Foundations of Parapsychology; Exploring the Boundaries of Human Capability. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.
Grattan-Guinness, Ivor. Psychical Research; A Guide to its History, Principles and Practices, in Celebration of 100 Years of the Society for Psychical Research. UK: Aquarian Press, 1982.
Hansel, C. E. M. ESP and Parapsychology: A Critical Re-Evaluation. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1980.
Haynes, Renée. The Society for Psychical Research 1882-1982, a History. Macdonald & Co., London, 1982.
Holden, Constance. "Parapsychology Update." Science, 2 December 1983.
Lindsey, Charley. "Skeptics attempt to debunk unusual beliefs." Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, 3 August 1998.
McConnell, R. A. An Introduction to Parapsychology in the Context of Science. Pittsburgh, Penn.: University of Pittsburgh, Biological Sciences Department, 1983.
Markwick, Betty. "The Soal-Goldney Experiments with Basil Shackleton; New Evidence of Data Manipulation." Proceedings of the S.P.R. 56 (1978).
"Max Dessoir and the Origin of the Word 'Parapsychology."' Journal of the S.P.R. 54, 806 (January 1987).
Medhurst, R. G. "The Origin of the Prepared Random Numbers Used in the Shackleton Experiments." Journal of the S.P.R. 46 (1971).
Moore, R. Lawrence. In Search of White Crows: Spiritualism, Parapsychology, and American Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Murphy, Gardner, and Laura A. Dale. Challenge of Psychical Research: A Primer of Psychical Research. New York: Harper & Row, 1961.
Parapsychological Association Web Site.http://www.parapsych.org. July 31, 2000.
Pratt, J. Gaither. ESP Research Today: a Study of Developments in Parapsychology since 1960. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1963.
Price, Harry. Fifty Years of Psychical Research: A Critical Survey. London: Longmans Green, 1939. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.
Rao, K. Ramakrishna. Experimental Parapsychology: a Review and Interpretation, with a Comprehensive Bibliography. Springfield, Ill.: Charles Thomas, 1966.
Rhine, J. B. Extrasensory Perception. Boston, Mass.: Boston Society for Psychic Research, 1934. Rev. ed., Boston: Bruce Humphries, 1964.
——. "History of Experimental Studies." In Benjamin B. Wolman, et al. Handbook of Parapsychology. New York: Van Nor-strand Reinhold, 1986.
——, ed. Progress in Parapsychology. Durham, N.C.: Parapsychology Press, 1971.
——. The Reach of the Mind. New York: William Sloane, 1947. Reprint, New York: William Morrow, 1971.
Rhine, J. B., et al. Extrasensory Perception after Sixty Years: a Critical Appraisal of the Research in Extrasensory Perception. New York: Henry Holt, 1940. Reprint, Boston: Bruce Humphries, 1966.
Rhine, J. B., and R. Brier. Parapsychology Today. New York: Citadel, 1968.
Richet, Charles. Thirty Years of Psychical Research. London: W. Collins Sons, 1923. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.
Rush, Joseph H. "What is Parapsychology?" In Hoyt L. Edge, Robert L. Morris, Joseph H. Rush, & John Palmer. Foundations of Parapsychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.
Schmeidler, Gertrude R. Extrasensory Perception. New York: Atherton, 1969.
Schwartz, Joe. "The baby boom taks to the dead." American Demographics, April 1991.
Science News. "Believe it or not." 9 March 1991.
Soal, S. G., and F. Bateman. Modern Experiments in Telepathy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1954.
Sudre, René. Parapsychology. New York: Citadel, 1960.
Thalbourne, Michael A. A Glossary of Terms Used in Parapsychology. London: Heinemann, 1982.
Thouless, Robert H. Experimental Psychical Research. London, 1963. Reprint. Santa Fe, N.M.: Gannon, 1969.
Vasiliev, L. L. Experiments in Mental Suggestion. Church Crookham, UK: Institute for the Study of Mental Images, 1963. Reprinted as Experiments in Distance Influence. New York: E. P. Dutton/London: Wildwood House, 1976.
