We mentioned this study after the New York Times wrote about it last month–and the reaction–but now here’s more details.
ESP. Extrasensory perception. Despite all the studies done by J.B. Rhine, despite Carl Jung’s writings on the subject, despite the fact that most of us experience it from time to time, it remains an ugly stepchild in the psychological community. But now, an article in a prestigious journal may change all that. Or not.
The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has agreed to publish an article about nine unusual lab experiments conducted over the last ten years by Daryl J. Bem, a professor emeritus at Cornell. Hard to argue with an academic from Cornell, right? In a nutshell, Bem tested the ability of college students to “accurately sense random events, like whether a computer program will flash a photograph on the left or right side of the screen.” The study included more than 1,000 students. For the nuances of the experiment, click
here.
What’s more intriguing than the experiment itself is the resistance from other mainstream psychologists that Bem’s experiment is pro ESP – i.e., that it exists, that it’s real. Quoting from the NY Times article: “It’s craziness, pure craziness. I can’t believe a major journal is allowing this work in,” Ray Hyman, an emeritus professor of psychology at the University Oregon and longtime critic of ESP research, said. “I think it’s just an embarrassment for the entire field.”
Really? An embarrassment? Bem’s article was subjected to peer review by four reviewers in the field. And all four decided that the paper met the journal’s editorial standards, says Charles Judd, the editor of the journal, a psychologist at the University of Colorado. He added: “…there was no mechanism by which we could understand the results.”
We’re not sure what he means by “mechanism,” but this seems to be the bone of contention among those who object to the article. “The problem was that this paper was treated like any other,” said an editor at the journal, Laura King, a psychologist at the University of Missouri. “And it wasn’t.”
Because the paper concerns ESP, a “paranormal” phenomenon, it apparently should be subjected to more rigorous standards. In the end, it all boils down to this: “…if ESP exists, why aren’t people getting rich by reliably predicting the movement of the stock market or the outcome of football games?”
Why does ESP have to translate to wealth and riches? Why is that the bottom line validation for whether it’s real? What about the child who reaches out telepathically to a parent in the middle of a crisis and the contact averts a tragedy? What about the feelings you experience with a partner, a friend, a sibling, those moments when your minds connect in an inexplicable and beautiful way? ESP is as common and ordinary as breakfast.
It’s tough to dismiss someone like Bem – Cornell, Harvard, Stanford, considered to be one of the imminent social psychologists. And maybe that’s why the rebuttals have been so
vociferous. The rebuttals seem to be the dying gasp of the old paradigm, no different than the dying beliefs in politics or religion. Change will come regardless of what the naysayers and skeptics say. It will sweep into our lives in such bold, dramatic ways that rebuttals will make us laugh.