confirmation bias and small sample size anyone?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09...one_telepathy/
It could be genuine telepathy. Then again, it could be a flawed experiment.
Is there an online article with his test protocol on it? I think there is - I'll have a look.
The test should be quite easy, and cheap, to replicate. Perhaps we should do it.
.
http://www.sheldrake.org/experiments...xperiment.html
His protocol is simple and his figures look correct. I'd like to see a good 40-50 trials for more statistical power. The required number of trials needed for a meaningful result can be worked out so I'll do that later.
Should be an easy experiment to do though.
.
Yay! Let's do it :) I hereby volunteer to join in.
There's no substitute for actually trying to replicate a piece of research. If the conclusions are valid, then the results should be reproducible. If not ...
I can't get the link to the protocol to work :( , but judging by what I've read on the JREF and here it sounds like it should be doable.
That link should work, I've just checked it. ???
I've calculated that we'll need to do a good 80 to 100 attempts for the test to be valid if we're looking for a medium size effect.
According to Sheldrake's figures it's a HUGE size effect but I have a suspicion that we won't be able to replicate that outcome.
If half a dozen of us can give an hour or two of our time then we will quickly reach the needed figures. If we do get an effect then we can do it formally and film it.
.
Link works now. Gremlins >:(
Looks like the protocol requires fifteen minutes for the subject (presumably to to chill out and tune into the vibes) between each call. This means 80 attempts would take 20 'subject hours'.
I wonder what the criteria for choosing people likely to stimulate telepathic responses are? :-\ Would this mean that we couldn't do this test using each other as the callers, because we don't have strong enough 'telepathic links' to each other?, the subject nominates four people to whom a telepathic response seems likely.
Shame, as probably the most ergonomic way to do it would be to organise a rota: each participant takes turns being the subject, one of four possible callers and 'resting' ready to be the next subject. For example, seven people could fit in eighty attempts in less than seven hours of time.
Come to think of it, If we had nineteen people we could rattle through a trail a minute on that basis :D
Why is reading by definition less distracting than watching TV? :-\ :-\Fifteen minutes before the time chosen for a trial, the subject sits quietly reading, or engaged in some other relaxing activity (but not watching TV or a video, which can be too distracting).
I am up for it :) If you have any use for a newcomer.
Love
Kath
How many participants did he actually use in this study?
(my bold)Originally Posted by The Reg article
Re-reading the article and it's associated press release as reported by The Register, how accurate is the "The odds against this being a chance effect are 1,000 billion to one."? That seems an awfully large extropolation from 63 people who each gave the numbers of 4 friends\relatives. And was the fact that they volunteered these numbers taken into account?
<Having trouble accessing the paper at the moment, apologies if these questions are answered in it>
Just turned on Breakfast and caught the end of Rupert Sheldrake talkling about telepathy and mobile phones and how he conducting a new experiment (see his website for details - www.sheldrake.org.) Did anyone see the full interview?
He's running an online version of the test using email.
Might be an interesting thing to register for.
There's a link under "Experiments" on his homepage (I'm not going to link there again)
OK. Thanks. He's a bloody fool anyway but I hate it when they get time on television.
Who was the bloke next to him? I never saw him talk because I caught the end.
Well hopefully it was someone with some sort of sceptical viewpoint. I didn't see the item, but it was advertised earlier as "telephone telepathy - scientists say it's real".
By the way, does Sheldrake always announce his results during August/September?
Good grief! At the bottom of that page he's asking people to do the experiment and send him the results.
No chance of reporting bias there then.
Sounds more like a Uri Geller experiment- try this at home and ring in if it worksGood grief! At the bottom of that page he's asking people to do the experiment and send him the results.
No chance of reporting bias there then.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks