Search

Saturday, March 16, 2019

Objectivity in psi and paranormal experimentation


DOES THE EXPERIMENTER’S BELIEF MATTER?

BY: CAROLINE WATT

I have conducted a series of studies (e.g.Watt & Ramakers, 2003) looking at the question of experimenter effects in parapsychology. It has been suggested that the belief of the experimenter may influence the outcome of their study – such that sceptics tend to find what they expect, and so do believers. Indeed, some have claimed that the experimenter’s own psi may affect the outcome of the study.

We selected a number of individuals who scored extremely high or extremely low on a paranormal belief questionnaire, and then trained them to administer a psi task to naive participants. The results for all sessions combined showed overall significant positive scoring on the psi task.

More interestingly, when comparing sessions conducted by believer experimenters with sessions conducted by sceptics, the effect was entirely limited to those participants tested by believer experimenters. Participants tested by skeptical experimenters obtained chance results on the psi task.
The positive psi result could not be due to subtle cueing of the experimenter or participants, because all were blind to the randomised condition manipulations that were taking place during the psi task. Sensory leakage was also ruled out by locating experimenters and participants in separate isolated rooms.

Questionnaire measures suggested that participants’ expectancy and motivation were unaffected by their experimenters’ paranormal belief, raising the possibility that it was the experimenter’s psi that influenced the outcome of the study. If experimenter psi effects are real – and this question needs further experimentation – then this suggests challenging questions not only for parapsychology but also for science in general. Traditionally the experimenter is conceptualised as an objective observer of the data, rather than being another participant in the study.

References:

CAROLINE WATT, The Psychologist Vol 19 No 7, July 2006, www.thepsychologist.org.uk 

Read Also:



No comments:

Post a Comment