——. Studies in Mental Telepathy. New York: CCM Information Corp., 1971.
White, Rhea A., and Laura A. Dale. Parapsychology: Sources of Information. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1973.
——. Surveys in Parapsychology. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1976.
Wolman, Benjamin B., ed. Handbook of Parapsychology. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1977. Rev. ed., Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., 1986.
The study of extrasensory perception (ESP), communications with the dead, telekinesis (using mental energy to cause distant objects to move), and other mental phenomena that have not been explained or accepted by scientists. (See psychic research.)
Add your blog to the Answers Directory.
Parapsychology (from the Greek: παρά para, "alongside" +
psychology) is the study of ostensibly paranormal
psychological phenomena. Phenomena studied include extra-sensory perception,
psychokinesis, and survival of consciousness after
death; parapsychologists call these phenomena psi, a neutral term
non-suggestive of what causes the phenomena or experiences.[1]
Parapsychological research involves a variety of qualitative and quantitative methodologies,[2] and takes place at a small number of universities and privately funded laboratories, notably in the United States and the United Kingdom. The research has been published in mainstream journals including Psychological Bulletin, Foundations of Physics, and the British Journal of Psychology, as well as specialist publications such as the Journal of Parapsychology. Experiments conducted by parapsychologists have included the use of random number generators to test for evidence of psychokinesis, sensory-deprivation Ganzfeld experiments to test for extra-sensory perception, and research trials conducted under contract to the United States government to investigate the possibility of remote viewing. Parapsychologists have generated a number of meta-analytical studies based on this research, which combine the data from previous experiments into one large data set. These statistical analyses have attracted much attention and debate.
Parapsychology is a fringe science because it involves research that does not fit within standard theoretical models accepted by mainstream science. Scientists such as psychologists Ray Hyman and James Alcock, among others, are critical of both the methodology used and the results obtained by parapsychology. Skeptical researchers suggest that methodological flaws provide the best explanation for apparent experimental successes, rather than the anomalistic explanations offered by many parapsychologists. Critical analysts argue that parapsychology crosses the line into pseudoscience.[3] To date, no evidence has been accepted by the mainstream scientific community as irrefutably supporting the existence of paranormal phenomena.
The term parapsychology was coined in or before 1889 by psychologist Max Dessoir. It was adopted by J.B. Rhine in the 1930s as a replacement for the term psychical research, to indicate a significant shift toward laboratory methodologies applied to the study of psychical phenomena.[4]
![]()
The Society for Psychical Research (SPR) was founded in London in 1882. The formation of the SPR was the first systematic effort to organize scientists and scholars for a critical and sustained investigation of paranormal phenomena. The early membership of the SPR included philosophers, scholars, scientists, educators and politicians, such as Henry Sidgwick, Arthur Balfour, William Crookes, and Charles Richet.[5]
The SPR classified its subjects of study into several areas: telepathy, hypnotism, Reichenbach's phenomena, apparitions, haunts, and the physical aspects of spiritualism such as table-tilting and the appearance of matter from unknown sources, otherwise known as materialization. One of the first collaborative efforts of the SPR was its Census of Hallucinations, which researched apparitional experiences and hallucinations in the sane. The census was the Society's first attempt at a statistical evaluation of paranormal phenomena, and the resulting publication in 1886, Phantasms of the Living is still widely referenced in parapsychological literature today. The SPR became the model for similar societies in other European countries and the United States during the late 19th century. Largely due to the support of psychologist William James, the American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR) opened its doors in New York City in 1885.[6]
Today, the SPR and ASPR continue the investigation of psi phenomena. The SPR's purpose is stated in every issue of its Journal - being "to examine without prejudice or prepossession and in a scientific spirit those faculties of man, real or supposed, which appear to be inexplicable on any generally recognized hypothesis."[7]
In 1911, Stanford University became the first academic institution in the United States to study extra-sensory perception (ESP) and psychokinesis (PK) in a laboratory setting. The effort was headed by psychologist John Edgar Coover. In 1930, Duke University became the second major U.S. academic institution to engage in the critical study of ESP and psychokinesis in the laboratory. Under the guidance of psychologist William McDougall, and with the help of others in the department—including psychologists Karl Zener, Joseph B. Rhine, and Louisa E. Rhine—laboratory ESP experiments using volunteer subjects from the undergraduate student body began. As opposed to the approaches of psychical research, which generally sought qualitative evidence for paranormal phenomena, the experiments at Duke University proffered a quantitative, statistical approach using cards and dice. As a consequence of the ESP experiments at Duke, standard laboratory procedures for the testing of ESP developed and came to be adopted by interested researchers throughout the world.[6]
The publication of J.B. Rhine's book, New Frontiers of the Mind (1937) brought the laboratory's findings to the general public. In his book, Rhine popularized the word "parapsychology," which psychologist Max Dessoir had coined over 40 years earlier, to describe the research conducted at Duke. Rhine also founded an autonomous Parapsychology Laboratory within Duke and started the Journal of Parapsychology, which he co-edited with McDougall.
