Psychology and Anomalous Observations The Question of ESP in Dreams

Irvin L. Child Yale University

ABSTRACT: Books by psychologists purporting to of- regardless of whether it leads to an understanding of fer critical reviews of research in parapsychology do new discoveries or to an understanding of how per- not use the scientific standards of discourse prevalent suasive illusions arise. Apparent anomalies--just like in psychology. Experiments at Maimonides Medical the more numerous observations that are not anom- Center on possible extrasensory perception (ESP) in alous-can receive appropriate attention only as they dreams are used to illustrate this point. The experi- become accurately known to the scientists to whose ments have received little or no mention in some re- work they are relevant. Much parapsychological re- views to which they are clearly pertinent. In others, search is barred from being seriously considered be- they have been so severely distorted as to give an en- cause it is either neglected or misrepresented in writ- tirely erroneous impression of how they were con- ings by some psychologists--among them, some who ducted. Insofar as psychologists are guided by these have placed themselves in a prime position to mediate reviews, they are prevented from gaining accurate in- interaction between parapsychological research and formation about research that, as surveys show, would the general body of psychological knowledge. In this be of wide interest to psychologists as well as to others. article, I illustrate this important general point with a particular case, that of experimental research on possible ESP in dreams. It is a case of especially great In recent years, evidence has been accumulating for interest but is not unrepresentative of how psycho- the occurrence of sfich anomalies as telepathy and logical publications have treated similar anomalies. psychokinesis, but the evidence is not totally con- vincing. The evidence has come largely from experi- The Maimonides Research ments by psychologists who have devoted their careers The experimental evidence suggesting that dreams mainly to studying these anomalies, but members of may actually be influenced by ESP comes almost en- other disciplines, including engineering and physics, tirely from a research program carried out at the have also taken part. Some psychologists not primarily Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York. concerned with parapsychology have taken time out Among scientists active in parapsychology, this pro- from other professional concerns to explore such gram is widely known and greatly respected. It has anomalies for themselves. Of these, some have joined had a major indirect influence on the recent course in the experimentation (e.g., Crandall & Hite, 1983; of parapsychological research, although the great ex- Lowry, 1981; Radin, 1982). Some have critically re- pense of dream-laboratory work has prevented it from viewed portions of the evidence (e.g., Akers, 1984; being a direct model. Hyman, 1985). Some, doubting that the phenomena None of the Maimonides research was published could be real, have explored nonrational processes in the journals that are the conventional media for that might encourage belief in their reality (e.g., Ay- psychology. (The only possible exception is that a eroff & Abelson, 1976). Still others, considering the summary of one study [Honorton, Krippner, & Ull- evidence substantial enough to justify a constructive man, 1972] appeared in convention proceedings of theoretical effort, have struggled to relate the apparent the American Psychological Association.) Much of it anomalies to better established knowledge in a way was published in the specialized journals of parapsy- that will render them less anomalous (e.g., Irwin, chology. The rest was published in psychiatric or other 1979) or not anomalous at all (e.g., Blackmore, 1984). medical journals, where it would not be noticed by These psychologists differ widely in their surmise many psychologists. Most of it was summarized in about whether the apparent anomalies in question will popularized form in a book (Ullman, Krippner, & eventually be judged real or illusory; but they appear Vaughan, 1973) in which two of the researchers were to agree that the evidence to date warrants serious joined by a popular writer whose own writings are consideration. clearly not in the scientific tradition, and the book Serious consideration of apparent anomalies departs from the pattern of scientific reporting that seems an essential part of the procedures of science, characterizes the original research reports.

November 1985 • American Psychologist 1219 Copyright 1985 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/85/$00.75 Vol. 40, No. 11, 1219-1230 How, then, would this research come to the at- explained in detail unless the percipient was a repeater tention of psychologists, so that its findings or its errors for whom that step was not necessary. When ready might in time be evaluated for their significance to to go to bed, the percipient was wired up in the usual the body of systematic observations upon which psy- way for monitoring of brain waves and eye move- chology has been and will be built? The experiments ments, and he or she had no further contact with the at Maimonides were published between about 1966 agent or agent's experimenter until after the session and 1972. In the years since--now over a decade-- was completed. The experimenter in the next room five books have been published by academic psy- monitored the percipient's sleep and at the beginning chologists that purport to offer a scholarly review and of each period of rapid eye movements (REM), when evaluation of parapsychological research. They vary it was reasonably certain the sleeper would be dream- in the extent to which they seem addressed to psy- ing, notified the agent by pressing a buzzer. chologists themselves or to their students, but they The agent was in a remote room in the building, seem to be the principal route by which either present provided with a target picture (and sometimes acces- or future psychologists, unless they have an already sory material echoing the theme of the picture) ran- established interest strong enough to lead them to domly chosen from a pool of potential targets as the search out the original publications, might become message to be concentrated on. The procedure for acquainted with the experiments on ESP in dreams. random choice of a target from the pool was designed I propose to review how these five books have pre- to prevent anyone else from knowing the identity of sented knowledge about the experiments. First, how- the target. The agent did not open the packet con- ever, I must offer a summary of the experiments; taining the target until isolated for the night (except without that, my review would make sense only to for the one-way buzzer communication). Whenever readers already well acquainted with them. signaled that the percipient had entered a REM pe- The experiments at Maimonides grew out of riod, the agent was to concentrate on the target, with Montague Ullman's observations, in his psychiatric the aim of communicating it telepathically to the per- practice, of apparent telepathy underlying the content cipient and thus influencing the dream the percipient of some dreams reported by his patients--observa- was having. The percipient was oriented toward trying tions parallel to those reported by many other psy- to receive this message. But of course if clairvoyance chiatrists. He sought to determine whether this ap- and telepathy are both possible, the percipient might parent phenomenon would appear in a sleep labora- have used the former--that is, might have been pick- tory under controlled conditions that would seem to ing up information directly from the target picture, exclude interpretations other than that of ESP. He without the mediation of the agent's thoughts or ef- was joined in this research by psychologist Stanley forts. For this reason, the term general extrasensory Krippner, now at the Saybrook Institute in San Fran- perception (GESP) would be used today, though the cisco, and a little later by Charles Honorton, now head researchers more often used the term telepathy. of the Psychophysical Research Laboratories in Toward the approximate end of each REM pe- Princeton, New Jersey. Encouraged by early findings riod, the percipient was awakened (by intercom) by but seeking to improve experimental controls and the monitoring experimenter and described any identify optimal conditions, these researchers, assisted dream just experienced (with prodding and question- by numerous helpers and consultants, tried out var- ing, if necessary, though the percipient of course knew ious modifications of procedure. No one simple de- in advance what to do on each awakening). At the scription of procedure, therefore, can be accurate for end of the night's sleep, the percipient was interviewed all of the experiments. But the brief description that and was asked for impressions about what the target follows is not, I believe, misleading as an account of might have been. (The interview was of course double- what was generally done. blind; neither percipient nor interviewer knew the The Experimental Procedure identity of the target.) The dream descriptions and morning impressions and associations were recorded A subject would come to the laboratory to spend the and later transcribed. night there as would-be percipient in a study of pos- The original research reports and the popular sible telepathic influence on dreams. He or she met book both present a number of very striking similar- and talked with the person who was going to serve as ities between passages in the dream transcripts and agent (that is, the person who would try to send a the picture that happened to be the night's target. telepathic message), as well as with the two experi- These similarities merit attention, yet they should in menters taking part that night, and procedures were themselves yield no sense of conviction. Perhaps any transcript of a night's dreaming contains passages of Requests for reprints should be sent to Irvin L. Child at the De- striking similarity to any picture to which they might partment of Psychology,Yale University,P.O. Box 11A, New Haven, be compared. The Maimonides research, however, Connecticut 06520-7447. consisted of carefully planned experiments designed

1220 November 1985 • American Psychologist to permit evaluation of this hypothesis of random Each data row in Table 1 refers to one segment similarity, and I must now turn to that aspect. of the research, and segments for the most part are Results labeled as they were in the table of Ullman et al. (1973, pp. 275-277). Segments that followed the general To evaluate the chance hypothesis, the researchers procedure I described--all-night sessions, with an obtained judgments of similarity between the dream agent concentrating on the target during each of the content and the actual target for the night, and at the percipient's REM periods--are gathered together in same time obtained judgments of similarity between the first eight lines, A through H (in five of these seg- the dream content and each of the other potential ments, all but A, C, and H, a single percipient con- targets in the pool from which the target had been tinued throughout a series, and in four of these the selected at random. The person judging, of course, percipient was a psychologist). Other types of segments had no information about which picture had been are presented in the rest of the table. Lines I, J, and randomly selected as target; the entire pool (in du- K summarize precognitive sessions; here the target plicate) was presented together, with no clue as to was not selected until after the dreaming and interview which picture had been the target and which ones had had been completed. The target consisted of a set of not. That is, in the experimental condition a picture stimuli to be presented directly to the percipient after was randomly selected from a pool and concentrated it had been selected in the morning. Lines L and M on by the agent, and in the control condition a picture represent GESP sessions in which the percipient's was left behind in the pool. Any consistent difference dreams were monitored and recorded throughout the between target and nontarget in similarity to dream night, but the agent was attempting to transmit only content, exceeding what could reasonably be ascribed before the percipient went to sleep or just after, or to chance, was considered an apparent anomaly. sporadically. Line N refers to a few clairvoyance ses- The data available for the largest number of ses- sions; these were like the standard GESP sessions ex- sions came from judgments made by judges who had cept that there was no agent (no one knew the identity no contact with the experiment except to receive (by of the target). Finally, Line O reports on some GESP mail, generally) the material necessary for judging sessions in which each dream was considered sepa- (transcripts of dreams and interview and a copy of rately; these formed a single experiment with four the target pool). For many sessions, judgments were percipients, comparing nights involving a different also available from the dreamer; he or she, of course, target for each REM period with nights involving re- made judgments only after completing participation peated use of a single target. in the experiment as dreamer (except in some series Regardless of the type of session (considering the where a separate target pool was used for each night five types I have described), each session fell into one and the dreamer's judgments could be made at the of two categories: (a) pilot sessions, in which either a end of the session). For many sessions, judgments were new dreamer or a new procedure was being tried out; made for the dream transcripts alone and for the total these appear in lines H, K, and N, or (b) sessions in transcript including the morning interview; for con- an experimental series, planned in advance as one or sistency I have used the latter, because it involved more sessions for each of two or more subjects, or as judges who had more nearly the same information as a number of sessions with the same dreamer through- the subjects. out. Most of the researchers' publications were de- The only form in which the data are available voted tO the results obtained in the experimental se- for all series of sessions is a count of hits and misses. ries, but the results of the pilot sessions have also been If the actual target was ranked in the upper half of briefly reported. the target pool, for similarity to the dreams and in- A glance at the score columns for judges and for terview, the outcome was considered a hit. If the actual subjects is sufficient to indicate a strong tendency for target was ranked in the lower half of the pool, the an excess of hits over misses. If we average the outcome outcome was considered a miss. The hit-or-miss score for judges and for subjects, we find that hits exceed is presented separately in Table l for judges and for misses on every one of the 15 independent lines on subjects in the first two data columns. Where infor- which outcome for hits and misses differs. (On Line mation is not supplied for one or the other, the reason E hits and misses occur with equal frequency.) By a is generally that it was impossible for the researchers simple sign-test, this outcome would be significant to obtain it, and for a similar reason the number of beyond the 0.0001 level. I would not stress the exact cases sometimes varies. value here, for several reasons. There was no advance

