A simple telepathy test: which word did I write?

[Laird]

it might perhaps be useful if Tom Ruffles could post a little message for promoting this forum on the SPR's social media, as you say he is their Communications Officer.

The e-mail address of the Parapsychological Association is office@parapsych.org

Realising not long after your post that our eighth anniversary was imminent, and inspired by your post, we decided to combine that anniversary with a membership drive. I've emailed Tom and the PA, along with several other organisations and individuals who also might be willing to support us in that.

If you or anybody else wants to support our membership drive, then please feel free to promote it on your own socials, or mention it to others who might be willing to do that.

It was quite some time since I posted in this forum, but I am mainly interested in parapsychology and there are just not that many threads here that interests me. People here appear to find other subjects more interesting. I seem to recall that people on the Skeptiko forum also gradually drifted away from parapsychology and started to find other subjects more interesting.

That's probably a fair call. We do seem to discuss parapsychology-adjacent topics more so than parapsychology proper these days. Perhaps if we manage to attract more members, there will be more topics of interest to you. Otherwise, do you have any suggestions on how we can do better?

That's probably a fair call. We do seem to discuss parapsychology-adjacent topics more so than parapsychology proper these days. Perhaps if we manage to attract more members, there will be more topics of interest to you. Otherwise, do you have any suggestions on how we can do better?

Perhaps start discussions when new issues of open access journals have been published, e.g., the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research or the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

[Laird]

Perhaps start discussions when new issues of open access journals have been published, e.g., the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research or the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

That's a great idea. We do have an existing Psi journals thread where we were sharing new journal releases, but it hasn't been updated in years, and it's probably anyway worth having an individual thread to discuss each journal release, at least for the SPR and JSE journals.

[Laird]

On this theme, I see that the SPR released their latest journal issue about a week ago, so I've created a dedicated discussion thread for it:

Journal of the Society for Psychical Research Vol. 89 No. 3 (2025)

Might be persuaded to have a go, if the tests had much greater unique detailed visual contextual information provided surrounding the target (during the period of the test)... something like this perhaps... the more normal to everyday surroundings (like the first step on the stairs, or next to a light switch that is regularly seen), and hi-def details (like the visibility of little scratches and marks on the floor and paintwork etc...)



Obviously you have to be the one to hand tear the paper, and scrumple it up. The more detailed unique context the better, visual or otherwise.

Interesting suggestion, Max_B.

In this test, I did not write the target on a piece of paper. Instead, I highlighted (in yellow) a word I had written in one of my computer files, the latest file about telepathy in my computer. Then, I looked at this word fairly frequently during the test.

This seems to be a little more convenient for me.

This is the image I saw several times:

I was hoping participants in the test would reply "rice" (it happened once).

Interesting suggestion, Max_B.

In this test, I did not write the target on a piece of paper. Instead, I highlighted (in yellow) a word I had written in one of my computer files, the latest file about telepathy in my computer. Then, I looked at this word fairly frequently during the test.

This seems to be a little more convenient for me.

This is the image I saw several times:

I was hoping participants in the test would reply "rice" (it happened once).

Next to your computer would be good too! I just think the more unique one-off context (i.e. scrumpled then unscrumpled paper) that can be provided to the subjects, giving them as much unique contextual information as possible would help, without revealing the target. The subjects get to see all the context, but minus the handwritten target.

We understand information contextually, and we have the issue of interference... which might be limited by the unique scrumpled pattern... not convinced a digital font on a plain screen offers enough uniqueness... anyway we're trying to increase the probability of a hit.

Sony's ESPER Labs protocol used something similar - stunningly successful.  But both people were in the same room, and the subjects were children who had previously shown anomalous abilities. Can't do anything about the last sentence, but we could copy the handwritten scrumpled paper protocol. Their targets were completely freeform... but you're using a very limited multiple choice system (I prefer only two choices for symmetry's sake).

Next to your computer would be good too! I just think the more unique one-off context (i.e. scrumpled then unscrumpled paper) that can be provided to the subjects, giving them as much unique contextual information as possible would help, without revealing the target. The subjects get to see all the context, but minus the handwritten target.

We understand information contextually, and we have the issue of interference... which might be limited by the unique scrumpled pattern... not convinced a digital font on a plain screen offers enough uniqueness... anyway we're trying to increase the probability of a hit.

Sony's ESPER Labs protocol used something similar - stunningly successful.  But both people were in the same room, and the subjects were children who had previously shown anomalous abilities. Can't do anything about the last sentence, but we could copy the handwritten scrumpled paper protocol. Their targets were completely freeform... but you're using a very limited multiple choice system (I prefer only two choices for symmetry's sake).

I have been doing these online telepathy (or ESP) tests since 2009, and until recently, I was using a target handwritten on a piece of paper.

I didn't find the results were less good after I switched to a highlighted word on a computer screen, in spite of a possible lack of poetry.

I just completed a test in French, which can be seen here: https://forum.doctissimo.fr/psychologie/...2659_1.htm.

The test was succesful: the word which was given by most participants (two, who said: "automne") was the correct target of the test.
In addition, a careful analysis of the two correct answers revealed, in my opinion, that they were more serious, friendlier and more credible than the incorrect ones.

This is important for me, because this gives me the impression that what I am trying to do does (hopefully) make some sense.

This impression of "seeing" the ESP effect by a careful study of the answers, their details and their tones, is important and invaluable for me.

Not all tests are so successful, however.

In the case of this latest test, my account on Doctissimo (where I did the test) had been recently deleted, because the moderators apparently didn't like the fact I was offering money to correct responders, in order to try to motivate them (in fact, I only gave money to charities of their choices, not to the responders directly).

It is possible that this unfortunate (and, in my opinion, unjustified) incident did generate some sympathy and extra motivation for the people (often ladies of various ages on this French forum) who participated when I came back.

Highlighting on a computer screen may give an element of modernity and efficiency which is appreciated.