FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W171158982> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W171158982 startingPage "99" @default.
• W171158982 abstract "ABSTRACT: This paper reviews six clairvoyance experiments and two precognition ones. In essence, all eight studies use an unbalanced deck of some kind in which one or more items in the deck (will) appear more frequently than others. Traditionally, results from the six clairvoyance experiments have been thought to support each other; the current assessment, however, reveals that the findings are not as complementary as might first be imagined. Although all authors believe that psi operates globally in their experiments by scanning the whole target set, at least four different models are offered to explain how global psi might work. None of these models can explain all the results. A review of the two precognition experiments reveals that they fail to address the questions they sought to answer. Moreover, if global psi extends over time as well as space, the variety of models used to explain the clairvoyance studies may also be pertinent to the precognition experiments. A number of potential research questions are identified and a series of experiments is devised to answer the question of whether precognition foresees events that will be or whether it looks forward to what will be decided. It is hoped that this review will promote more conceptually rigorous research. Conceptually, precognition is a notoriously difficult topic. Not only does it appear to imply backwards causation because a future event seems to impinge on my present mental activity, but it also seems to imply that future events are fixed, because if the future can have an impact on my brain state, the future must have sufficient reality in order to make that impact in the first place. These and similar issues have been debated extensively in both the philosophical (e.g., Broad, 1937; Dummett, 1954; Rankin, 1957) and parapsychological (e.g., Beloff, 1990; Roberts, 1993; Struckmeyer, 1970) literature. Experimentally, the problem of whether foreseen events are fixed or alterable has been examined by distinguishing between actual and probable futures. Such precognition experiments have some items in their target pool that are more likely to become the target than others. The concept is that if participants in these experiments make more calls on the high-probability targets than on the low-probability ones, the idea that precognition directs itself towards probable (hence, preventable) futures rather than towards actual (and thus fixed) ones will arguably have received some experimental support. However, even disregarding the conceptual problems behind such designs for now, attempting to draw conclusions from the experimental paradigm above is more complicated than the given description suggests. The first experiments to use targets of varying frequencies (when items that appeared more frequently had a higher probability of actually being the target if called) were clairvoyance ones. This alone indicates a problem in varying target probabilities to see whether foreseen events are of probable or actual futures; if clairvoyance tests vary the frequency of symbols in the target set in order to gain a better idea of how psi might operate, those conclusions about the operation of psi may hold for similar experiments in the precognition mode as well. For example, one reason for varying the target frequency in clairvoyance tasks might be to see whether psi homes in on the most conspicuous item in the set (which could either be the most frequent or the least frequent symbol depending on their overall distribution). Alternatively, other clairvoyance experiments might examine whether varying target probabilities encourages participants to use psi in the form of a best bet by provoking participants to make more calls on the more frequently occurring symbols. Similarly, then, precognition experiments examining the issue of whether people foresee probable or actual futures may not be able to show definitively whether precognition is of a future that is determined or free. …" @default.
• W171158982 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W171158982 creator A5054715953 @default.
• W171158982 date "1999-06-01" @default.
• W171158982 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W171158982 title "Testing Clairvoyance and Precognition by Manipulating Probabilities: A Conceptual Assessment of the Experimental Literature" @default.
• W171158982 hasPublicationYear "1999" @default.
• W171158982 type Work @default.
• W171158982 sameAs 171158982 @default.
• W171158982 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W171158982 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W171158982 hasAuthorship W171158982A5054715953 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C136197465 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C15491014 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C166151441 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C177264268 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C188147891 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C2779662365 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W171158982 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C111472728 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C121332964 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C136197465 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C138885662 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C142724271 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C15491014 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C154945302 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C15744967 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C166151441 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C177264268 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C180747234 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C188147891 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C199360897 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C204787440 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C2779662365 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C41008148 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C62520636 @default.
• W171158982 hasConceptScore W171158982C71924100 @default.
• W171158982 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W171158982 hasLocation W1711589821 @default.
• W171158982 hasOpenAccess W171158982 @default.
• W171158982 hasPrimaryLocation W1711589821 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W112182725 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1480941253 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1494631005 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1542693673 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1557056967 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1727727976 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1979095722 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W1982936106 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2029714230 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2071256901 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2151551693 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2316551472 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2325910621 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2328056838 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2616788705 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2769584419 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2914451351 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W3131325962 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W560756311 @default.
• W171158982 hasRelatedWork W2182956560 @default.
• W171158982 hasVolume "63" @default.
• W171158982 isParatext "false" @default.
• W171158982 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W171158982 magId "171158982" @default.
• W171158982 workType "article" @default.