Editing Parapsychology (section)

===Rhine era===

In 1911, [[Stanford University]] became the first academic institution in the United States to study [[extrasensory perception]] (ESP) and psychokinesis (PK) in a laboratory setting. The effort was headed by psychologist [[John Edgar Coover]] and funded by [[Thomas Welton Stanford]], brother of the university's founder. After conducting approximately 10,000 experiments, Coover concluded that "statistical treatments of the data fail to reveal any cause beyond chance."<ref>{{cite book|first=Egil|last=Asprem|title=The Problem of Disenchantment: Scientific Naturalism and Esoteric Discourse, 1900–1939|publisher=[[Brill Academic Publishers]]|location=Leiden, Netherlands|date=2014|isbn=978-9004251922|pages=355–360}}</ref>

In 1930, [[Duke University]] became the second major U.S. academic institution to engage in the critical study of ESP and psychokinesis in the laboratory. Under the guidance of psychologist [[William McDougall (psychologist)|William McDougall]], and with the help of others in the department—including psychologists [[Karl Zener]], [[Joseph Banks Rhine|Joseph B. Rhine]], and [[Louisa E. Rhine]]—laboratory ESP experiments using volunteer subjects from the undergraduate student body began. As opposed to the approaches of psychical research, which generally sought [[Qualitative research|qualitative evidence]] for paranormal phenomena, the experiments at Duke University proffered a [[Quantitative research|quantitative]], [[statistical]] approach using [[Zener cards|cards]] and dice. As a consequence of the ESP experiments at Duke, standard laboratory procedures for the testing of ESP were developed and adopted by interested researchers worldwide.<ref name="Berger"/>

[[George Estabrooks]] conducted an ESP experiment using cards in 1927. Harvard students were used as the subjects. Estabrooks acted as the sender, with the guesser in an adjoining room. Estabrooks conducted a total of 2,300 trials. When Estabrooks sent the subjects to a distant room with insulation, the scores dropped to chance level. Attempts to repeat the experiment also failed.<ref name="Hansel 1985"/>

The publication of J. B. Rhine's book, ''New Frontiers of the Mind'' (1937), brought the laboratory's findings to the general public. In his book, Rhine popularized the word "parapsychology", coined by psychologist [[Max Dessoir]] over 40 years earlier, to describe the research conducted at Duke. Rhine also founded an autonomous Parapsychology Laboratory within Duke and started the ''[[Journal of Parapsychology]]'', which he co-edited with McDougall.<ref name=Berger/>
[[File:Zener cards (color).svg|thumb|right|upright=1.25|Early parapsychological research employed the use of [[Zener cards]] in experiments designed to test for the existence of [[telepathy|telepathic communication]], or clairvoyant or precognitive perception.]]
Rhine, along with associate Karl Zener, had developed a statistical system of testing for ESP that involved subjects guessing what symbol, out of five possible symbols, would appear when going through a [[Zener cards|special deck of cards]] designed for this purpose. A percentage of correct guesses (or hits) significantly above 20% was perceived as higher than chance and indicative of psychic ability. Rhine stated in his first book, ''[[Extrasensory Perception (book)|Extrasensory Perception]]'' (1934), that after 90,000 trials, he felt ESP is "an actual and demonstrable occurrence".<ref name="Rhine1934">J. B. Rhine (1934). Extra-Sensory Perception. (4th ed.) Branden Publishing Company 1997. {{ISBN|0828314640}}</ref>

Irish medium and parapsychologist [[Eileen J. Garrett]] was tested by Rhine at Duke University in 1933 with Zener cards. Rhine placed certain symbols on the cards, sealed them in an envelope, and asked Garrett to guess their contents. She performed poorly and later criticized the tests by claiming the cards lacked a [[Energy (esotericism)|psychic energy]] called "energy stimulus" and that she could not perform clairvoyance to order.<ref>{{cite book|first=Jenny|last=Hazelgrove|title=Spiritualism and British Society Between the Wars|publisher=Manchester University Press|location=Manchester, England|date=2000|isbn=978-0719055591|page=[https://archive.org/details/spiritualismbrit00haze/page/204 204]|url=https://archive.org/details/spiritualismbrit00haze/page/204}}</ref> The parapsychologist [[Samuel Soal]] and his colleagues tested Garrett in May 1937. Soal conducted most experiments in the Psychological Laboratory at [[University College London]]. Soal recorded over 12,000 guesses, but Garrett failed to produce above chance level.<ref>{{cite journal|first1=A. S.|last1=Russell|first2=John Andrews|last2=Benn|title=A New Discovery|journal=Discovery: The Popular Journal of Knowledge|volume=13|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|location=Cambridge, England|pages=305–306}}</ref> In his report Soal wrote "In the case of Mrs. Eileen Garrett we fail to find the slightest confirmation of J. B. Rhine's remarkable claims relating to her alleged powers of extra-sensory perception. Not only did she fail when I took charge of the experiments, but she failed equally when four other carefully trained experimenters took my place."<ref>[[Samuel Soal]]. ''A Repetition of Dr. Rhine's work with Mrs. Eileen Garrett''. Proc. S.P.R. Vol. XLII. pp. 84–85. Also quoted in [[Antony Flew]]. (1955). ''A New Approach To Psychical Research''. Watts & Co. pp. 90–92.</ref>

