Individual Differences in Precognition Performance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Am I Luckier Than You? Individual Differences in Precognition Performance Marco Zdrenka A thesis submitted to Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology Victoria University of Wellington 2018 ABSTRACT The results found in parapsychological research have not been particularly persuasive, in large part due to a lack of replicability of those studies purporting evidence in support of the existence of psi phenomena. I propose that a more promising avenue of research into psi focuses on the potential correlates of psi performance (i.e. factors that correlate with above- or below-chance performance on luck-based tasks without any known causal mechanism). Specifically, individual differences, such as belief in ESP or extraversion, have been shown to correlate with psi performance in forced- choice precognition experiments (where participants predict a future chance- event by choosing one option from a limited number of options). Thus, the goal of this thesis was to synthesise existing literature on predictors of psi performance, to identify the best predictors of psi performance, and to test these predictors using the latest experimental paradigms while also examining its external validity in the real world. My first study (Study I) was a never-before-conducted meta-analysis of all research that has looked at individual differences and psi performance in forced-choice precognition experiments. Overall, 57 studies published between 1945 and 2016, including 35 individual difference measures, were subject to meta-analysis (Zdrenka & Wilson, 2017). Six individual difference measures, namely, luck belief (the belief that luck is primarily controllable), perceptual defensiveness, openness to experience, belief in ESP, extraversion, and time belief as dynamic, were found to significantly correlate with psi performance. Study II attempted to examine these promising individual difference variables using one of Bem’s (2011a) previously successful experimental paradigms, while also using Bem’s own materials and resources. Thus, Study II is a replication of the first of his experiments, Precognitive Detection of Erotic Stimuli, which was shown to be the most robust of the studies reported by Bem (Bem, Tressoldi, Rabeyron, & Duggan, 2015). In summary, Study II explored precognition using this most robust experimental paradigm, in combination 2 with the most promising individual difference correlates identified in Study I. Belief in ESP was found to significantly predict psi performance (i.e. a ‘sheep- goat’ effect; Schmeidler, 1943, 1945) whereas the other individual differences did not. The aims of Studies III(A) and III(B) were to investigate the utility of paranormal belief as a predictor of performance in two real-life lottery studies. In the first Study III(A), a large sample of New Zealanders completed a measure of paranormal belief and provided their preferred lotto numbers. Paranormal belief (and a range of other lottery behaviours) failed to predict lottery success. Finally, a pilot study is presented (Study III(B)) incorporating the same individual difference measures from Study I and II, but applied in a real-world setting. We examined participants’ predictions of numbers drawn in the New Zealand lottery over eight weeks, as the lottery presents a real-world example of forced-choice precognition (in that the future event is ostensibly unpredictable and there are a limited number of choices to pick from, i.e. the numbers 1-40). However, there was a low rate of participation that was caused, in part, by the time-commitment required, and therefore the study was underpowered and the results inconclusive. Limitations were also identified by potential preference biases distorting the results (due to there being only a single target set per draw, i.e. the winning lotto number set). Overall, this thesis attempted to answer two main research questions: (1) which individual difference measures are the most predictive of psi performance in the forced-choice precognition domain? (Studies I) and, (2) are these individual difference predictors consistent and reliable across a range of settings? (Studies II through III(B)). I found partial support for a significant predictor, in that Belief in ESP significantly correlated with psi performance in a forced-choice precognition replicatory experiment, but further research is necessary to confirm whether this finding—based on experimental laboratory- based studies—translates to real-world psi, and to address the limitations found in Studies II and III. An alternative interpretation is that the results are due to random variation—given that they are weak and inconsistent—and psi does not 3 exist. Pre-registered studies and prospective meta-analyses are likely to determine which interpretation prevails in the end. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It wouldn’t be a thesis about luck, without first acknowledging the large role that ‘luck’ played in getting me to where I am today. While hard work does pay off, I am extremely fortunate that the stars aligned from day one (when the universe first began) such that I was able to think, write, and meet all the people that helped me along the way. It is fitting, then, to start with Marc Wilson, my supervisor, who happened to accept me as his PhD student even though we had never met (and he did not know that I was interested in parapsychology!). Perhaps it was precognition. It was only after our first meeting together that I decided to bare my soul and let him know that my ‘other’ interest was this phenomena known as ‘psi’. I was pleasantly surprised (or perhaps more shocked) to find out that not only was he well versed in the parapsychological literature, but was happy to supervise me on that topic if I wanted to pursue it. The rest is history. I’m truly thankful for how supportive you’ve been over these past three years (you always know how to put someone at ease). You provided just the right amount of guidance to get me to the end, but were hands-off enough that I could always go in a direction I enjoyed. Thank you. Three academic mentors also led me down this path. The first is Kumar Yogeeswaran, who re-invigorated my interest in psychology after I took his Social Psychology class. I wouldn’t have considered postgrad if it wasn’t for you. You’re a great mentor and a great teacher, and made my honours year the best it could be. The second is Caroline Watt. Once Marc gave me the green light to pursue parapsychology, I delved into the literature but soon found the field to be very polarised. Most papers were either pro-psi or anti-psi, and there didn’t seem to be much of a middle ground (or at least, an interpretation of the core data that both sides accepted). As ‘luck’ would have it, I came across Caroline’s online parapsychology course, which provided a balanced overview of all sides of the debate that I could find nowhere else. It provided me with some structure amidst the chaos, and I am grateful to you for that. And finally Daryl 5 Bem, thank you for graciously providing me with your replication package (which enabled me to conduct Study II). I can say without hesitation that you are a solid figure to look up to in both the field of psychology and parapsychology. Next—I wouldn’t be here without my family. Dad, for always helping me out when I needed it. Mum, for being extraordinarily proud of my academic achievements. Both of you didn’t think twice about the fact that I chose to study even more (I had already spent 6 years at university before pursuing my PhD)—you were just supportive in whatever I wanted to do. It really helped put me at ease with my decision. My brother Paul, you were always there to keep things light-hearted, bringing up X-files references whenever my research topic came up. You made me step back and laugh, and I appreciate that. My sister Helene, you were always so inquisitive about my work and provided lots of sage advice along the way. I am grateful to have such a caring sister. Also to meine Oma, Chai, Elaine, Annie, Marwan, Jenny, Ceci, Nox, Grace, and Nikolai, you’ve all been a great support for me and I’m glad to have you all as part of my extended family. To all of my friends, thanks for listening to me ramble about what ‘luck’ is and whether probabilities exist. I will have no more excuses not to play some board games now and actually leave my house (I’m sure the Vitamin D won’t hurt either). Last but not least is my partner Jennifer, who often jokes that this PhD is practically hers—but she’s not far off from the truth. There is no way I could have done this without her support, encouragement, and patience. You made all of this worth it, and I hope I can do the same for you in your future endeavours. 6 PREFACE From a young age, I have been drawn to weird or controversial topics. I remember reading books about the Bermuda Triangle, aliens, conspiracies, and everything in between. It was always difficult to decipher fact from fiction, due to the sensationalism you often find in these subjects. What I didn’t know at the time, however, was that a field of research existed that attempted to examine [some of] these concepts scientifically. This piqued my interest, as I wanted to learn about these topics in an objective way. Fringe topics never interested me for the sake of it being fantastical, or because I have a creative mind (which I don’t). Rather, it was more about truth for me.