t Of course, usable judgments could not be obtained from the subject in precognitive sessions, because at the time of judging he judgments. In a few of the pilot sessions (Lines H, K, and N) only or she would already know what the target had been. For Line F, the subject's judgment was sought, and in some sessions only that the single subject was unable to give the extra time required for of one or more judges; in a few the mean judges' rating was neither judging, and for Line O one of the four subjects failed to make a hit nor a miss but exactly at the middle.

November 1985 • American Psychologist 1221 Table 1 Summary of Maimonides Results on Tendency for Dreams to Be Judged More Like Target Than Like Nontargets in Target Pool

Judges' Subjects' score score z or t resulting from judgments

Series Hit Miss Hit Miss Judges Subjects Sources

GESP: Dreams monitored and recorded throughout night; agent "transmitting" during each REM period

A. 1st screening 7 5 10 2 z = 0.71 b z = 1.33 b UIIman, Krippner, & Feldstein (1966) B. 1st Erwin 5 2 6 1 z = 2.53 b z = 1.90 b UIIman et al. (1966) C. 2nd screening 4 8 9 3 z = -.25 b z = 1.17 b UIIman (1969) D. Posin 6 2 6 2 z = 1.05 c z = 1.05 c UJlman (1969) E. Grayeb 3 5 5 3 z = -.63 c z = 0.63 c UIIman, Krippner, & Vaughan (1973) F. 2nd Erwin 8 0 t = 4.93 a Ullman & Krippner (1969) G. Van de Castle 6 2 8 0 t = 2.81 a t = 2.74" KrJppner & UIIman (1970) H. Pilot sessions 53 14 42 22 z = 4.20 b z = 2.21 b Ullman et al. (1973)

Precognition: Dreams monitored and recorded throughout night; target experience next day

I. 1st Bessent 7 1 t -= 2.81 a Krippner, UIIman, & Honor'ton (1971 ) J. 2nd Bessent 7 1 t = 2.27 a Krippner, Honorton, & UIIman (1972) K. Pilot sessions 2 0 z = 0.67 c Ullman et al. (1973)

GESP: Dreams monitored and recorded throughout night; agent active only at beginning or sporadically

L. Sensory bombard- 8 0 4 4 z = 3.11b z = 0.00 c Krippner, Honorton, merit UIIman, Masters, & Houston (1971 ) M. Grateful Dead 7 5 8 4 z = 0.61 c z = 0.81 e Krippner, Honorton, & UIIman (1973)

Clairvoyance: Dreams monitored and recorded throughout night; concealed target known to no one

N. Pilot sessions 5 3 4 5 z = 0.98 b z = 0.00 b UIIman et al. (1973)

GESP: Single dreams

O. Vaughan, Harris, 105 98 74 79 z = 0.63 c z = -.32 c Honorton, Krippner, & Parise Ullman (1972)

Note. GESP = general extrasensory perception. Italics identify results obtained with procedures that preserve independence of judgments in a series. For some series, the published source does not use the uniform measures entered in this table, and mimeographed laboratory reports were also consulted. Superscipts indicate which measure was available, in order of priority. a Ratings. b Rankings. c Score (count of hits and misses).

plan to merge the outcomes for judges and subjects. sonably be ascribed to chance. There is some system- Moreover, the various series could be split up in other atic--that is, nonrandom--source of anomalous re- ways. Although I think my organization of the table semblance of dreams to target. is very reasonable (and I did not notice this outcome Despite its breadth, this "hitting" tendency seems until after the table was constructed), it is not the to vary greatly in strength. The data on single organization selected by Ullman et al. (1973); their dreams--Line O--suggest no consistency. At the table, if evaluated statistically in this same way, would other extreme, some separate lines of the table look not yield so striking a result. What is clear is that the impressive. I will next consider how we may legiti- tendency toward hits rather than misses cannot rea- mately evaluate the relative statistical significance of

1222 November 1985 • American Psychologist separate parts of the data on all-night sessions. (I will Is there likely to have been much of this non- not try to take exact account here of the fact that the independence in the series where it was possible? A single-dream data are not significant, though it is wise pertinent fact is that the hits were not generally direct to have in mind that the exact values I cite must be hits. That is, there was no overwhelming tendency for viewed as slightly exaggerated, in the absence of any • the correct target to be given first place rather than explicit advance prediction that the results for all-night just being ranked in the upper half of the target pool. sessions and for single dreams would differ greatly.) This greatly reduces the strength of the argument that Two difficulties, one general and one specific, ordinary significance tests are grossly inaccurate be- stand in the way of making as thorough an evaluation cause of nonindependence. Because certainty is not as I would wish. The general difficulty is that the re- possible, however, we need to separate results accord- searchers turned the task of statistical evaluation over ing to whether the procedures permitted this kind of to various consultants--for the most part, different nonindependence. In the table, I have italicized results consultants at various times--and some of the con- that cannot have been influenced by this difficulty sultants must also have influenced the choice of pro- (either because each night's ratings were made by a cedures and measures. The consultants, and presum- different person or because each night in a series had, ably the researchers themselves, seem not to have been and was judged in relation to, a separate target pool) at that time very experienced in working with some or that closely approximate this ideal condition. of the design problems posed by this research nor in The outcome is clear. Several segments of the planning how the research could be done to permit data, considered separately, yield significant evidence effective analysis. Much of the research was not prop- that dreams (and associations to them) tended to re- edy analyzed at the time, and for much of it the full semble the picture chosen randomly as target more original data are no longer available. (The researchers than they resembled other pictures in the pool. In the have been very helpful in supplying me with material case of evaluation by outside judges, two of the three they have been able to locate despite dispersal and segments that are free of the problem of noninde- storage of the laboratory's files. Perhaps additional pendence yield separately significant results: The pilot details may be recovered in the future.) The result is sessions (Line H) yield a z of 4.20, and thus a p of that completely satisfactory analysis is at present pos- .00002. An experiment with distant but multisensory sible only for some portions of the data, targets (Line L) yields a z of 3.11 and a p of .001. If The specific difficulty results from a feature of we consider segments in which judgments may not the research design employed in most of the experi- be completely independent of each other and analyze mental series, a feature whose implications the re- them in the standard way, we find that the two series searchers did not fully appreciate at the time. If a with psychologist William Erwin as dreamer are also judge is presented with a set of transcripts and a set significant (if nonindependence of judgments does not of targets and is asked to judge similarity of each target seriously interfere), Line B with a z of 2.53 (p < .01) to each transcript, the various judgments may not be and Line F with a t of 4.93 and 7 df(p < .01). The completely independent. If one transcript is so closely two precognitive series (Lines I and J), each with 7 similar to a particular target that the judge is confident df, yield ts of 2.81 and 2.27, with p values slightly of having recognized a correct match, the judge (or above and below .05, respectively. percipient, of course) may minimize the similarity of Segment results based on the subjects' own judg- that target to the transcripts judged later. Instructions ments of similarity are less significant than those based to judges explicitly urged them to avoid this error, but on judgments by outside judges. Only two segments we cannot tell how thoroughly this directive was fol- reach minimal levels of statistical significance: Line lowed. Nonindependence would create no bias toward G, where the t of 2.74 with 7 dfis significant at the either positive or negative evidence of correspondence .05 level, and Line H, where the z of 2.21 is significant between targets and transcripts, but it would alter at the .05 level. variability and thus render inappropriate some stan- The statistical evaluation of the separate seg- dard tests of significance. I have entered in the two ments of the Maimonides experiments also permits succeeding columns of the table a t or a z that can be a more adequate evaluation of their overall statistical used in evaluating the statistical significance of the significance. For judgments by outside judges, three departure from chance expectancy (t is required when segments are free of the potential nonindependence ratings are available, and z must be used when only of successive judgments (Lines H, L, and N). Putting rankings or score counts are available, because sample these three together by the procedure Mosteller and variability in the former case is estimated from the Bush (1954, pp. 329-330) ascribed to Stouffer (rec- data but in the latter case must be based conservatively ommended by Rosenthal [ 1984, p. 72] as the "simplest on a theoretical distribution.) If ratings were available, and most versatile" of the possible procedures), the they were used; if not, rankings were used if available; joint p value is <.000002. For the subjects' own judg- otherwise, score count was used. ments, six segments are available (Lines A, C, G, H,

