Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

Examining Psychokinesis: The Interaction of Human Intention with Random Number Generators, A Meta-Analysis

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

Holger Bosch, Fiona Steinkamp and Emil Boller's Examining Psychokinesis, The Interaction of Human Intention with Random Number Generators, A Meta-Analysis, published in Psychological Bulletin in 2006, is a peer reviewed statistical meta-analysis combining 380 studies testing whether human intention correlates with the output of random number generators. The authors found a very small but statistically significant overall effect, then used modeling to argue that the effect's size, its relationship to each study's sample size, and the wide variation between studies were all consistent with publication bias rather than a genuine psychokinetic effect, concluding psychokinesis was not proven. Its strength is a rigorous, large scale statistical treatment published in a leading mainstream psychology journal. Its limit is that its publication bias explanation is itself disputed: parapsychology researchers published direct methodological responses in the same journal arguing the bias correction was applied incorrectly, so the meta-analysis's conclusion should be read as one position within an active statistical argument, not a closed case.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
1
Holger Bosch, Fiona Steinkamp and Emil Boller's meta-analysis, published in Psychological Bulletin in 2006, is a rigorous peer reviewed statistical treatment in a leading mainstream psychology journal, treated at the top tier.
Notes
Peer-reviewed meta-analysis examining claimed psychokinetic effects on random number generators.
Citation
Author
Holger Bösch, Fiona Steinkamp and Emil Boller
Publisher
Psychological Bulletin
Publication Year
2006
Source Type
peer-reviewed article
Claims Backed By This Source (19 claims)

This source backs 19 claims across the atlas. As facts: 13 well-attested, 2 popular myth - corrected. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
  • Historical Figures, 4 claims: 2 well-attested, 1 popular myth - corrected, 1 general references.
  • Articles, 3 claims: 3 well-attested.
  • Studies, 3 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 popular myth - corrected, 1 general references.
  • Years, 2 claims: 1 holds, 1 general references.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

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.