AMPLIFYING PRECOGNITION: FOUR EXPERIMENTS WITH ROULETTE.
ABSTRACT: The starting point of my investigations was the well-known fact that subjects asked to produce random decisions were not able to do so, but would show characteristic patterns in their choices. Subjects show preferences and aversions, and avoid repetitions of the same choice. Reinforcing the response (feedback) leads the subjects to behave in the opposite way; most of them prefer to repeat the same choice. These behavior patterns were expected to influence the results of statistical ESP experiments (here, precognition).
To compare the divergence between two sets of probabilities (or relative frequencies), the expected one and the observed one, an information theoretical measure U was defined. For every trial and for each of the three response patterns, the U value can rise or fall, leading to 3 x 2 = 8 different possible "strategies" of the subject. To match the actual strategy with the outcome of the subject's precognition trials for each of the eight strategies, the number of corresponding hits (positive sign) and misses (negative sign), weighted with the related (square of) subject's wager were stored in the program's session memory.
For each forthcoming trial, it is then possible to calculate the changes in the three U-values with respect to both possible predictions that can be made in a two-alternatives setup. Thus, one can decide which of the possible two predictions would represent the better strategy with regard to the effectiveness of all strategies applied by the subject during the previous trials.
A computer program was prepared to recognize the response patterns and calculate the measures. The program was able to make its own bets on certain trials when the appropriate statistical criteria were met. The program's prediction for the forthcoming trial does not consider the subject's prediction for the forthcoming trial, but acts completely independently, only on the basis of the data of the previous trials. It did not have to be the same as the subject's prediction.
Four precognition studies were completed between 1980 and 1999. To motivate the subjects, the experiments were performed as roulette games. The subject could bet any (hypothetical) wager on red or black.
For all four series, target frequencies and target transition frequencies from lag 1 up to lag 4 were compared to chance expectation. Also, in all four series, no significant deviations from chance expectation could be observed, so, all four random number generators were working perfectly.
In all four precognition studies, subjects scored collectively slightly below chance. (There was no hypothesis with respect to these scores.)
In all studies, the prognosis program scored above chance (main hypotheses). The overall score of the amplifying program resulted in a highly significant z value of +2.87 (p = .002).
Synchronous with the program's prognoses, the subjects scored collectively below chance in all studies. (There was no hypothesis with respect to these scores.) Comparing the synchronous hit scores of the subjects with the hit scores of the program, leads (for the difference) to a z value of +2.73 (p = .003). This additional, newly discovered effect is not expected by chance.
Summarizing the results of all four studies, the program performed considerably better than the subjects, "amplifying" precognition.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||The Journal of Parapsychology|
|Date:||Sep 1, 1999|
|Previous Article:||ATMOSPHERIC ELECTROMAGNETISM: AN ATTEMPT AT REPLICATING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN NATURAL SFERICS AND ESP.|
|Next Article:||THE RISE AND FALL OF THE INDIAN ROPE TRICK.|