Ray Hyman, a psychologist and prominent skeptic of parapsychology, and Charles Honorton, a parapsychology researcher, jointly authored this peer reviewed article in the Journal of Parapsychology after years of public dispute over ganzfeld telepathy experiments, an unusual case of two opposed researchers publishing a shared statement of where they agreed and disagreed. Its strength is exactly that structure, both sides state plainly which statistical points they accept and which interpretive questions remain open, rather than either side's account standing unchallenged. Its limit is that it is a snapshot of one negotiated position from 1986, and both authors state that later, more rigorously controlled experiments would be needed to settle the underlying question, so it should be read as a documented moment in an ongoing methodological debate, not a final verdict.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Ray Hyman and Charles Honorton's joint peer reviewed statement on ganzfeld experiment methodology, issued after their meta-analysis dispute over its results. NotesJoint statement on ganzfeld methodology after the Hyman-Honorton meta-analysis dispute.
Citation
AuthorRay Hyman, Charles Honorton
PublisherJournal of Parapsychology, Vol. 50
Publication Year1986
Source Typepeer-reviewed article
Claims Backed By This Source (60 claims)
This source backs 60 claims across the atlas. As facts: 28 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate, 1 open question. As cited relationships: 10 holds, 4 connected, 2 critiqued Here. Plus 12 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Open Questions, 12 claims: 7 well-attested, 4 connected, 1 general references.
- Psi Phenomena, 12 claims: 3 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate, 3 holds, 1 critiqued Here, 2 general references.
- Years, 8 claims: 4 holds, 4 general references.
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Studies, 7 claims: 2 well-attested, 1 open question, 2 holds, 2 general references.
- Historical Figures, 6 claims: 3 well-attested, 1 holds, 2 general references.
- Articles, 5 claims: 5 well-attested.
- Disciplines, 3 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 critiqued Here, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.