November 1985 • American Psychologist 1223 L, and N), and their joint p value is less than .002. to use a term such as anomalies, so as to avoid variable The other segments of the data have the problem of and possibly confusing connotations about the origin potential nonindependence of successive judgments, of the anomalies. Zusne and Jones (1982) wisely pre- and even if the exaggeration of significance may be pared the way for this usage in speaking of anomalistic small for a single line, I would not want to risk com- psychology. But meanwhile, psychologists need not pounding it in an overall p. Their prevailing unity of cut themselves off from knowledge of relevant facts direction, however (direction not being subject to in- because of dissatisfaction with the terminology sur- fluence by the kind of nonindependence involved rounding their presentation. here), and the substantial size of some of the differ- Attempted Replications Elsewhere ences, justify the inference that the overall evidence of consistency far exceeds that indicated by only those The Maimonides pattern of controlled experiment in selected segments for which a precise statistical state- a sleep laboratory, obviously, is extremely time con- ment is possible• The impression given by the mere suming and expensive, and replication seems to have count of hits and misses is thus fully confirmed when been attempted so far at only two other sleep labo- more sensitive measures are used. ratories. At the University of Wyoming, two experi- Parapsychological experiments are sometimes ments yielded results approximately at mean chance criticized on the grounds that what evidence they expectation--slightly below in one study (Belvedere provide for ESP indicates at most some very small & Foulkes, 1971), slightly above in the other (Foulkes effects detectable only by amassing large bodies of et al., 1972). In a replication at the Boston University data. Those to whom this criticism has any appeal School of Medicine (Globus, Knapp, Skinner, & should be aware that the Maimonides experiments Healey, 1968), overall results were not significantly are clearly exempt from it. The significant results on positive, though in this instance encouragement for Lines F and G of the table, for example, are each further exploration was reported. The researchers had attributable basically to just eight data points. decided in advance to base their conclusions on exact If replications elsewhere should eventually con- hits--that is, placing the target first, rather than just firm the statistically significant outcome of the Mai- in the upper half; by this measure, the results were monides experiments, would the fact of statistical sig- encouraging, though not statistically significant. nificance in itself establish the presence of the kind Moreover, to quote the researchers, "Post hoc analysis of anomaly called ESP? Of course not. Statistical sig- revealed that the judges were significantly more correct nificance indicates only the presence of consistency when they were more 'confident' in their judgments. and does not identify its source. ESP, or the more • . . Further conservatively designed research does general term psi, is a label for consistencies that have seem indicated because of these findings" (Globus et no identifiable source and that suggest transfer of in- al., 1968, p. 365). formation by channels not familiar to present scien- A study by Calvin Hall (1967) is sometimes cited tific knowledge. A judgment about the appropriateness as a replication that confirmed the Maimonides find- of the label, and thus about the "ESP hypothesis," is ings; in truth, however, although it provided impres- complex. It depends on a variety of other judgments sive case material, it was not done in a way that per- and knowledge--how confidently other possible mits evaluation as a replication of the Maimonides sources of the consistent effect can be excluded, experiments• Several small-scale studies, done without whether other lines of experimentation are yielding the facilities of a sleep laboratory, have been reported results that suggest the same judgment, and so on. that are not replications of even one of the more am- I believe many psychologists would, like myself, bitious Maimonides experiments but each of which consider the ESP hypothesis to merit serious consid- reports positive results that might encourage further eration and continued research if they read the Mai- exploration (Braud, 1977; Child, Kanthamani, & monides reports for themselves and if they familiar- Sweeney, 1977; Rechtschaffen, 1970; Strauch, 1970; ized themselves with other recent and older lines of Van de Castle, 1971). In the case of these minor stud- experimentation (e.g., Jahn, 1982, and many of the ies--unlike the Maimonides studies and the three chapters in Wolman, 1977). systematic replications--one must recognize the like- Some parapsychological researchers--among lihood of selective publication on the basis of inter- them the Maimonides group--have written at times esting results. Taken all together, these diverse and as though a finding of statistical significance suffi- generally small-scale studies done elsewhere do, in my ciently justified a conclusion that the apparent anom- opinion, add something to the conviction the Mai- aly should be classified as ESP. I can understand their monides experiments might inspire, that dream re- choice of words, which is based on their own confi- search is a promising technique for experimental study dence that their experiments permitted exclusion of of the ESP question. other, interpretations. But perhaps psychologists who The lack of significant results in the three sys- in the future become involved in this area may prefer tematic replications is hardly conclusive evidence

1224 November 1985 • American Psychologist against eventual replicability. In the Maimonides se- the night. He did this notably by misinterpreting an ries, likewise, three successive replications (Lines C, ambiguous statement in the Maimonides reports, not D, and E in Table 1) yielded no significant result, yet mentioning that his interpretation was incompatible they are part of a program yielding highly.significant with other passages; his interpretation was in fact er- overall results. roneous, as shown by Akers (1984, pp. 128-129). If results of such potentially great interest and Furthermore, Hansel did not alert the reader to the scientific importance as those of the Maimonides great care exerted by the researchers to eliminate pos- program had'been reported on a more conventional sible sources of sensory cuing. Most important is the topic, one might expect them to be widely and ac- fact that Hansel did not provide any plausible ac- curately described in reviews of the field to which count-other than fraudhof how the opportunities they were relevant, and to be analyzed carefully as a for sensory cuing that he claimed existed would be basis for sound evaluation of whether replication and likely to lead to the striking findings of the research. extension of the research were indicated, or of whether For example, he seemed to consider important the errors could be detected and understood. What has fact that at Maimonides the agent could leave his or happened in this instance of anomalous research her room during the night to go to the bathroom, findings? whereas in Wyoming the agent had a room with its Representation of the Maimonides own bathroom, and the outer door to the room was sealed with tape to prevent the agent from emerging. Research in Books by Psychologists Hansel did not attempt to say how the agent's visit to It is appropriate to begin with E. M. Hansel's 1980 the bathroom could have altered the details of the revision of his earlier critical book on parapsychology. percipient's dreams each night in a manner distinc- As part of his attempt to bring the earlier book up to tively appropriate to that night's target. The only date, he included an entire chapter on experiments plausible route of influence on the dream record on telepathy in dreams. One page was devoted to a seems to be deliberate fraud involving the researchers description of the basic method used in the Maimon- and their subjects. The great number and variety of ides experiments; one paragraph summarized the im- personnel in these studies--experimenters, agents, pressive outcome of 10 of the experiments. The rest percipients, and judges--makes fraud especially un- of the chapter was devoted mainly to a specific account likely as an explanation of the positive findings; but of the experiment in which psychologist Robert Van Hansel did not mention this important fact. de Castle was the subject (the outcome is summarized It appears to me that all of Hansel's criticisms in Line G of my Table 1) and to the attempted rep- of the Maimonides experiments are relevant only on lication at the University of Wyoming (Belvedere & the hypothesis of fraud (except for the mistaken crit- Foulkes, 1971), in which Van de Castle was again the icism I have mentioned above). He said that uninten- subject. Another page was devoted to another of the tional communication was more likely but provided Maimonides experiments that was also repeated at no evidence either that it occurred or that such com- the University of Wyoming (Foulkes et al., 1972). munication-in any form in which it might have oc- Hansel did not mention the replication by Globus et curred-could have produced such consistent results al. (1968), whose authors felt that the results encour- as emerged from the Maimonides experiments. I infer aged further exploration. Hansel gave more weight to that Hansel was merely avoiding making explicit his the two negative outcomes at Wyoming than to the unsupported accusations of fraud. Fraud is an inter- sum of the Maimonides research, arguing that sensory pretation always important to keep in mind, and it is cues supposedly permitted by the procedures at Mai- one that could not be entirely excluded even by pre- monides, not possible because of greater care taken cautions going beyond those used in the Wyoming by the Wyoming experimenters, were responsible for studies. But the fact that fraud was as always, theo- the difference in results. He did not provide, of course, retically possible hardly justifies dismissal of a series the full account of procedures presented in the original of carefully conducted studies that offer important Maimonides reports that might persuade many read- suggestions for opening up a new line of inquiry into ers that Hansel's interpretation is far from compelling. a topic potentially of great significance. Especially re- Nor did he consider why some of the other experi- grettable is Hansel's description of various supposed ments at Maimonides, not obviously distinguished in defects in the experiments as though they mark the the care with which they were done from the two that experiments as being carelessly conducted by general were replicated (e.g., those on Lines E, M, and O of scientific criteria, whereas in fact the supposed defects Table 1) yielded a close-to-chance outcome such as are relevant only if one assumes fraud. A reader who Hansel might have expected sensory cuing to prevent. is introduced to the Maimonides research by Hansel's Hansel exaggerated the opportunities for sensory chapter is likely to get a totally erroneous impression cuing--that is, for the percipient to obtain by ordinary of the care taken by the experimenters to avoid various sensory means some information about the target for possible sources of error. The one thing they could

