|
Susan J. Blackmore and Nicholas Rose
Department of Psychology
University of the West of England
St Matthias College
Bristol BS16 2JP
Paper presented at the 24th International Conference
of the Society for Psychical Research, Northampton, September 2000
During the summer of 1998 we were approached
by DS who claimed to have psychic ability and to be able to predict
the outcome of horse races. DS was confident he could demonstrate that
ability in experiments and we were keen to test him. Over a period of
nearly two years we carried out a series of experiments to test his
claims. At each stage he failed to demonstrate psi and we designed further
experiments to take account of his own suggested reasons for failure.
Experiment 1.
DS chose to try guessing the suit of playing
cards. In a simple pilot study, carried out in October 1998, SB randomly
selected a card once a week and placed it in a location agreed with
DS in the office at UWE. DS then phoned in with his guess and NR recorded
the guess. Over six weeks DS correctly guessed the suit 3 times in six
guesses. He guessed the number five times but was never correct. He
said he could not make more frequent guesses but might do better if
he had a list of words to look at, as he does in a betting shop.
Experiment 2.
DS and SB created three list of words. Each
week SB randomly chose one word from each list and displayed it in her
office at home. DS rang in and NR recorded his guesses. 18 targets were
prepared. DS made guesses for 14 of them. None was correct. DS and NR
discussed how the experiment might be made more like the horse betting
situation DS is used to. They decided that a computer programme would
be used to simulate a horse race.
Experiment 3.
In a simulated race between 5 horses DS was
asked to predict the winner, making his guesses at home. NR ran one
trial a week and DS rang in with his prediction at a regular time. When
DS rang the race was run and the result recorded by NR. 10 trials were
run between 22/4 and 22/6 1999. DS obtained 1 hit (MCE = 2).
Experiment 4.
Conversations with DS revealed that he was
unhappy with ringing in his predictions from home and with other aspects
of the experiment. NR redesigned the programme to meet the requirements
and DS came into the University for further trials. In these experiments
DS had to choose the winner from 10 ‘horses’, completing 100
trials over a period of 10 weeks. The computer program recorded predictions
and winner. NR recorded the rank of the predicted winner. In the 100
trials DS scored 6 hits (MCE = 10) and a sum of ranks of 578 (MCE =
550).
Experiment 5.
DS expressed concern over the pressure to make
10 predictions in a session, explaining that in the betting shop he
sometimes let races run in order to get a feel for the race. NR therefore
redesigned the computer programme to allow races to be run without a
prediction, and told DS he could make fewer than 10 predictions or even
none on a particular session. DS also suggested that stress in his daily
life might be affecting his performance on the task. 20 trials were
run over three sessions. The computer recorded all the data. DS scored
1 hit (MCE = 2) and a sum of ranks of 106 (MCE = 110). DS’s claims
about his performance and his reasons for failure became steadily more
complex. SB therefore interviewed DS after this experiment, and the
subsequent one. The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed.
Experiment 6.
From the interview DS still appeared confident
that he could produce psi if environmental factors at home (such as
good sleep and diet) could be improved, and if he had more motivation
to win in each individual trial. He also studied his previous results
in great detail and on this basis suggested to NR that he would get
more 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, and 10 places and fewer 5, 6, 7 and 8’s. NR
redesigned the programme to record that information from each race.
In addition DS was provided with toy money to make ‘bets’
with. For the 20 trials DS was given £40, allowing him to make an average
bet of £2 per race – he could raise or lower that according to
his confidence in the outcome. This (in theory) allowed us to take a
measure of his confidence, as well as providing him with greater motivation
to succeed. 20 trials were run over 6 sessions. DS scored 3 hits (MCE
= 2) and a sum of ranks of 99 (MCE = 110). These results, although in
the right direction, were not significant. There was no evidence that
fewer 5, 6, 7 or 8 places were obtained. DS bet precisely £1 on each
race for which he made a prediction, and there was no sign that he was
more confident of his prediction when he won. The return of the stake
was 7:1 which (with the return of the original stake) meant that he
received £8 back for every £1 gambled. From the initial stake of £40,
DS ended with a small winnings with a total of £44.
Perhaps the most interesting part of this process
was the extent to which DS’s explanation for failure to obtain
psi became more complex over time and eventually overcame our ability
to simulate features within the experiment. Whilst DS was unable to
obtain results suggestive of psi, the results do gradually appear to
be moving in that direction – and he did make a small winning in
the final experiment. A further experiment is planned if DS is available
later in the year.
Thanks to the Perrott-Warrick Fund for support of this project.
Back to Publications
|
