Editing Ganzfeld experiment (section)

===Contemporary research===
The ganzfeld experiment has continued to be refined over the years. In its current incarnation, an automated computer system is used to select and display the targets ("digital autoganzfeld"). This has the potential to overcome some of the shortcomings of earlier experimental setups, such as randomization and experimenter blindness with respect to the targets.<ref name=GouldingEtAl2004>{{cite journal | author1=Goulding, A. |author2=Westerlund, J. |author3=Parker, A. |author4=Wackermann, J. | year=2004 | title=The first Digital Autoganzfeld study using a real-time judging procedure | url=https://www.academia.edu/download/30657773/EJP_v19.pdf#page=69 |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.academia.edu/download/30657773/EJP_v19.pdf#page=69 |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live | journal=European Journal of Parapsychology | volume=19 | pages=66–97}}{{dead link|date=July 2022|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref>

In 2010, Lance Storm, Patrizio Tressoldi, and Lorenzo Di Risio analyzed 29 ganzfeld studies from 1997 to 2008. Of the 1,498 trials, 483 produced hits, corresponding to a hit rate of 32.2%. This hit rate is [[Statistical significance|statistically significant]] with p < .001. Participants selected for personality traits and personal characteristics thought to be psi-conducive were found to perform significantly better than unselected participants in the ganzfeld condition.<ref name=StormEtAl2010>{{cite journal | last1=Storm | first1=Lance | last2=Tressoldi | first2=Patrizio E. | last3=Di Risio | first3=Lorenzo | title=Meta-analysis of free-response studies, 1992–2008: Assessing the noise reduction model in parapsychology | journal=Psychological Bulletin | volume=136 | issue=4 | year=2010 | doi=10.1037/a0019457 | pages=471–485 | url-status=dead | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110124055506/http://www.psy.unipd.it/~tressold/cmssimple/uploads/includes/MetaFreeResp010.pdf | archive-date=2011-01-24 | access-date=2010-08-18 | pmid=20565164 | url=http://www.psy.unipd.it/~tressold/cmssimple/uploads/includes/MetaFreeResp010.pdf }}</ref> Hyman (2010) published a rebuttal to Storm ''et al''. concluding that the ganzfeld studies have not been independently replicated and had thus failed to produce evidence for psi.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Hyman R.|author-link=Ray Hyman|year=2010|title=Meta-analysis that conceals more than it reveals: Comment on Storm et al. (2010) |journal=Psychological Bulletin|volume=136|issue=4|pages=486–490|doi=10.1037/a0019676|pmid=20565165 | url = http://drsmorey.org/bibtex/upload/Hyman:2010.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20131103081111/http://drsmorey.org/bibtex/upload/Hyman%3A2010.pdf | archive-date = 2013-11-03 }}</ref> According to Hyman, "reliance on meta-analysis as the sole basis for justifying the claim that an anomaly exists and that the evidence for it is consistent and replicable is fallacious. It distorts what scientists mean by confirmatory evidence." Storm ''et al''. published a response to Hyman claiming the ganzfeld experimental design has proved to be consistent and reliable but parapsychology is a struggling discipline that has not received much attention so further research on the subject is necessary.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Storm | first1=Lance | last2=Tressoldi | first2=Patrizio E. | last3=Risio | first3=Lorenzo Di | title=A meta-analysis with nothing to hide: Reply to Hyman (2010). | journal=Psychological Bulletin | volume=136 | issue=4 | year=2010 | doi=10.1037/a0019840 | pages=491–494 | s2cid=21103309 | pmid=20565166 }}</ref> Rouder ''et al''. in 2013 wrote that critical evaluation of Storm ''et al''.'s meta-analysis reveals no evidence for psi, no plausible mechanism, and omitted replication failures.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Rouder | first1=Jeffrey N. | last2=Morey | first2=Richard D. | last3=Province | first3=Jordan M. | title=A Bayes factor meta-analysis of recent extrasensory perception experiments: Comment on Storm, Tressoldi, and Di Risio (2010). | journal=Psychological Bulletin | volume=139 | issue=1 | year=2013 | doi=10.1037/a0029008 | pages=241–247 | pmid=23294092 }}</ref>

A 2016 paper examined questionable research practices in the ganzfeld experiments and simulated how such practices could cause erroneous positive results.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Testing for Questionable Research Practices in a Meta-Analysis: An Example from Experimental Parapsychology|last1=Bierman|first1=DJ|last2=Spottiswoode|first2=JP|last3=Bijl|first3=A|year=2016|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=11|issue=5|page=1|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0153049|quote=We consider [questionable research practices] in the context of a meta-analysis database of Ganzfeld–telepathy experiments from the field of experimental parapsychology. The Ganzfeld database is particularly suitable for this study, because the parapsychological phenomenon it investigates is widely believed to be nonexistent.|pmid=27144889|pmc=4856278|bibcode=2016PLoSO..1153049B|doi-access=free}}</ref>