The parapsychology experiments at Duke evoked much criticism from academics and others who challenged the concepts and evidence of ESP. Many psychological departments attempted to repeat Rhine's experiments with failure. W. S. Cox (1936) from [[Princeton University]], with 132 subjects, produced 25,064 trials in a playing card ESP experiment. Cox concluded, "There is no evidence of extrasensory perception either in the 'average man' or of the group investigated or in any particular individual of that group. The discrepancy between these results and those obtained by Rhine is due either to uncontrollable factors in experimental procedure or to the difference in the subjects."<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Cox | first1 = W. S. | year = 1936 | title = An experiment in ESP | doi = 10.1037/h0054630 | journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology | volume = 19 | issue = 4| page = 437 }}</ref> Four other psychological departments failed to replicate Rhine's results.<ref>Cited in [[C. E. M. Hansel]] ''The Search for a Demonstration of ESP'' in [[Paul Kurtz]]. (1985). ''A Skeptic's Handbook of Parapsychology''. Prometheus Books. pp. 105–127. {{ISBN|0879753005}}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Adam | first1 = E. T. | year = 1938 | title = A summary of some negative experiments | journal = Journal of Parapsychology | volume = 2 | pages = 232–236 }}
* Crumbaugh, J. C. (1938). ''An experimental study of extra-sensory perception''. Masters thesis. Southern Methodist University.
* {{cite journal | last1 = Heinlein | first1 = C. P | last2 = Heinlein | first2 = J. H. | year = 1938 | title = Critique of the premises of statistical methodology of parapsychology | journal = Journal of Parapsychology | volume = 5 | pages = 135–148 | doi=10.1080/00223980.1938.9917558}}
* Willoughby, R. R. (1938). ''Further card-guessing experiments''. Journal of Psychology 18: 3–13.</ref> After thousands of card runs, [[James Charles Crumbaugh]] failed to duplicate the results of Rhine.<ref>[[James Alcock|Alcock, James]]. (1981). ''Parapsychology – Science Or Magic?: A Psychological Perspective''. Pergamon Press. 136. {{ISBN|978-0080257730}}</ref>

[[File:Hubert Pearce with J. B. Rhine.png|thumb|[[Hubert Pearce]] with J. B. Rhine]]
In 1938, the psychologist [[Joseph Jastrow]] wrote that much of the evidence for extrasensory perception collected by Rhine and other parapsychologists was anecdotal, biased, dubious and the result of "faulty observation and familiar human frailties".<ref>[[Joseph Jastrow]]. (1938). ''ESP, House of Cards''. The American Scholar 8: 13–22.</ref> Rhine's experiments were discredited due to the discovery that [[sensory leakage]] or cheating could account for all his results, such as the subject being able to read the symbols from the back of the cards and being able to see and hear the experimenter to note subtle clues.<ref>[[Harold Gulliksen]]. (1938). ''Extra-Sensory Perception: What Is It?''. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 623–634. "Investigating Rhine's methods, we find that his mathematical methods are wrong and that the effect of this error would in some cases be negligible and in others very marked. We find that many of his experiments were set up in a manner which would tend to increase, instead of to diminish, the possibility of systematic clerical errors; and lastly, that the ESP cards can be read from the back."</ref><ref>Charles M. Wynn, Arthur W. Wiggins. (2001). ''Quantum Leaps in the Wrong Direction: Where Real Science Ends...and Pseudoscience Begins''. Joseph Henry Press. p. 156. {{ISBN|978-0309073097}} "In 1940, Rhine coauthored a book, ''Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years'' in which he suggested that something more than mere guess work was involved in his experiments. He was right! It is now known that the experiments conducted in his laboratory contained serious methodological flaws. Tests often took place with minimal or no screening between the subject and the person administering the test. Subjects could see the backs of cards that were later discovered to be so cheaply printed that a faint outline of the symbol could be seen. Furthermore, in face-to-face tests, subjects could see card faces reflected in the tester's eyeglasses or cornea. They were even able to (consciously or unconsciously) pick up clues from the tester's facial expression and voice inflection. In addition, an observant subject could identify the cards by certain irregularities like warped edges, spots on the backs, or design imperfections."</ref><ref>[[Terence Hines]]. (2003). ''Pseudoscience and the Paranormal''. Prometheus Books. p. 122. {{ISBN|1573929794}} "The procedural errors in the Rhine experiments have been extremely damaging to his claims to have demonstrated the existence of ESP. Equally damaging has been the fact that the results have not replicated when the experiments have been conducted in other laboratories."</ref><ref>Jonathan C. Smith. (2009). [https://books.google.com/books?id=sJgONrua8IkC&dq=rhine+pseudoscience&pg=PT226 ''Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit'']. Wiley-Blackwell. {{ISBN|978-1405181228}}. "Today, researchers discount the first decade of Rhine's work with Zener cards. Stimulus leakage or cheating could account for all his findings. Slight indentations on the backs of cards revealed the symbols embossed on card faces. Subjects could see and hear the experimenter, and note subtle but revealing facial expressions or changes in breathing."</ref>

