Editing Ganzfeld experiment (section)

== Controversy ==

In 1979, [[Susan Blackmore]] visited the laboratories of [[Carl Sargent]] in [[Cambridge]]. She noticed a number of irregularities in the procedure and wrote about them for the ''Journal of the Society for Psychical Research''.

{{quote|It now appeared that in one session&nbsp;– number 9&nbsp;– the following events had taken place.
# Sargent did the randomization when he should not have.
# A 'B' went missing from the drawer during the session, instead of afterwards.
# Sargent came into the judging and "pushed" the subject towards 'B'.
# An error of addition was made in favour of 'B' and 'B' was chosen.
# 'B' was the target and the session a direct hit.<ref>{{cite journal |title=A Report of a Visit to Carl Sargent's Laboratory |author= Blackmore, Susan |journal=Journal of the Society for Psychical Research |volume=54 |pages=186–198 |year=1987}}</ref>}}

This article, along with further criticisms of Sargent's work from [[Adrian Parker (parapsychologist)|Adrian Parker]] and [[Nils Wiklund]] remained unpublished until 1987 but all were well known in parapsychological circles. Sargent wrote a rebuttal to these criticisms (also not published until 1987)<ref>{{cite journal |title=Sceptical fairytales from Bristol |author=Sargent, Carl |journal=Journal of the Society for Psychical Research |volume=54 |pages=208–218 |year=1987}}</ref> in which he did not deny what Blackmore had observed, but argued that her conclusions based on those observations were wrong and prejudiced. His co-workers also responded, saying that any deviation from protocol was the result of "random errors" rather than any concerted attempt at fraud.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Cheating, psi, and the appliance of science: a reply to Blackmore |author=Harley, Matthews |journal=Journal of the Society for Psychical Research |volume=54 |pages=199–207 |year=1987}}</ref> Carl Sargent stopped working in parapsychology after this and did not respond "in a timely fashion" when the Council of the Parapsychological Association asked for his data, and so his membership of that organization was allowed to lapse.<ref>{{cite book |last=Beloff |first=John |title=Parapsychology: A Concise History |publisher=Palgrave MacMillan |pages=283–284 |year=1997}}</ref>

Writing for ''[[Skeptical Inquirer]]'' in 2018, Blackmore states that Sargent "deliberately violated his own protocols and in one trial had almost certainly cheated." Psychologists reading [[Daryl Bem]]'s review in ''Psychological Bulletin'' would "not have a clue that serious doubt had been cast on more than a quarter of the studies involved". When Blackmore confronted Sargent, he told her "it wouldn't matter if some experiments were unreliable because, after all, we know that psi exists". Blackmore also recounts having a discussion with Bem at a consciousness conference where she challenged him on his support of Sargent and Honorton's research, he replied "it did not matter". Blackmore writes, "But it does matter. ... It matters because Bem's continued claims mislead a willing public into believing that there is reputable scientific evidence for ESP in the Ganzfeld when there is not".<ref name="Blackmore 2018">{{cite journal |last1=Blackmore |first1=Susan |author-link= Susan Blackmore|title=Daryl Bem and Psi in the Ganzfeld |journal=Skeptical Inquirer |date=2018 |volume=42 |issue=3 |pages=44–45 }}</ref>