November 1985 • American Psychologist 1225 not avoid was obtaining results that Hansel considered seemed to reject the Maimonides experiments because a priori impossible, hence evidence of fraud; but they included no control groups. He wrote that "a Hansel was not entirely frank about his reasoning. control group, for which no sender or no target was An incidental point worth noting is that Hansel used, would appear essential" (p. 163). Later he added, did not himself apply, in his critical attack, the stan- "One could, alternatively, 'send' when the subject was dards of evidence he demanded of the researchers. not in the dream state, and compare 'success' in this His conclusions were based implicitly on the assump- case with success in dream state trials" (p. 163). The tion that the difference of outcome between the Mai- first of these statements suggests a relevant use of con- monides and the Wyoming experiments was a genuine trol groups but errs in calling it essential; in other difference, not attributable to random variation. He psychological research, Alcock would have doubtless did not even raise the question, as he surely would readily recognized that within-subject control can, have if, in some parallel instance, the Maimonides where feasible, be much more efficient and pertinent researchers had claimed or implied statistical signif- than a separate control group. His second statement icance where it was questionable. In fact, the difference suggests a type of experiment that is probably im- of outcome might well have arisen from random error; possible (because in satisfactory form it seems to re- for the percipient's own judgments the difference is quire the subject to dream whether awake or asleep significant at the 5% level (2-tailed), but for the out- and not to know whether he or she was awake or siders' judgments it does not approach significance. asleep). This second kind of experiment, moreover, Another 1980 book is The Psychology of Tran- has special pertinence only to a comparison between scendence, by Andrew Neher, in which almost 100 dreaming and waking, not to the question of whether pages are devoted to "psychic experience." Neher dif- ESP is manifested in dreaming. fered from the other authors I refer to in describing Alcock, in short, did not seem to recognize that the Maimonides work as a "series of studies of great the design of the Maimonides experiments was based interest" (p. 145), but this evaluation seems to be ne- on controls exactly parallel to those used by innu- gated by his devoting only three lines to it and four merable psychologists in other research with similar lines to unsuccessful replications. logical structure (and even implied, curiously enough, A third 1980 publication, The Psychology of the in his own second suggestion). He encouraged readers Psychic, by David Marks and Richard Kammann, to think that the Maimonides studies are beyond the provides less of a general review of recent parapsy- pale of acceptable experimental design, whereas in chology than Hansel's book or even Neher's one long fact they are fine examples of appropriate use of chapter. It is largely devoted to the techniques of within-subject control rather than between-subjects mentalists (that is, conjurors specializing in psycho- control. logical rather than physical effects) and can be useful The quality of thinking with which Alcock con- to anyone encountering a mentalist who pretends to fronted the Maimonides research appeared also in a be "psychic." Most readers are not likely to be aware passage that did not refer to it by name. Referring to that parapsychological research receives only limited an article published in The Humanist by Ethel Grod- attention. The jacket blurbs give a very different view zins Romm, he wrote, of the book, as do the authors in their introductory Romm (1977) argued that a fundamental problem with both sentences: the dream telepathy research and the remote viewing tests ESP is just around the next corner. When you get there, it is that the reports suffer from what she called "shoe-fitting" is just around the next corner. Having now turned over one language; she cited a study in which the sender was installed hundred of these comers, we decided to call it quits and in a room draped in white fabric and had ice cubes poured report our findings for public review. (Marks & Kammann, down his back. A receiver who reported "white" was im- 1980, p. 4) mediately judged to have made a "hit" by an independent panel. Yet, as she observed, words such as "miserable", Given this introduction to the nature of the book, "wet", or "icy" would have been better hits .... Again, the readers might suppose it would at least mention any obvious need is for a control group. Why are they not used? corner that many parapsychologists have judged to be (p. 163) an impressive turning. But the Maimonides dream What Romm described as "shoe fitting" (misinter- experiments received no mention at all. preting events to fit one's expectations) is an important Another volume, by psychologist James Alcock kind of error that is repeatedly made in interpretation (1981), quite clearly purports to include a general re- of everyday occurrences by people who believe they view and evaluation of parapsychological research. are psychic. But the dream telepathy research at Mai- Alcock mentioned (p. 6) that Hansel had examined monides was well protected against this kind of error the Maimonides experiments, but the only account by the painstaking controls that Alcock seemed not of them that Alcock offered (on p. 163) was incidental to have noticed. Surely Romm must be referring to to a discussion of control groups. By implication he some other and very sloppy dream research?

1226 November 1985 • American Psychologist Not at all. The details in this paragraph, and Expect?" and it repeatedly speaks of "cult phuds," even more in Romm's article, point unmistakably, meaning people with PhDs who are interested in though inaccurately, to the fifth night of the first pre- parapsychological problems. Alcock's repetition of cognitive series at Maimonides. The actual details of Romm's misstatements in a context lacking these target and response would alone deprive it of much clues may well be taken by many a reader as scholarly of its value as an example of shoe fitting. As reported writing based on correct information and rational by Krippner, Ullman, & Honorton (197 l), the target thought. Paradoxically, both Alcock's paragraph and was a morning experience that included being in a Romm's article are excellent examples of the shoe- room that was draped with white sheets. The subject's fitting error that both decry in others who are in fact first dream report had included the statement, "I was carefully avoiding it. just standing in a room, surrounded by white. Every The last of the five books that bring, or fail to imaginable thing in that room was white" (p. 201). bring, the Maimonides research to the attention of There is more similarity here than Romm and Alcock psychologists and their students is Anomalistic Psy- acknowledged in mentioning from this passage only chology: A Study of Extraordinary Phenomena of Be- the single word "white." havior and Experience, a 1982 volume by Leonard More important, however, is the fact that the ex- Zusne and Warren H. Jones. This is in many ways periment they were referring to provided no oppor- an excellent book, and it is also the one of the five tunity for shoe fitting. The procedures followed in the that comes closest to including a general review of experiment were completely misrepresented in a way important recent research in parapsychology. Its brief that created the illusion that the possibility existed. account of the Maimonides dream experiments, how- There was no panel, in the sense of a group of people ever, misrepresented them in ways that should seri- gathered together and capable of influencing each ously reduce a reader's interest in considering them other. The judges, operating independently, separately further. judged every one of the 64 possible combinations of Zusne and Jones's description of the basic pro- target and transcript yielded by the eight nights of the cedure made three serious errors. First, it implied that experiment, not just the eight correct pairings, and one of the experimenters had a chance to know the they had no clues to which those eight were. Their identity of the target. ("After the subject falls asleep, responses are hardly likely to have been immediate, an art reproduction is selected from a large collection as they required reading the entire night's transcript. randomly, placed in an envelope, and given to the Because each judge was working alone and was not agent" p. 260). In fact, precautions were taken to en- recording times, there would have been no record if sure that no one but the agent could know the identity a particular response had been immediate, and no of the target. Second, the authors stated that "three record of what particular element in the transcript judges.., rate their confidence that the dream con- led to an immediate response. tent matches the target picture" (p. 260), leading the I looked up in a 1977 issue of The Humanist the reader to suppose that the judges were informed of article by Romm that Alcock cited. The half page on the identity of the target at the time of rating. In fact, shoe-fitting language gave as examples this item from a judge was presented with a dream transcript and a the Maimonides research and also the SRI remote- pool of potential targets and was asked to rate the viewing experiments (Puthoff & Targ, 1976) done at degree of similarity between the transcript and each SRI International. In both cases what was said was member of the pool, while being unaware of which pure fiction, based on failure to note what was done member had been the target. Third, there was a sim- in the experiments and in particular that the experi- ilarly, though more obscurely, misleading description menters were well aware of the danger of shoe-fitting of how ratings were obtained from the dreamer. language and that the design of their experiments in- This misinformation was followed by even more corporated procedures to ensure that it could not oc- serious misrepresentation of the research and, by im- cur. Romm's ignorance about the Maimonides re- plication, of the competence of the researchers. Zusne search and her apparent willingness to fabricate false- and Jones (1982) wrote that Ullman and Krippner hoods about it should be recognized by anyone who (1978) had found that dreamers were not influenced had read any of the Maimonides research publica- telepathically unless they knew in advance that an tions. Yet Alcock accepted and repeated the fictions attempt would be made to influence them. This led, as though they were true. His presentation in the con- they wrote, to the subject's being "primed prior to text of a book apparently in the scientific tradition going to sleep" through the experimenter's seems to me more dangerous than Romm's original preparing the receiver through experiences that were related article, for anyone with a scientific orientation should to the content of the picture to be telepathically transmitted be able to recognize Romm's article as propaganda. during the night. Thus, when the picture was Van Gogh's Its title, for example, is "When You Give a Closet Corridor of the St. Paul Hospital, which depicts a lonely Occultist a PhD, What Kind of Research Can You figure in the hallways of a mental hospital, the receiver: (l)

November 1985 * American Psychologist 1227 heard Rosza's Spellboundplayed on a phonograph; (2) heard conception and prejudice; we have already seen it in the monitor laugh hysterically in the room; (3) was addressed Alcock's book. Alcock (1983) wrote the review of as "Mr. Van Gogh" by the monitor; (4) was shown paintings Zusne and Jones's book for Contemporary Psychology, done by mental patients; (5) was given a pill and a glass of the book-review journal of the American Psycholog- water; and (6) was daubed with a piece of cotton dipped in acetone. The receiver was an English "sensitive," but it is ical Association, and he did not mention this egregious obvious that no psychic sensitivity was required to figure error, even though very slight acquaintance with the out the general content of the picture and to produce an Maimonides research should suffice to detect it. appropriate report, whether any dreams were actually seen Discussion or not. (pp. 260-261) The experiments at the Maimonides Medical Center If researchers were to report positive results of on the possibility of ESP in dreams clearly merit care- the experiment described here by Zusne and Jones ful attention from psychologists who, for whatever and were to claim that it provided some positive ev- reason, are interested in the question of ESP. To firm idence of ESP, what would a reader conclude? Surely, believers in the impossibility of ESP, they pose a chal- that the researchers were completely incompetent, but lenge to skill in detecting experimental flaws or to the probably not that they were dishonest. For dishonesty understanding of other sources of error. To those who to take such a frank and transparent form is hardly can conceive that ESP might be possible, they convey credible. suggestions about some of the conditions influencing Incompetence of the researchers is not, however, its appearance or absence and about techniques for a proper inference. The simple fact, which anyone investigating it. can easily verify, is that the account Zusne and Jones This attention is not likely to be given by psy- gave of the experiment is grossly inaccurate. What chologists whose knowledge about the experiments Zusne and Jones have done is to describe (for one comes from the books by their fellow psychologists specific night of the experiment) some of the stimuli that purport to review parapsychological research. provided to the dreamer the next morning, after his Some of those books engage in nearly incredible fal- dreams had been recorded and his night's sleep was sification of the facts about the experiments; others over. Zusne and Jones erroneously stated that these simply neglect them. I believe it is fair to say that stimuli were provided before the night's sleep, to prime none of these books has correctly identified any defect the subject to have or falsely report having the desired in the Maimonides experiments other than ones rel- kind of dream. The correct sequence of events was evant only to the hypothesis of fraud or on inappro- quite clearly stated in the brief reference Zusne and priate statistical reasoning (easily remedied by new Jones cited (Ullman & Krippner, 1978), as well as in calculations from the published data). I do not mean the original research report (Krippner, Honorton, & that the Maimonides experiments are models of design Ullman, 1972). and execution. I have already called attention to a I can understand and sympathize with Zusne and design flaw that prevents sensitive analysis of some of Jones's error. The experiment they cited is one in the experiments; and the control procedures were vi- which the nocturnal dreamer was seeking to dream olated at one session, as Akers (1984) pointed out on in response to a set of stimuli to be created and pre- the basis of the full information supplied in the orig- sented to him the next morning. As may be seen in inal report. (Neither of these genuine defects was Table 1, results from such precognitive sessions (all mentioned in any of the five books I have reviewed done with a single subject) were especially strong. This here, an indication of their authors' general lack of apparent transcendence of time as well as space makes correct information about the Maimonides experi- the precognitive findings seem at least doubly impos- ments.) sible to most of us. An easy misreading, therefore, on Readers who doubt that the falsification is as ex- initially scanning the research report, would be to treme as I have pictured it need only consult the suppose the stimuli to have been presented partly in sources I have referred to. Their doubt might also be advance (because some parts obviously involved a reduced by familiarity with some of James Bradley's waking subject) and partly during sleep. research (1981, 1984). In his 1984 article, he reported This erroneous reading on which Zusne and similar misrepresentations of fact on a topic, robust- Jones based their account could easily have been cor- ness of procedures of statistical inference, on which rected by a more careful rereading. In dealing with psychologists would not be thought to have nearly the other topics, they might have realized the improba- strength of preconception that many are known to bility that researchers could have been so grossly in- have about ESP. How much more likely, then, falsi- competent and could have checked the accuracy of fication on so emotionally laden a topic as ESP is for their statements before publishing them. Zusne and many psychologists! In the earlier article, Bradley Jones are not alone in this tendency to quick misper- (1981) presented experimental evidence (for college ception of parapsychological research through pre- students, in this case, not psychologists) that confi-