[[Magic (illusion)|Illusionist]] [[Milbourne Christopher]] wrote years later that he felt "there are at least a dozen ways a subject who wished to cheat under the conditions Rhine described could deceive the investigator". When Rhine took precautions in response to criticisms of his methods, he failed to find any high-scoring subjects.<ref name="Milbourne">[[Milbourne Christopher]]. (1970). ''ESP, Seers & Psychics''. Thomas Y. Crowell Co. pp. 24–28</ref> Another criticism, made by chemist [[Irving Langmuir]], among others, was one of [[Selection bias|selective reporting]]. Langmuir stated that Rhine did not report scores of subjects that he suspected were intentionally guessing wrong and that this, he felt, biased the statistical results higher than they should have been.<ref>[[Robert L. Park]]. (2000). ''[[Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud]]''. Oxford University Press. pp. 40–43. {{ISBN|0198604432}}</ref>

Rhine and his colleagues attempted to address these criticisms through new experiments described in the book ''[[Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years]]'' (1940).<ref name=ESP60>Rhine, J.B. (1966). Foreword. In Pratt, J.G., Rhine, J.B., Smith, B.M., Stuart, C.E., & Greenwood, J.A. (eds.). ''[[Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years]]''. 2nd ed. Boston, US: Humphries.</ref> Rhine described three experiments: the [[Pearce-Pratt experiment]], the [[Pratt-Woodruff experiment]], and the Ownbey-Zirkle series, which he believed demonstrated ESP. However, [[C. E. M. Hansel]] wrote, "It is now known that each experiment contained serious flaws that escaped notice in the examination made by the authors of ''Extra-Sensory Perception After Sixty Years''".<ref name="Hansel 1985"/> [[Joseph Gaither Pratt]] was the co-experimenter in the Pearce-Pratt and Pratt-Woodruff experiments at the Duke campus. Hansel visited the campus where the experiments took place and discovered the results could have originated through a trick, so they could not supply evidence for ESP.<ref>[[C. E. M. Hansel]]. (1980). ''ESP and Parapsychology: A Critical Re-Evaluation''. Prometheus Books. pp. 125–140</ref>

In 1957, Rhine and [[Joseph Gaither Pratt]] wrote ''[[Parapsychology: Frontier Science of the Mind]]''. Because of the methodological problems, parapsychologists no longer utilize card-guessing studies.<ref>[http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/back_from_the_future ''Back from the Future: Parapsychology and the Bem Affair''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111231102646/http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/back_from_the_future |date=2011-12-31 }}. ''[[Skeptical Inquirer]]''. "Despite Rhine's confidence that he had established the reality of extrasensory perception, he had not done so. Methodological problems with his experiments eventually came to light, and as a result parapsychologists no longer run card-guessing studies and rarely even refer to Rhine's work."</ref> Rhine's experiments into [[psychokinesis]] (PK) were also criticized. [[John Sladek]] wrote:

