A simple telepathy test: which word did I write?

Perhaps you should (also with your colleagues on this forum) give a thought or two about what "formal tests" have achieved in parapsychology, in terms of mainstream recognition.

Surely an informal test will be worse off than a formal one?

I mean the only person who could be convinced by the data here is...just you?

I actually think you might be on to something with the idea that those who need to justify their intuition as part of their authority could have higher Psi capability. Someone who "just knows" the right style to win over the masses, the right stocks to buy/sell, the right words to sway a critical person or group...I can see Psi playing a role in all of this.

I am just not sure what these tests will show. I don't really have a problem with doing the tests if people want to participate, just unclear what the end goal here is?

I actually think you might be on to something with the idea that those who need to justify their intuition as part of their authority could have higher Psi capability. Someone who "just knows" the right style to win over the masses, the right stocks to buy/sell, the right words to sway a critical person or group...I can see Psi playing a role in all of this.

Out of all the people in the world, all with different ideas and different ways of thinking, would that not happen by chance alone?

Out of all the people in the world, all with different ideas and different ways of thinking, would that not happen by chance alone?

Yeah it doesn't mean Psi is definitively involved, it could just be chance. I do think trying to find potential candidates who *could* exhibit Psi at better-than-average levels is worthwhile though.

Perhaps you should (also with your colleagues on this forum) give a thought or two about what "formal tests" have achieved in parapsychology, in terms of mainstream recognition.

Well, they're the only thing that has led to any maintream recognition at all, whereas uncontrolled, small scale, informal things like what you did only lead to further ridicule and rightful claims that people who "believe" in paraspsychology are just stupid, gullible, and unscientific like all other believers of spirituality and religion. So i'd say their role has been pretty impactful.

They're the reason people can demonstrate that the scoffers have double standards of evidence and methodology, and are the very thing they claim to be fighting.

I always struggle with making a guess on these tests. Basically I think of my response before opening the thread for the very first time, but I tend to confuse myself by answering '42' (Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy).

In this case, my initial thought was '44'. Then I read the four words, after that I went away and thought about the words. I thought the last two words were 'home' and 'garden' (I was wrong, the word was 'house', not 'home') and somehow became fixated on the word home because it had four letters.

For me, I then got caught up in over-intellectualising, echoing between the number four and the third word. I had no confidence in saying anything useful.

More broadly, I do get what was said about emotional attachment being important. But I can also appreciate the usefulness of something which is just random, where there is no attachment like in winning the lottery or a big prize, a simple random choice like this has its merits.

In doing random-choice tests, I think of the now-traditional Zener cards used by J.B. Rhine. Some time ago I found an online test using those cards, I think there were 25 cards in a test. I scored well over half right. But that was beginners luck. My initial success gradually disappeared into randomness, I couldn't sustain an above-average score long-term.

Perhaps then an important factor is novelty. Doing something new, like a particular test for the first time, can give an opportunity to feel for each guess with an open mind, but after a while it becomes more of a mundane activity where one is not engaged, not interested or excited by the task.

I suppose I'm suggesting there doesn't necessarily need to be a strong emotional link of a life-or-death type, but there does need to be some engagement, where novelty or curiosity can create some interest and involvement.

I always struggle with making a guess on these tests. Basically I think of my response before opening the thread for the very first time, but I tend to confuse myself by answering '42' (Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy).

In this case, my initial thought was '44'. Then I read the four words, after that I went away and thought about the words. I thought the last two words were 'home' and 'garden' (I was wrong, the word was 'house', not 'home') and somehow became fixated on the word home because it had four letters.

For me, I then got caught up in over-intellectualising, echoing between the number four and the third word. I had no confidence in saying anything useful.

This is interesting, Typoz.

Your initial thought was '44', while the correct target was the fourth word (initially chosen by the random number generator, but then written, highlighted in yellow, and read and said many times by me during the several days-long test - I really did put some effort into this).

So you got really close (and I don't think I am being biased or unfair, or that I try to manipulate anything when I say this).

Perhaps it would have been useful if you had written these impressions, this "mentation" (see this Journal of Parapsychology article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication...cal_Effect ) in the thread during the test (not hidden behind a "spoiler").

In addition to its intrinsic interest, this might have helped and guided other potential respondents.

Well, they're the only thing that has led to any maintream recognition at all, whereas uncontrolled, small scale, informal things like what you did only lead to further ridicule and rightful claims that people who "believe" in paraspsychology are just stupid, gullible, and unscientific like all other believers of spirituality and religion. So i'd say their role has been pretty impactful.

They're the reason people can demonstrate that the scoffers have double standards of evidence and methodology, and are the very thing they claim to be fighting.

My tests are not uncontrolled, because people have a possibility of verifying the very simple things that I explain.

For example, when I say that your answer was less credible because you said: "I have no idea ... Probably wrong but whatever.", people can go back to your answer, and verify that you did make these statements.

Your answer was however a little bit complicated to analyse because you said "... but just on first random gut instinct".

I am of the opinion that this comment did give your answer a small overall positive credibility.

If you had said "chair", with, for example, a comment like "I am pretty confident about my answer", your answer would have been found credible, according to my usual criteria (regardless of whether your answer was correct or not).

If you had just said, say:
"I have no idea ... OK, my guess is "chair". Probably wrong but whatever.",
you would have been in negative credibility territory (see https://internationalskeptics.com/forums...st-9516155 for details, this is an analysis I did in 2013 on the forum of the James Randi Educational Foundation, which became the International Skeptics Forum in 2014).

In my opinion, the opposite is true.

It is much easier for people to just answer one of the four words: "table", "chair", "house" and "garden", than trying to e.g. guess a picture made far away by an unknown person.

The percipient's work is helped by the fact that some limited information is already provided.

In addition, a statistical analysis of the results is much easier to conduct in the fixed choice experiment than in the open choice case.

Frankly, it's not any easier than with open-ended questions. Maybe it's easier for *you*, but I personally find it much easier when I'm not given a set of possible answers. It means that I can let my mind be open to whatever possibilities that might arise. Stuff can more easily flit in my mind, often rather inexplicably.

The mistake you make is in thinking that minds work similarly ~ some are helped by limited information, some are completely thrown off by being given information. Some of us just work better when we're not distracted by a limited set of answers.

So, your opinion is your opinion, which is fine ~ just don't extrapolate it as being fact.

Not everyone has the same set of paranormal skills, either ~ not even the same general category, even. Some people see ghosts that others don't, for example, despite both being able to sense ghosts.

In summary ~ minds are unpredictable, and don't act according to the patterns you think they might.

Frankly, it's not any easier than with open-ended questions. Maybe it's easier for *you*, but I personally find it much easier when I'm not given a set of possible answers. It means that I can let my mind be open to whatever possibilities that might arise. Stuff can more easily flit in my mind, often rather inexplicably.

In that case, you can write what goes through your mind (I believe this is called "mentation" in ganzfeld jargon), and I'll try to study these impressions.

This is interesting, Typoz.

Your initial thought was '44', while the correct target was the fourth word (initially chosen by the random number generator, but then written, highlighted in yellow, and read and said many times by me during the several days-long test - I really did put some effort into this).

So you got really close (and I don't think I am being biased or unfair, or that I try to manipulate anything when I say this).

Perhaps it would have been useful if you had written these impressions, this "mentation" (see this Journal of Parapsychology article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication...cal_Effect ) in the thread during the test (not hidden behind a "spoiler").

In addition to its intrinsic interest, this might have helped and guided other potential respondents.

You are right, it would have been better if I'd shared my thoughts before the test was ended. Sorry about that.