The parapsychology experiments at Duke evoked much criticism from academic psychologists who challenged the concepts and evidence of ESP. Rhine and his colleagues attempted to address these criticisms through new experiments, articles, and books, and summarized the state of the criticism along with their responses in the book Extra-Sensory Perception After Sixty Years.
The administration of Duke grew less sympathetic to parapsychology, and after Rhine's retirement in 1965 parapsychological links with the university were broken. Rhine later established the Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man (FRNM) and the Institute for Parapsychology as a successor to the Duke laboratory.[6] In 1995, the centenary of Rhine's birth, the FRNM was renamed the Rhine Research Center. Today, the Rhine Research Center is a parapsychology research unit, stating that it "aims to improve the human condition by creating a scientific understanding of those abilities and sensitivities that appear to transcend the ordinary limits of space and time."[8]
The Parapsychological Association (PA) was created in Durham, North Carolina, on June 19, 1957. Its formation was proposed by J. B. Rhine at a workshop on parapsychology which was held at the Parapsychology Laboratory of Duke University. Rhine proposed that the group form itself into the nucleus of an international professional society in parapsychology. The aim of the organization, as stated in its Constitution, became "to advance parapsychology as a science, to disseminate knowledge of the field, and to integrate the findings with those of other branches of science".[9]
Under the direction of anthropologist Margaret Mead, the Parapsychological Association took a large step in advancing the field of parapsychology in 1969 when it became affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the largest general scientific society in the world.[10] In 1979, physicist John A. Wheeler argued that parapsychology is pseudoscientific, and that the affiliation of the PA to the AAAS needed to be reconsidered.[11] His challenge to parapsychology's AAAS affiliation was unsuccessful.[11] Today, the PA consists of about three hundred full, associate, and affiliated members worldwide and maintains its affiliation with the AAAS.[12] The annual AAAS convention provides a forum where parapsychologists can present their research to scientists from other fields and advance parapsychology in the context of the AAAS's lobbying on national science policy.[12]
The affiliation of the Parapsychological Association (PA) with the American Association for the Advancement of Science, along with a general openness to psychic and occult phenomena in the 1970s, led to a decade of increased parapsychological research. During this period, other notable organizations were also formed, including the Academy of Parapsychology and Medicine (1970), the Institute of Parascience (1971), the Academy of Religion and Psychical Research, the Institute of Noetic Sciences (1973), the International Kirlian Research Association (1975), and the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory (1979). Parapsychological work was also conducted at the Stanford Research Institute during this time.[4]
The scope of parapsychology expanded during these years. Psychiatrist Ian Stevenson
conducted much of his controversial research into reincarnation during the 1970s.