1228 November 1985 • American Psychologist dence in the correctness of one's own erroneous opin- Evidence for improperly focused psi? Journal of the American ions is positively correlated with the degree of expertise Society for Psychical Research, 77, 209-228. Foulkes, D., Belvedere, E., Masters, R. E. L., Houston, J., Krippner, one believes oneself to have in the field of knowledge S., Honorton, C., & Ullman, M. (1972). Long-distance "sensory- within which the erroneous opinion falls. This finding bombardment" ESP in dreams: A failure to replicate. Perceptual may help in understanding why the authors of some and Motor Skills, 35, 731-734. of these books did not find it necessary to consider Globus, G., Knapp, P., Skinner, J., & Healey, J. (1968). An appraisal of telepathic communication in dreams. Psychophysiology,, 4, 365. critically their own erroneous statements. Hall, C. (1967). Experimente zur telepathischen Beeinflussung von A very considerable proportion of psychologists T~umen. [Experiments on telepathic influence on dreams]. have a potential interest in the question of ESP. In a Zeitschri~ ffir Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, recent survey (Wagner & Monnet, 1979) of university 10, 18-47. professors in various fields, 34% of psychologists were Hansel, C. E. M. (1980). ESP and parapsychology." A critical re- evaluation. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus. found to consider ESP either an established fact or a Honorton, C., Krippner, S., & Ullman, M. (1972). Telepathic per- likely possibility, exactly the same proportion as con- ception of art prints under two conditions. Proceedings of the sidered it an impossibility. In this survey, psychologists 80th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Associ- less frequently expressed a positive opinion than did ation, 7, 319-320. Hyman, R. (1985). The ganzfeld psi experiment: A critical appraisal. members of other disciplines, a finding that may be Journal of Parapsychology, 49, 3-49. attributable to psychologists' better understanding of Irwin, H. J. (1979). Psi and the mind: An information processing sources of error in human judgment, There seems to approach. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow. be no equally sound reason for the curious fact that Jahn, R. G. (1982). The persistent paradox of psychic phenomena: psychologists differed overwhelmingly from others in An engineering perspective. Proceedings of the Institute of Elec- trical and Electronics Engineers, 70, 136-170. their tendency to consider ESP an impossibility. Of Krippner, S., Honorton, E., & Ullman, M. (1972). A second pre- natural scientists, only 3% checked that opinion; of cognitive dream study with Malcolm Bessent. Journal of the the 166 professors in other social sciences, not a single American Society for Psychical Research, 66, 269-279. one did. Krippner, S., Honorton, C., & Ullman, M. (1973). An experiment in dream telepathy with "The Grateful Dead." Journal of the Both of these groups of psychologists have been American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and Medicine, 20, ill served by the apparently scholarly books that seem 9-17. to convey information about the dream experiments. Krippner, S., Honorton, C., Uilman, M., Masters, R., & Houston, The same may be said about some other lines ofpara- J. ( 1971 ). A long-distance "sensory-bombardment" study of ESP psychological research. Interested readers might well in dreams. Journal of the American Societyfor PsychicalResearch, 65. 468-475. consult the original sources and form their own judg- Krippner, S., & Ullman, M. (1970). Telepathy and dreams: A con- ments. trolled experiment with electroencephalogram-electro-oculogram monitoring. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 151, 394- 403. REFERENCES Krippner, S., Ullman, M., & Honorton, C. (1971). A precognitive dream study with a single subject. Journal of the American Society Akers, C. (1984). Methodological criticisms of parapsychology. In for Psychical Research, 65, 192-203. S. Krippner (Ed.), Advances in parapsychological research (Vol. Lowry, R. (1981). Apparent PK effect on computer-generated ran- 4, pp. 112-164). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. dom digit series. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Alcock, J. E. (1981). Parapsychology science or magic? A psycho- Research, 75, 209-220. logical perspective. New York: Pergamon Press. Marks, D., & Kammann, R. (1980). The psychology of the psychic. Alcock, J. E. (1983). Bringing anomalies back into psychology. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus. Contemporary Psychology, 28, 351-352. MosteUer, E, & Bush, R. R. (1954). Selected quantitative techniques. Ayeroff, E, & Abelson, R. P. (1976). ESP and ESB: Belief in personal In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. success at mental telepathy. Journal of Personality and Social 289-334). Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley. Psychology, 34, 240-247. Neher, A. (1980). The psychology of transcendence. Englewood Cliffs, Belvedere, E., & Foulkes, D. ( 1971). Telepathy and dreams: A failure NJ: Prentice-Hall. to replicate. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33, 783-789. Puthoff, H. E., & Targ, R. (1976). A perceptual channel for infor- Blackmore, S. J. (1984). A psychological theory of the out-of-body mation transfer over kilometer distances: Historical perspective experience. Journal of PaCapsychology, 48, 201-218. and recent research. Proceedings of the Institute of Electrical and Bradley, J. V. (1981), Overconfidence in ignorant experts. Bulletin Electronic Engineers, 64, 329-354. of the Psychonomic Society, 17, 82-84. Radin, D. I. (1982). Experimental attempts to influence pseudo- Bradley, J. V. (1984). Antinonrobustness: A case study in the so- random number sequences. Journal of the American Society for ciology of science. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 463- Psychical Research, 76, 359-374. 466. Rechtschaffen, A. (1970). Sleep and dream states: An experimental Braud, W. (1977). Long-distance dream and presleep telepathy. In design. In R. Cavanna (Ed.), Psifavorable states of consciousness J. D. Morris, W. G. Roll, & R. L. Morris (Eds.), Research in (pp. 87-120). New York: Parapsychology Foundation. parapsychology 1976 (pp. 154-155). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow. Romm, E. G. (1977). When you give a closet occultist a Ph.D., Child, I. L., Kanthamani, H., & Sweeney, V. M. (1977). A simplified what kind of research can you expect? The Humanist, 37(3), experiment in dream telepathy. In J. D. Morris, W. G. Roll, & 12-15. R. L. Morris (Eds.), Research in parapsychology 1976 (pp. 91- Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. 93). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. CrandaU, J. E., & Hite, D. D. (1983). Psi-missing and displacement: Strauch, I. (1970). Dreams and psi in the laboratory. In R. Cavanna

November 1985 • American Psychologist 1229 (Ed.), Psifavorable states of consciousness (pp. 46-54). New York: itoring technique. International Journal of Neuropsychiatry, 2, Parapsychology Foundation. 420-437. Ullman, M. (1969). Telepathy and dreams. Experimental Medicine Ullman, M., Krippner, S., & Vaughan, A. (1973). Dream telepathy. & Surgery, 27, 19-38. New York: Macmillan. Ullman, M., & Krippner, S. (1969). A laboratory approach to the Van de Castle, R. L. (1971). The study of GESP in a group setting nocturnal dimension ofparanormal experience: Report of a con- by means of dreams. Journal of Parapsychology, 35, 312. firmatory study using the REM monitoring technique. Biological Wagner, M. W., & Monnet, M. (1979). Attitudes ofcoUege professors Psychiatry, 1, 259-270. toward extra-sensory perception. Zetetic Scholar, no. 5, 7-16. Ullman, M., & Krippner, S. (1978). Experimental dream studies. Wolman, B. B. (Ed.). (1977). Handbook of parapsychology. New In M. Ebon (Ed.), The Signet handbook of parapsychology (pp. York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 409-422). New York: New American Library. Zusne, L., & Jones, W. H. (1982). Anomalistic psychology: A study Ullman, M., Krippner, S., & Feldstein, S. (1966). Experimentally of extraordinary phenomena of behavior and experience. Hillsdale, induced telepathic dreams: Two studies using EEG-REM mon- NJ: Erlhaum.

