Chance News 70: Difference between revisions

From ChanceWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
Line 2: Line 2:
==Forsooth==
==Forsooth==


==Item 1==
==New ESP study raises ruckus==
Read about a new study in which a Cornell psychologist claims to have verified "ESP":<br>
[http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/extrasensory-perception-scientific-journal-esp-paper-published-cornell/story?id=12556754 “ESP Study Gets Published in Scientific Journal], by Ned Potter, <i>ABC World News</i>, January 6, 2011 (including 2-min video interview).<br>
[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/science/06esp.html?_r=1&ref=benedictcarey “Journal’s paper on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage”], by Benedict Carey, <i>The New York Times</i>, January 5, 2011.<br>
 
Read the study:<br>
[http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.pdf “Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect”], by Daryl J. Bem, Cornell University, <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</i>, 2010.<br>
 
Read a rebuttal:<br>
[http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1018886/Bem6.pdf “Why Psychologists Must Change the Way They Analyze Their Data”], by Eric-Jan Wagenmakers <i>et al</i>.,  University of Amsterdam.<br>
<blockquote>We reanalyze Bem’s data using a default Bayesian t-test and show that the evidence for psi ["ESP"] is weak to nonexistent.  ….  We conclude that Bem’s p-values do not indicate evidence in favor of precognition; instead, they indicate that experimental psychologists need to change the way they conduct their experiments and analyze their data.</blockquote>
 
Submitted by Margaret Cibes based on an ISOSTAT posting by Randall Pruim
 
==Item 2==
==Item 2==

Revision as of 21:01, 7 January 2011

Quotations

Forsooth

New ESP study raises ruckus

Read about a new study in which a Cornell psychologist claims to have verified "ESP":
“ESP Study Gets Published in Scientific Journal, by Ned Potter, ABC World News, January 6, 2011 (including 2-min video interview).
“Journal’s paper on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage”, by Benedict Carey, The New York Times, January 5, 2011.

Read the study:
“Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect”, by Daryl J. Bem, Cornell University, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2010.

Read a rebuttal:
“Why Psychologists Must Change the Way They Analyze Their Data”, by Eric-Jan Wagenmakers et al., University of Amsterdam.

We reanalyze Bem’s data using a default Bayesian t-test and show that the evidence for psi ["ESP"] is weak to nonexistent. …. We conclude that Bem’s p-values do not indicate evidence in favor of precognition; instead, they indicate that experimental psychologists need to change the way they conduct their experiments and analyze their data.

Submitted by Margaret Cibes based on an ISOSTAT posting by Randall Pruim

Item 2