Psychologist Thelma Moss devoted time to the study of Kirlian photography at UCLA's
parapsychology laboratory. The influx of spiritual teachers from Asia, and their claims of abilities produced by meditation, led to research on
During this period, academics outside parapsychology also appeared to have a general optimism towards this research. In 1979, a survey of more than 1,100 college professors in the United States found that only 2% of psychologists expressed the belief that extra-sensory perception was an impossibility. A far greater number, 34%, indicated that they believed ESP was either an established fact or a likely possibility. The percentage was even higher in other areas of study: 55% of natural scientists, 66% of social scientists (excluding psychologists), and 77% of academics in the arts, humanities, and education believed that ESP research was worthwhile.[13]
The surge in paranormal research continued throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s. By the end of the 1980s, the Parapsychological Association reported members working in more than 30 countries. Additionally, research not affiliated with the PA was being carried out in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.[4]
Contemporary parapsychological research has waned considerably.[14] Early research was considered inconclusive, and parapsychologists were faced with strong opposition from their academic colleagues.[4] Some effects thought to be paranormal, for example, the effects of Kirlian photography, disappeared under more stringent controls, leaving those avenues of research at dead-ends.[4] Many university laboratories in the United States have closed, citing a lack of acceptance by mainstream science as the reason, leaving the bulk of parapsychology confined to private institutions funded by private sources.[4] After 28 years of research, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory (PEAR) retired their laboratory in 2007.[14]
Two universities in the United States still have academic parapsychology laboratories: the Division of Perceptual Studies, a unit at the University of Virginia's Department of Psychiatric Medicine, studies the possibility of survival of consciousness after bodily death; the University of Arizona's Veritas Laboratory conducts laboratory investigations of mediums. Several private institutions, including the Institute of Noetic Sciences and others, conduct and promote parapsychological research. Britain leads parapsychological study in Europe, with privately funded laboratories at the universities of Edinburgh, Northampton, and Liverpool Hope, among others.[14]
Parapsychological research has also been augmented by other sub-disciplines of psychology. These related fields include transpersonal psychology, which studies transcendent or spiritual aspects of the human mind, and anomalistic psychology, which examines paranormal beliefs and subjective anomalous experiences in traditional psychological terms.[15][14]
Parapsychologists study a number of ostensible paranormal phenomena, including but not limited to:
The definitions for the terms above may not reflect their mainstream usage, nor the opinions of all parapsychologists and their critics. Many critics, for example, feel that parapsychologists are engaged in the study of phenomena that disappear under stringent experimental conditions and are thus normal processes.
According to the Parapsychological Association, parapsychologists do not study all paranormal phenomena, nor are they concerned with astrology, UFOs, Bigfoot, paganism, vampires, alchemy, or witchcraft.[2]
Parapsychologists employ a variety of approaches during the study of apparent paranormal phenomena. These methods include qualitative approaches used in traditional psychology, but also quantitative empirical methodologies. Their more controversial studies involve the use of meta-analyses in examining the statistical evidence for psi.[14]
The ganzfeld (German for "whole field") is a technique used to test individuals for telepathy. The technique was developed to quickly quiet mental "noise" by providing a mild, unpatterned sensory field to mask the visual and auditory environment. Isolating the visual sense is usually achieved by creating a soft red glow which is diffused through half ping-pong balls attached to the recipient's eyes. The auditory sense is usually blocked by playing white noise, static, or similar sounds to the recipient. The subject is also seated in a reclined, comfortable position to minimize the sense of touch.
In the typical ganzfeld experiment, a "sender" and "receiver" are isolated. The receiver is put into the ganzfeld state, and the sender is shown a video clip or still picture and asked to mentally send that image to the receiver. The receiver, while in the ganzfeld, is asked to continuously speak aloud all mental processes, including images, thoughts, and feelings. At the end of the sending period, typically about 20 to 40 minutes in length, the receiver is taken out of the ganzfeld and shown four images or videos, one of which is the true target and three are non-target decoys. The receiver attempts to select the true target, using perceptions experienced during the ganzfeld state as clues to what the mentally "sent" image might have been.