1230 November 1985 • American Psychologist all involved, especially the public, who much in common with professionals in by other psychologists and nurses around benefit from the work of both disciplines. other disciplines who share the same the country. clientele and concerns. Health psychology, REFERENCES on the other hand, serves clients whose REFERENCES Baumann, L., & Leventhal, H. (1985). I can tell illnesses include somatic aspects. The re- Chamings, P. A. (1984). Ranking the nursing when my blood pressure is up, can't I? Health search and practice priorities of health schools. Nursing Outlook, 32, 238-239. Psychology, 4, 203-218. psychologists, then, often overlap with DeLeon, P. H., Kjervik, D. K., Kraut, A. G., DeLeon, P. H., Kjervik, D. K., Kraut, A. G., those of other health professionals, in- & VandenBos, G. R. (1985). Psychology and & VandenBos, G. R. (1985). Psychology and cluding nurses. nursing: A natural alliance. American Psy- nursing: A natural alliance. American Psy- chologist, 40, 1153-1164. chologist, 40, 1153-1164. What may be less obvious is that Jaiowiec, A., Murphy, S. P., & Powers, M. J. other specialty areas in nursing and psy- (1984). Psychometric assessment of the Ja- chology also have considerable overlap. As lowiec coping scale. Nursing Research, 33, one example, consider parent and child 157-161. nursing, a specialty area including the tra- Leventhal, H., Meyer, D., & Nerenz, D. (1980). ditional concerns of maternity and pedi- Further Implications of The common sense representation of illness atric care. At the University of Washington Anomalous Observations for danger. In S. Rachman (Ed.), Medical psy- in Seattle, the Parent and Child Nursing chology (Vol. 2). New York: Pergamon Press. Scientific Psychology Department includes, among its 41 faculty members, 9 with doctoral degrees in psy- Oliver w. Hill chology or educational psychology, 2 with Virginia State University interdisciplinarydoctoral degrees in which Recently, Child (November 1985) pointed psychology played a key part, and 2 with out that many anomalous observations degrees in nursing science whose disser- within psychological (specifically, para- The Natural Alliance of tations were psychological in nature. These psychological) research are barred from Psychology and Nursing: 13 faculty members range in rank from consideration by the mainstream of psy- Substance as Well as Practice research associate to full professor; some chology through both neglect and have regular academic appointments, and misrepresentations due to the philosoph- Sandra K. Mitchell, others serve on the research faculty; some, ical prejudice of reviewers. Specifically, Kathryn E. Barnard, Cathryn L. Booth, but not all, are registered nurses. Together, he described research conducted at the Diane L. Magyary, and Susan J. Spieker they bring to their work graduate training Maimonides Medical Center on possible University of Washington in clinical, counseling, developmental, so- telepathic information transfer during School of Nursing cial, experimental, cognitive, and physi- dreaming. This study appears to have been DeLeon, Kjervik, Kraut, and VandenBos ological psychology, as well as expertise in well designed, with results that are ex- (November 1985) described the "natural research methods, design, and measure- tremely compelling. Even for those who alliance" of psychology and nursing, cen- ment. All are involved to some degree in reject the explanation of extrasensory per- tering around "defining the appropriate the research activities of the Nursing ception (ESP) out of hand, the results rep- scope of practice" in each discipline. Al- School, recently reported to be number resent intriguing data that need to be ac- though their discussion did an admirable one in the country (Chamings, 1984). counted for. As Child pointed out, serious job of illuminating the historical parallels These research projects range widely in consideration of apparent anomalies between clinical psychologists and clinical content and scope and include such topics seems an essential part of the procedure nurse specialists (such as nurse practitio- as home intervention in high-risk families of science, and it is important that accu- ners), it leaves the impression that these with newborns, parent education to reduce rate information about such anomalous legal and policy issues are the only links disruptive behavior in preschoolers, pro- findings be disseminated within the fold between the two disciplines. vision of effective education for children of psychologists. Often, however, scientific In our experience, there is also a with chronic illnesses and their parents, psychologists have difficulty keeping on "natural alliance" between psychology and and improvement in the care of infants in top of the literature within even a narrow nursing based on subject matter. Nursing neonatal intensive care units. Many of domain of interest and never venture be- is concerned with human responses, some these faculty are associated with the Uni- yond the boundaries of their immediate of which are psychological, to states of ill- versity's Child Development and Mental research. However, certain potentially ness and wellness. Research in nursing Retardation Center, and six of them are revolutionary findings that have implica- science is concerned with describing and also members of the MacArthur Foun- tions for the most fundamental tenets of predicting those human responses and dation Research Network on the Transi- our world view, such as the results reported with testing interventions that alter them. tion from Infancy to Early Childhood. on by Child, are relevant to and should be It goes without saying that psychology is Both of these affiliations represent sub- considered by all scientists. This is partic- involved in similar ways with human re- stantial investments in interdisciplinary ularly true in the case of some recent sponses of many kinds, including those work that includes not only nursing and anomalous experimental findings in the related to health. psychology but also pediatrics, social work, area of quantum physics (Aspect, Dali- This alliance between nursing and psychiatry, nutrition, and other allied dis- bard, & Roger, 1982) that have great im- psychology is probably most obvious in ciplines. plications for all of the natural sciences, the subareas of psychosocial nursing and Although our department and school including psychology. health psychology. Research and practice may be somewhat unique in the extent of The dominant philosophical views in psychosocial nursing center on the care collaboration between nursing and psy- within psychology and the other natural of clients with mental and emotional ill- chology, we believe that the "natural al- sciences can be characterized as realism nesses. Consequently, both scholars and liance" is a strong one, and we expect to and physicalistic monism. Realism is the clinicians working in this subarea have be joined in these collaborative ventures view that external reality exists and has

1170 October 1986 9American Psychologist definite properties independent of any act pairs will obey a relation called the Bell any of the previous tests. Local realistic of observation. Physicalistic monism is the inequality (for a detailed discussion, see (hidden variable) theories therefore appear view that the processes commonly referred d'Espagnat, 1979), whereas quantum the- to be untenable, and at least one of the to as "mind" or "consciousness" are to- ory predicts a violation of the inequality. premises underlying those theories of tally reducible to underlying physical pro- In essence, quantum theory predicts that reality (i.e., realism or Einstein separabil- cesses. measuring the polarization of one photon ity) must be in error. A third fundamental assumption that in a pair "causes" (this term is used Now invoking another basic as- has exerted a strong influence on the world loosely) a change in the polarization of the sumption of science--that it is legitimate view of science could be termed the lo- second to bring it into correspondence, to draw general conclusions from consis- cality assumption (or Einstein separabil- even though the two are far enough apart tent observations or experiments--we ity), which holds that events can have only that a causal signal would have to propa- must consider the macroscopic implica- local influence, with the maximum gate faster than the speed of light in order tions if the picture of reality that quantum boundary constrained by the speed of to connect them. theory gives us is valid. This has impli- light. (It is this assumption specifically that Since 1972, five of seven experimen- cations for measurement and logic, two of makes many of the findings of parapsy- tal tests of the Bell inequality have sup- the fundamental epistemological tools of chological research "anomalous.") These ported the predictions of quantum theory. science, in terms of their ability to answer three assumptions about reality have However, none of these earlier experiments ultimate questions about our existence. formed the basis for the current scientific was a rigorous test of Einstein separability With the emphasis on measurement, paradigm. The results of the Aspect ex- (i.e., that no signal can propagate faster the world is reduced to quantities and the periment (as well as the Maimonides re- than the speed of light), because the set- relationships between them. There is a search) seem to call for a reevaluation of tings of the polarizing and detecting in- fundamental belief that the quantitative some of these above-mentioned assump- struments were determined well in ad- description of things is paramount and tions. vance, and a possible argument could be even complete in itself. It is as if we have Local realistic theories of physical made that the setting of one of the instru- given measurement ontological signifi- reality place a limit on the extent to which ments might conceivably affect events ob- cance and confused quantification with distant events can be correlated, whereas served at the other (this influence would explanation. Despite their utility, and even quantum mechanics allows this limit to not have had to propagate faster than necessity in most scientific endeavors, op- be exceeded. Those physicists who felt light), or the settings of the instruments erational definitions lack any kind of ul- uncomfortable with the paradoxes that could have modified hidden parameters at timate meaning and therefore are not sat- abound in the predictions of quantum the source of the photon pairs. isfactory for achieving a final understand- mechanics, such as the seeming connec- The major improvement in the As- ing of the world. Because they are so much tion of particles at a distance, felt that these pect et al. experiment involved adding a part of our ordering schema of reality, relationships would be explained by some rapid switching devices that changed the we forget the arbitrariness of our units of as-yet-undiscovered supplementary pa- settings of the instruments while the pho- division and measurement, including even rameters or "hidden variables" that rep- tons were in flight. Each polarizer was re- the most basic units of extention and du- resent the actual underlying reality--the placed by a setup involving a switching ration. There is a culture whose basic fundamental clockwork--below the un- device followed by two polarizers with dif- temporal unit is the time it takes a pot of real world of the quantum. ferent orientations. The two switches were rice to boil. Our units of nanoseconds are The Aspect et al. (1982) experiment driven at different frequencies, making certainly more sophisticated and accurate was designed to test directly the predic- them function in an uncorrelated way. but no less arbitrary. These divisions (such tions of "hidden variable" theories versus Switching occurred about each 10 nano- as seconds and centimeters) are not a part the predictions of quantum mechanics re- seconds, compared to the photon transit of objective reality but are part of the cog- garding the behavior of photons scattered time of about 20 nanoseconds. It was thus nitive framework that we have created in in opposite directions from a source. impossible for any information about the order to organize that reality. Streams of photon pairs scattered in op- experimental setup to travel from one part Quantum paradoxes point to the posite directions from the same source of the apparatus to the other and affect the limitations of logic and measurement for were passed through polarizers whose set- outcome of any measurement unless such even the understanding of basic levels of tings were varied randomly and observed an influence was exceeding the speed of physical reality. Logical absolutes (e.g., by two detectors that measured the polar- light. something cannot be both A and not-A ization of the split pairs. According to The results of the Aspect et al. ex- simultaneously) break down at the quan- quantum theory, this property of polar- periment support the predictions of quan- tum level. What is termed the "problem ization does not exist until it is measured. tum mechanics. When the polarization of of measurement," exemplified by the Classical realistic theories such as the hid- a photon was changed, the second photon Heisenberg uncertainty principle, tends to den variable explanation hold that each was changed in the same manner. In other puncture our image as uninvolved ob- photon has a "real" polarization from the words, the photons started out with the servers as we measure so-called "objec- moment it is created. Because the photon same polarity and were found to still have tive" reality. pairs are emitted simultaneously, their the same polarity after each passed Of course the ultimate limitations of polarizations are originally correlated, but through an independent device that shifted logic are in the areas of self-reference and quantum theory and hidden variable the- its polarity to one of two possible states at completeness--a logical system is not ca- ories make different predictions about the random. These results violate the Bell in- pable of explaining itself, and for any suf- nature of the final correlations after the equality (which limits the correlations of ficiently powerful logical system, there will photons pass through the polarizers and the photons based on the considerations be truths not expressible as theorems of the detectors. In particular, hidden vari- of set theory) by five standard deviations. that system. There is thus a good possi- able (local realistic) theories predict that Thus, this more rigorous procedure vio- bility that we may have to transcend logic the final correlations between the photon lated the inequality to a greater extent than as the sole criterion if we are to achieve