<blockquote>His research used dice, with subjects 'willing' them to fall a certain way. Not only can dice be drilled, shaved, falsely numbered and manipulated, but even straight dice often show bias in the long run. Casinos for this reason retire dice often, but at Duke, subjects continued to try for the same effect on the same dice over long experimental runs. Not surprisingly, PK appeared at Duke and nowhere else.<ref name="Sladek 1974">[[John Sladek]]. (1974). ''The New Apocrypha: A Guide to Strange Sciences and Occult Beliefs''. Panther. pp. 172–174</ref></blockquote>

[[File:Mr. Zirkle and Miss Ownbey ESP experiment.png|thumb|upright=1.25|Mr. Zirkle and Miss Ownbey]]
Parapsychologists and skeptics criticized the Ownbey-Zirkle ESP experiment at Duke.<ref name="Lamont 2013">[[Peter Lamont (historian)|Peter Lamont]]. (2013). ''Extraordinary Beliefs: A Historical Approach to a Psychological Problem''. Cambridge University Press. pp. 206–208. {{ISBN|978-1107019331}}</ref> Ownbey would attempt to send ESP symbols to Zirkle, who would guess what they were. The pair were placed in adjacent rooms, unable to see each other, and an electric fan was used to prevent the pair from communicating by sensory cues. Ownbey tapped a telegraph key to Zirkle to inform him when she was trying to send him a symbol. The door separating the two rooms was open during the experiment, and after each guess, Zirkle would call out his guess to Ownbey, who recorded his choice. Critics pointed out the experiment was flawed as Ownbey acted as both the sender and the experimenter; nobody controlled the experiment, so Ownbey could have cheated by communicating with Zirkle or made recording mistakes.<ref name="Lamont 2013"/><ref>[[C. E. M. Hansel]]. (1989). ''The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisited''. Prometheus Books. p. 46. {{ISBN|0879755164}}</ref>

The Turner-Ownbey long-distance [[telepathy]] experiment was also flawed. May Frances Turner positioned herself in the Duke Parapsychology Laboratory, while Sara Ownbey claimed to receive transmissions 250 miles away. For the experiment, Turner would think of a symbol and write it down, while Ownbey would write her guesses.<ref name="Sladek 1974"/> The scores were highly successful and both records were supposed to be sent to J. B. Rhine, however, Ownbey sent them to Turner. Critics pointed out this invalidated the results as she could have simply written her own record to agree with the other. When the experiment was repeated and the records were sent to Rhine, the scores dropped to average.<ref name="Sladek 1974"/><ref>[[Bergen Evans]]. (1954). ''The Spoor of Spooks: And Other Nonsense''. Knopf. p. 24</ref><ref>[[C. E. M. Hansel]]. (1989). ''The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisited''. Prometheus Books. pp. 56–58. {{ISBN|0879755164}}</ref>

Lucien Warner and Mildred Raible performed a famous ESP experiment at Duke University. Warner and Raible locked a subject in a room with a switch controlling a signal light elsewhere, which she could signal to guess the card. Ten runs with ESP packs of cards were used, and she achieved 93 hits (43 more than chance). Weaknesses with the experiment were later discovered. The duration of the light signal could be varied so that the subject could call for specific symbols. Certain symbols in the experiment appeared far more often than others, indicating poor shuffling or card manipulation. The experiment was not repeated.<ref name="Sladek 1974"/><ref>[[C. E. M. Hansel]]. (1989). ''The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisited''. Prometheus Books. p. 53. {{ISBN|0879755164}} "First, the recording was not completely independent, since the flash of light in the experimenters' room could be varied in duration by the subject and thus provide a possible cue. Second, there were five different symbols in the target series, but the experimental record showed that two of these arose more frequently than the other three."</ref>

Duke's administration grew less sympathetic to parapsychology, and after Rhine's retirement in 1965, parapsychological links with the university were broken. Rhine later established the Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man (FRNM) and the Institute for Parapsychology as a successor to the Duke laboratory.<ref name="Berger"/> In 1995, the centenary of Rhine's birth, the FRNM was renamed the [[Rhine Research Center]]. Today, the Rhine Research Center is a parapsychology research unit, stating that it "aims to improve the human condition by creating a scientific understanding of those abilities and sensitivities that appear to transcend the ordinary limits of space and time".<ref>{{cite web |title=The History of the Rhine Research Center |publisher=Rhine Research Center |url=http://www.rhine.org/f_hist.htm |access-date=2007-06-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070529210149/http://www.rhine.org/f_hist.htm |archive-date=2007-05-29 |url-status=dead }}</ref>