According to parapsychologists such as Dean Radin, Charles Honorton, and Daryl Bem, the results of ganzfeld experiments—collectively gathered from over 3,000 individual sessions conducted by about two dozen investigators world-wide—indicate that, on average, the target image is selected by the receiver more often than would be expected by chance alone.[16] Because these meta analyses of ganzfeld results are said to be statistically significant, they have sparked debates within mainstream academic psychology journals over how to properly interpret the data.[17]
Remote viewing experiments test the ability to gather information on a remote target consisting of an object, place, or person that is hidden from the physical perception of the viewer and typically separated from the viewer at some distance. In one type of remote viewing experiment, a pool of several hundred photographs are created. One of these is randomly selected by a third party to be the target. It is then set aside in a remote location. The remote viewer attempts to sketch or otherwise describe that remote target photo. This procedure is repeated for a number of different targets. Many ways of analytically evaluating the results of this sort of experiment have been developed. One common method is to take the group of seven target photos and responses, randomly shuffle the targets and responses, and then ask independent judges to rank or match the correct targets with the participant's actual responses. This method assumes that if there were an anomalous transfer of information, the responses should correspond more closely to the correct targets than to the mismatched targets.[18]
Several hundred such trials have been conducted by investigators over the past 25 years, including by the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory (PEAR) and by scientists at SRI International and Science Applications International Corp., under contract by the U.S. government. The cumulative data was interpreted by Professor of Aerospace Science Robert G. Jahn and psychologist Brenda Dunne at PEAR as indicating that information about remote photos, actual scenes, and events can be perceived beyond chance expectation.[18]
The advent of powerful and inexpensive electronic and computer technologies has allowed the development of fully automated
experiments studying possible interactions between mind and matter. In the most
common experiment of this type, a random number generator (RNG), based on
electronic or
Major meta-analyses of the RNG database have been published every few years since appearing in the journal Foundations of Physics in 1986.[19] PEAR founder Robert G. Jahn and his colleague Brenda Dunne say that the effect size in all cases was found to be very small, but consistent across time and experimental designs, resulting in an overall statistical significance. The most recent meta-analysis was published in Psychological Bulletin, along with several critical commentaries.[20][21] The meta-analysis was composed of 380 studies, which some researchers say has produced an overall effect size that was very small but statistically significant.
Formerly called bio-PK, "direct mental interactions with living systems" (DMILS) studies the effects of one person's intentions on a distant person's psychophysiological state. One type of DMILS experiment looks at the commonly reported "feeling of being stared at." The "starer" and the "staree" are isolated in different locations, and the starer is periodically asked to simply gaze at the staree via closed circuit video links. Meanwhile, the staree's nervous system activity is automatically and continuously monitored.
Parapsychologists have interpreted the cumulative data on this and similar DMILS experiments to suggest that one person's attention directed towards a remote, isolated person can significantly activate or calm that person's nervous system. In a meta-analysis of these experiments published in the British Journal of Psychology in 2004, researchers found that there was a small but significant overall DMILS effect. However, the study also found that when a small number of the highest-quality studies from one laboratory were analyzed, the effect size was not significant. The authors concluded that although the existence of some anomaly related to distant intentions cannot be ruled out, there was also a shortage of independent replications and theoretical concepts.[22]
A near-death experience (NDE) is an experience reported by a person who nearly died, or who experienced clinical death and then revived. NDEs include one or more of the following experiences: a sense of being dead; an out-of-body experience; a sensation of floating above one's body and seeing the surrounding area; a sense of overwhelming love and peace; a sensation of moving upwards through a tunnel or narrow passageway; meeting deceased relatives or spiritual figures; encountering a being of light, or a light; experiencing a life review; reaching a border or boundary; and a feeling of being returned to the body, often accompanied by reluctance.[23]
Interest in the NDE was originally spurred by the research of psychiatrists Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, George Ritchie, and Raymond Moody Jr. In 1998, Moody was appointed chair in "consciousness studies" at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The International Association for Near-death Studies (IANDS) was founded in 1978 to meet the needs of early researchers and experiencers within this field of research. Later researchers, such as neurologist Bruce Greyson, psychologist Kenneth Ring, and cardiologist Michael Sabom, introduced the study of near-death experiences to the academic setting.[23]