October 1986 9American Psychologist 1171 levels of ultimate ontological under- on the underlying whole from which both some of our most cherished and implicit standing. are abstracted. It remains a paradox only assumptions about the nature of reality. We must recognize that measure- as long as we are bound to our classical Concepts that have been fundamental to ment implies consciousness, and not rule realistic notions of space, time, and dis- the description of the physical world for out the possibility of consciousness playing creteness. centuries, such as discreteness, causality, a primary role in even our understanding What meaning does all this have for time, space, and number, have come into of physical reality. The relationship of psychology as a science? The issue here question during the last 70 or 80 years. consciousness to measurement is involved concerns metaphor and vision, assump- The model of reality emerging today pre- in our basic conceptualization of "num- tions and values. Although there have been sents a fundamentally different picture ber" and "quantity." Number not only several proposals by brain researchers that than did the old classical notions of dis- implies comparison (which ultimately in- single quantum exchanges may be signif- crete, locally connected particles arranged volves subjective criterion) but also seems icantly involved at the synaptic junction in absolute space and moving through ab- to be intimately connected to such trou- (see, e.g., Eccles, 1953; Walker, 1970), solute time. Particle is being replaced by blesome (anomalous?) concepts as infinity most psychologists and philosophers of process, causality by synchronicity, and and the cardinality of the continuum. psychology have tended to either ignore discreteness by undivided wholeness. We One very basic conceptual pitfall can completely or downplay the relevance of in psychology cannot afford to ignore these be illustrated by the way in which we con- quantum theory for psychology. This is fundamental changes in assumptions as we ceptuaiize infinity. Infinity is usually especially true in the case of anomalous attempt to plumb the depths of human thought of in terms of vastness or a very implications of quantum theory, such as consciousness. large number, when of course the concept the effects of the observer on the obser- has nothing to do with "largeness" or even vation (implied by the Heisenberg uncer- "number." It is not a point on the number tainty principle), because such effects were REFERENCES line, but a different order of things entirely thought to be negligible on macrostruc- (I am as "close" to infinity at one as I am tures. For example, Feigl (1975) stated: Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., & Roger, G. (1982). at one million). Yet infinity seems to un- Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using derly the number line and to be implied The influence of observation on observed ob- time-varying analyzers. Physical Review Let- jects maintained by a majority of present-day by the existence of quantity. A better con- ters, 49, 1804-1807. physicists is in any case negligible in regard to Bohm, D. (1973). Quantum theory as an in- ceptualization of infinity would be as un- macro-objects. It does not hurt the moon to dication of a new order in physics. Part B. divided wholeness. look at it, even if electrons get a 'kick' out of Implicate and explicate order in physical law. This concept of undivided wholeness being looked at. (p. 21) Foundations of Physics, 3, 139-169. may lead to the key in solving many of Bohm, D., & Hiley, B. (1975). On the intuitive the anomalies implied by quantum theory But this type of argument is based on the understanding of non-locality as implied by or posed by the results of parapsycholog- naive classical assumption that quantum quantum theory. Foundations of Physics, 5, ical research. To explain the type of phe- uncertainty is based on some disturbance 93-109. nomena we have been considering in the of a system during the measurement pro- Bohr, N. (1958). Atomic theory and human cess. This, however, is not the case. The knowledge. New York: Wiley. experiments mentioned above, several Child, I. (1985). Psychologyand anomalous ob- theorists have proposed that an object (e.g., uncertainty exists in the nature of reality itself. According to the fundamental servations: The question of ESP in dreams. a photon or a dreaming subject) is an ab- American Psychologist, 40, 1219-1230. straction from some underlying wholeness, equation of quantum mechanics, there is Clauser, J. (1976). Measurement of the circular- thus reversing the usual conceptualization no such thing as an electron that possesses polarization correlation in photons from an of the relationship between part and both a precise momentum and a precise atomic cascade. Nuovo Cimento B, 338, 740- whole. This underlying wholeness would position. Bohr (1958), one of the founders 746. represent a different order of reality that of quantum mechanics, stated: "In quan- d'Espagnat, B. (1979). Quantum theory and is unmanifest in nature. The underlying tum mechanics, we are not dealing with reality. Scientific American, 241, 158-171. Eccles, J. (1953). The neurophysiological basis reality is termed the implicate (or en- an arbitrary renunciation of more detailed analysis of atomic phenomena, but with a of mind. Oxford, England: Oxford University folded) order by Bohm (1973). Space, Press. recognition that such an analysis is in time, and matter represent the explicate Feigl, H. (1975). Some crucial issues of mind- (or unfolded) order. Bohm stated: principle (italics his) excluded" (p. 62). The body monism. In C. Chung-Ying (Ed.), Phil- implications of the experiments based on One is led to a new notion of unbroken whole- osophical aspects of the mind-body problem. ness which denies the classical idea of analyz- Bell's inequality have given indications Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. ability of the world into separately and inde- that many of the paradoxes of quantum Freedman, S., & Clauser, J. (1972). Experimen- pendently existing parts.... We have reversed mechanics extend into the world of mac- tal test of local hidden variable theories. the usual classical notion that the independent roscopic events as well (see Clauser, 1976; Physical Review Letters, 28, 938-941. 'elementary' parts of the world are the funda- Freedman & Clauser, 1972; Fry & Fry, E., & Thompson, R. (1976). Experimental mental reality, and that the various systems are Thompson, 1976; Lamehi-Rachti & Mit- test of local hidden variable theories. Physical Review Letters, 37, 2261-2264. merely particular contingent forms and ar- rig, 1976). In the words of Stapp (1971), rangements of these parts. Rather, we say that Lamehi-Rachti, M., & Mittig, W. (1976). inseparable quantum interconnectedness of the The important thing about Bell's theorem is that Quantum mechanics and hidden variables: whole universe is the fundamental reality, and it puts the dilemma posed by quantum phe- A test of Bell's inequality by the measurement that relatively independently behaving parts are nomena deafly into the realm of macroscopic of the spin correlation in low energy proton- merely particular and contingent forms within events.... (It) shows that our ordinary ideas photon scattering. Physical Review D, 14, this whole. (Bohm & Hiley, 1975, pp. 96, 102) about the world are somehow profoundly deft- 2543-2555. cient even on the macroscopic level. (p. 1303) Stapp, H. (1971). S-matrix interpretation of Thus, in the case of space-like separated quantum theory. Physical Review, D3, 1303- photons (or dreaming subjects and isolated The Aspect et al. (1982) experiment 1320. "senders"), the connectivity might not be in particular should serve as a caveat to Walker, E. (1970). The nature of consciousness. based on some transference of energy, but shake us out of our complacency regarding Mathematical Biosciences, 7, 131-178.

1 172 October 1986 9American Psychologist Secondary Sources in chology: A critical re-evaluation. Buffalo, NY: or in normal science for ESP, GESE or Parapsychological Research: Prometheus Books. Psi, most scientists would stop without Vitulli, W. E (1982). Effects of immediate feed- going further. A Vicious Cycle back on computer-assisted testing of ESP Child, however, asserted that the para- William F. Vitulli performance. PsychologicalReports, 51, 403- psychology critics have not been scientific. University of South Alabama 408. Vitulli, W. E (1983). Immediate feedback and With reference to research by Bradley Having taught courses in experimental target-symbol variation in computer-assisted (1981, 1984), he suggested in ad hominem parapsychology on an annual basis since psi tests. Journal of Parapsychology, 47, 37- attacks that parapsychology critics, who 1980, and having published several articles 47. are not primarily parapsychologists, have on the topic of computerized testing of ex- Vitulli, W. E, Cain, C., & Broome, G. 0985). wrapped themselves in their "erroneous trasensory perception (ESP; Vitulli, 1982, Color-mediated ganzfeld and computer-as- opinions" with the corresponding intensity sisted feedback in psi testing. Perceptualand of their belief in themselves as experts (p. 1983; Vitulli, Cain, & Broome, 1985), I Motor Skills, 61, 433-434. was elated to read Child's (November 1229). C. E. M. Hansel's (1980) parsi- Zusne, L., & Jones, W. H. (1982). Anomalistic monious explanations for the Maimonides 1985) effort to "turn psychologists psychology: A study of extraordinary phe- around" with respect to prejudice toward nomena ofbehavior and experience. Hillsdale, research by sensory cueing and fraud were psi research in general and prejudice to- NJ: Erlbaum. respectively labeled as "exaggerated" and ward research into the possibility of ESP "not entirely frank': (pp. 1225-1226). AI- in dreams in particular. cock (1981, 1983) and Zusne and Jones The secondary sources that surveyed (1982) were linked in an apparent con- research on ESP and other anomalous ex- spiracy of "preconception and prejudice" periences referred to by Child (e.g., Han- Not so Anomalous Observations (p. 1228). Those authors received the sel, 1980; Zusne & Jones, 1982) are surely Question ESP in Dreams brunt of Child's attack. Although Hansel's not unique in kind to the field of para- (!980) criticisms have been available for psychology. Textbooks in general psy- Edward J. Clemmer many years, Neher (1980) and Marks and Indiana University-Purdue University chology, experimental psychology, per- Kammarm (1980) were also criticized by in Fort Wayne sonality, and social psychology, for ex- Child for not devoting space to the Mai- ample, tend to slant material toward the The American Psychologist is the best monides research. Romm (1977) was at- author's bent--behavioral, physiological, public vehicle for effectively reaching a tacked for her "ignorance" and "apparent cognitive--at best by selecting studies ac- majority of psychologists with diverse in- willingness to fabricate falsehoods" (p. cording to meet space limitations or at terests. So Child's (1985) critique of re- 1227). Instead, Child proposed that his worst by blatantly misleading the reader views critical to parapsychology illustrated analysis merits attention along with that with biased interpretations of the primary on the positive the openness of AP review- of Akers (1984), both of whom are com- research. ers and editors to provide a forum for mitted to the ESP hypothesis by belief and Fortunately, there is a correction factor Child, who felt that the Maimonides research. associated with these more conventional dream research had not come to the at- Child asserted that familiarization with areas of psychology. Most psychologists are tention of many psychologists. The need the Maimonides reports and other lines of specialists in one or more of these subject for the critical reviews that Child attacked, experimentation would support the seri- matters. Therefore, they are more likely however, is also illustrated. On the nega- ous consideration of the ESP hypothesis. to dig into the primary sources in order tive, the article bears several marks of He asked psychologists to accept research to satisfy their own professional curiosity. pseudoscience (Radner & Radner, 1982), that was "not properly analyzed at the This is not necessarily so with respect to and in fact, is an excellent case study in time" and for which "the full original data parapsychology. Few psychologists spe- the psychology of belief (Alcock, 1981; are no kruger available" (p. 1223). Con- cialize in this currently esoteric field. Singer & Benassi, 1981). sequently, we cannot inspect the data for The likelihood that a psychologist who Child pleaded that the "procedures of "experimental flaws" or "other sources of reads one of the secondary sources (survey science" require a serious consideration error" as Child challenged (p. 1228). At texts in ESP) will go on to read the primary of the Maimonides research by psychol- another point, he called us to accept sta- sources (journal articles) is low. Two im- ogists, who (to their credit!), in contrast tistically significant results "attributable portant reasons for this reluctance are (a) to scientists in all other disciplines, tend basically to just eight data points" (p. journals in parapsychology are not always to consider ESP an impossibility (Wagner 1224). The opportunities for chance or available in college libraries, and (b) the & Monnet, 1979). What Child proposed deliberate fraud involving so few data reader may have already been prejudiced as an experimental hypothesis is that ESP points is a clear danger. The nearest rep- by the misleading interpretations con- influences dreams, or general extrasensory lications of the Maimonides research tained in the secondary source. Thus, the perception (GESP) may operate "without somehow (by their number?) "add some- vicious cycle continues. the mediation of an agent's thoughts or thing" to the "promising technique" dis- Let us reinforce Child's (1985) plea for efforts" (p. 1220), or PsL having"no iden- played by the Maimonides researchmde- more attention to the primary sources of tifiable source," transfers information "by spite "the lack of significant results in the research in parapsychology. Perhaps we channels not familiar to present scientific three systematic replications" (p. 1224). may break that vicious cycle. knowledge" (p. 1224). Some immeasure- How many times do we have to accept the able influence by an unknown means with null hypothesis before rejecting the ex- or without human agents supposedly re- perimental ESP hypothesis? Further, these REFERENCES suits in some increment of knowledge that confirmations of the null hypothesis do not Child, I. L. (1985). Psychology and anomalous does not allow for any ordinary (non- necessarily support "eventual replicabil- observations: The question of ESP in dreams. anomalous) explanation. This is not a ity" as Child expected (p. 1225). American Psychologist, 40, 1219-1230. simple problem of "terminology." Rather, Indeed, there are striking parallels of the Hansel, C. E. M. (1980). ESP and parapsy- with no definable mechanisms in nature Maimonides research to other parapsy-

