07-16-2018, 04:58 AM
|
#21
|
Stinkin' Mod
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,616
|
Quote:
Good ol' Wiki wrote
The publication of Bem's article and the resulting controversy prompted a wide-ranging commentary by Etienne LeBel and Kurt Peters.[40] Using Bem's article as a case study, they discussed deficiencies in the accepted methodology most commonly used in experimental psychology. LeBel and Peters suggest that experimental psychology is systemically biased toward interpretations of data that favor the researcher's theory.
In 2012, the same journal that published Bem's original experiments, The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 103, No. 6), published "Correcting the Past: Failures to Replicate Psi" by Jeff Galak of Carnegie Mellon University, Robyn A. LeBoeuf of the University of Florida, Leif D. Nelson of the University of California at Berkeley, and Joseph P. Simmons of the University of Pennsylvania. The paper reported seven experiments testing for precognition that "found no evidence supporting its existence."[41]
In results presented in 2016 at a meeting of the Parapsychological Association, Bem and two coauthors reported the results of a replication that was conducted using more rigorous methods. According to their pre-registered analysis, there was no evidence at all for ESP, nor was there any correlation between the attitudes of the experimenters—whether they were believers or skeptics when it came to psi—and the outcomes of the study. In summary, their large-scale, multisite, pre-registered replication ended with results that were negative, and showing no evidence of the feeling the future effect.
|
Oh Dear - more flawed methodology, statistical fuck-ups and an unhealthy sprinkling of bullshit! Sumble Bum, you really are a gullible fuck-nugget, but amusing in your stupidity.
Stop the Holy See men!
|
|
|