A number of studies conducted in the American, European, and Australasian continents have found that a majority of people surveyed report having had experiences that could be interpreted as telepathy, precognition, and similar phenomena. Variables that have been associated with reports of psi-phenomena include belief in the reality of psi; the tendency to have hypnotic, dissociative, and other alterations of consciousness; and, less reliably so, neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience. Although psi-related experiences can occur in the context of such psychopathologies as schizotypal personality, dissociative, and other disorders, most individuals who endorse a belief in psi are well-adjusted, lack serious pathology, and are not intellectually deficient or lacking critical abilities.[15]
Scientists who are critical of
parapsychology begin with the assertion that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. Proponents of hypotheses that
contradict centuries of scientific research must provide extraordinary evidence if their hypotheses are to be taken
seriously.[24] Many analysts of
parapsychology hold that the entire body of evidence to date is of poor quality and not adequately controlled. In their view, the
entire field of parapsychology has produced no conclusive results whatsoever. They cite instances of fraud, flawed studies, a
psychological need for mysticism, and cognitive
bias as ways to explain parapsychological results.[25] Skeptics have also contended that people's desire to believe in paranormal phenomena is often
stronger than the evidence that it does not exist.[26]
The reality of parapsychological phenomena and the scientific validity of parapsychological research is a matter of continued dispute. The methods of parapsychologists are regarded by some detractors as a pseudoscience.[3] Some of the more specific criticisms state that parapsychology does not have a clearly defined subject matter, an easily repeatable experiment that can demonstrate a psi effect on demand, nor an underlying theory to explain the paranormal transfer of information.[27] James E. Alcock, Professor of Psychology at York University, said that few of parapsychology's experimental results have prompted interdisciplinary research with more mainstream sciences such as physics or biology. Alcock states that parapsychology remains isolated science to such an extent that its very legitimacy is questionable,[28] and as a whole is not justified in being labeled "scientific".[29]
There have been instances of fraud in the history of parapsychology research. The Soal-Goldney experiments of 1941–43 (suggesting precognitive ability in subjects) were long regarded as some of the best in the field because they relied upon independent checking and witnesses to prevent fraud. However, many years later, suspicions of fraud were confirmed when statistical evidence, uncovered and published by other parapsychologists in the field, indicated that Dr. Soal had cheated by altering the raw data.[28][30][31]
Walter J. Levy, director of the Institute for Parapsychology, reported on a series of successful ESP experiments involving computer-controlled manipulation of non-human subjects, including eggs and rats. His experiments showed very high positive results. Because the subjects were non-human, and because the experimental environment was mostly automated, his successful experiments avoided criticism concerning experimenter effects, and removed the question of the subject's belief as an influence on the outcome. However, Levy's fellow researchers became suspicious about his methods. They found that Levy interfered with data-recording equipment, manually creating fraudulent strings of positive results. Rhine fired Levy and reported the fraud in a number of articles.[32][33]
Many spiritualist mediums used fraud, and some were exposed by early psychical researchers such as Richard Hodgson[34] and Harry Price.[35] In the 1920s, magician and escapologist Harry Houdini said that researchers and observers could not create experimental procedures which absolutely preclude fraud.[36] In 1979, magician and debunker James Randi perpetrated a hoax, now referred to as Project Alpha. Randi trained two young magicians and sent them under cover to Washington University's McDonnell Laboratory with the specific aim of exposing poor experimental methods and the credulity thought to be common in parapsychology. Although no formal statements or publications from the McDonnell laboratory supported the likelihood that the effects demonstrated by the two magicians were genuine, both of Randi's trainees reportedly deceived experimenters over a period of four years with demonstrations of supposedly telekinetic metal bending.[37] Such methodological failures have been cited as evidence that most, if not all, extraordinary results in parapsychology derive from error or fraud.
Although some critical analysts feel that parapsychological study is scientific, they are not satisfied with its experimental results.[38][27] Skeptical reviewers contend that apparently successful experimental results in psi research are more likely due to sloppy procedures, poorly trained researchers, or methodological flaws than to genuine psi effects.[39][40][41][42] For example, the data from the PEAR laboratory has been criticized by researchers such as statistics professor Jessica Utts and psy