October 1986 9American Psychologist 1173 chologieal studies. The comparisons, ing. Why should researchers devote any however, would lead one to regard the more time to such research? Edward J. Clemmer is currently located at Emerson College, Division of Humanities and Maimonides research with caution. Child Social Sciences, 100 Beacon St., Boston, MA deemphasized the statistical excess of hits REFERENCES 02116. over misses (p < .0001), but he appealed to the fact that "there is some systematic-- Akers, C. (1984). Methodological criticisms of that is, nonrandomusource of anomalous parapsychology. In S. Krippner (Ed.), Ad- vances in parapsychological research (Vol. 4, resemblance of dreams to targets" (p. pp. 112-164). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. 1222). The source, however, need not be Alcock, J. E. (1981). Parapsychology, science or Reply to Clemmer anomalous. In the Pearce-Pratt experi- magic?A psychologicalperspective. New York: ments (Rhine & Pratt, 1954), the excess Pergamon Press. Irvin L. Child of hits over misses was described by a bi- Alcock, J. E. (1983). Bringing anomalies back Yale University modal distribution (Hansel, 1980, p. 114; into psychology [Review of Anomalistic psy- Clemmer (this issue, pp. 1173-1174) gives Zusne & Jones, 1982, p. 378). The non- chology: A study of extraordinary phenomena no indication that he is disturbed at the random distribution suggested a non- of behavior and experience]. Contemporary Psychology, 28, 351-352. false accounts that Alcock ( 1981), Marks anomalous human intervention, most Bradley,J. V. (1981). Overconfidencein ignorant and Kammann (1980), and Romm (1977) likely fraud. experts. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, have given of the Maimonides research, In the Maimonides research, judges 17, 82-84. nor even that he has looked at the original evaluated "every one of the 64 possible Bradley, J. V. (1984). Antinonrobustness: A case research reports to cheek whether I was combinations of target and transcript" (p. study in the sociology of science. Bulletin of right that the accounts by those authors 1227). However, there is also an obvious the Psychonomic Society, 22, 463-466. are false in extremely important ways. He similarity of matching dreams to targets Child, I. L. (1985). Psychology and anomalous seems to rely on a priori knowledge that in the Maimonides research to studies of observations:The question of ESP in dreams. there can be no anomalies and to be glad remote viewing (Targ & Puthoff, 1974, American Psychologist, 40, 1219-1230. Epstein, R., Kirshnit, C. E., Lanza, R. P., & that psychologists are more likely than 1977). The identification of scenes by "re- Rubin, L. C. (1984). "Insight" in the pigeon: other scientists to adhere to this a priori mote viewing" is explained more parsi- Antecedents and determinants of an intelli- knowledge, regardless of where this reli- moniously by cues in the transcripts of gent performance. Nature, 308, 61-62. ance leads them. described scenes presented to judges, and Hansel, C. E. M. (1980). ESP and parapsy- Clemmer's interpretation of the Mai- by the subject's subjective validation in chology: A critical re-evaluation. Buffalo, NY: monides results is based on analogies to post-hoe confirmatory visits of target sites Prometheus Books. defects he claims in three other pieces of (Marks & Kammann, 1980, pp. 12-41). Hofstadter, D. R. (1982). Metamagical themas. parapsychological research. The bimodal- Uri Geller, instead of matching dreams Scientific American, 246(2), 18-26. ity he asserts for the Pearce-Pratt exper- to targets, matched his drawings to his Kurtz, P. (Ed.). (1985). A skeptic's handbook of parapsychology, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus iments seems to have no striking parallel "perception" of drawings inside envelopes. Books. in the Maimonides experiments. The de- Geller's success is easily accounted for by Marks, D., & Kammann, R. (1980). The psy- fects he asserts to have characterized cer- ordinary peeking and cueing (Marks & chology of the psychic. Buffalo, NY: Prome- tain "remote viewing" and clairvoyance Kammann, 1980; pp. 105-107; Randi, theus Books. experiments are of types against which the 1982b, pp. 39-60). The fact that in the Neher, A. (1980). The psychology of transcen- Maimonides experiments were well pro- Maimonides research there were a "great dence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. tected by the experimental procedures. number and variety of personnel" does not Radner, D., & Radner, M. (1982). Science and Thus Clemmer seems to follow in the tra- make fraud "especially unlikely" as Child unreason. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. dition established by Alcock (1981) and asserted, but to the contrary it increased Randi, J. (1982a). Flim-flam.t Psychics, ESP, Zusne and Jones (1982). Though he differs unicorns and other delusions. Buffalo, NY: the potential for fraud by only one or an, Prometheus Books. from them in not offering explicitly a false other of the partidpants--"experimenters, Randi, J. (1982b). The truth about Uri Geller. account of the dream experiments, the agents, percipients, and judges" (p. 1225). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books. misrepresentations he implies are almost Psychologists, perhaps, more than oth- Rhine, J. B., & Pratt, J. G. (1954). A review of as bad. ers-except professional magicians the Pearce-Pratt distance series of ESP tests. The scientific tradition is complex and (Randi, 1982a)nought to be sensitive to Journal of Parapsychology, 18, 165-177. diverse. My respect for the role of general issues of experimental control and bias in Romm, E. G. (1977). When you give a closet theory is a main reason that my commit- studies involving human subjects. occultist a Ph.D., what kind of research can ment "to the ESP hypothesis" (p. 1173) The Maimonides research need not be you expect? The Humanist, 37(3), 12-15. does not go beyond a belief that the hy- Singer, B., & Benassi, V. A. (1981). Occult be- cloaked in anomaly, any more than un- liefs. American Scientist, 69(1), 49-55. pothesis merits serious exploration in hope usual animal behaviors need be cloaked Targ, R., & Puthoff, H. (1974). Information of future discovery of the processes un- in "cognition" or "insight" rather than transfer under conditions of sensory shielding. derlying the apparent anomalies. But facts empirically validated principles of learn- Nature, 251, 602-607. are also important, and devotion to a the- ing (Epstein, Kirshnit, Lanza, & Rubin, Targ, R., & Puthoff, H. (1977). Mind-reach. New ory to the point of disregarding or altering 1984; Terrace, 1979). Anomalous findings York: Delacorte. pertinent facts seems hardly compatible need not have mysterious sourcesnonly Terrace, H. (1979). Nim: A chimpanzee who with the scientific tradition. A broad con- perhaps ,less appealing sources than those learned sign language. New York: Knopf. tribution of ESP experiments to psychol- found in normal science. The best scien- Wagner, M. W., & Monnet, M. (1979). Attitudes ogy may come from their misrepresenta- of college professors towards extra-sensory tific assessment of parapsychological re- perception. Zetetic Scholar, 5, 7-16. tion, if awareness of it alerts psychologists search is still to be found in critical reviews Zusne, L., & Jones, W. H. (1982). Anomalistic to the danger that excessive reliance on (Hofstadter, 1982; Kurtz, 1985). Since the psychology." A study of extraordinary phe- general theory may place our discipline at time of William James, the scientific case nomena of behavior and experience. Hillsdale, a disadvantage in the development of for parapsychology has not been eonvinc- N J: Erlbaum. strikingly new areas of knowledge.

1174 October 1986 9American Psychologist