Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries: Going Beyond Even Meta-Analysis of Distant Intention Effects

Important bridge editorial connecting the distant healing/intention literature with the psychokinesis/RNG literature. Bengston argues that Schmidt's DMILS work and PEAR's REG experiments are complementary approaches to studying consciousness-matter interaction. Published in J Altern Complement Med 2012;18(6):525-526. The small effect sizes in both paradigms may reflect the number of consciousnesses involved (multiple operators show additive effects). Calls for next-generation research focused on pattern identification across experimental protocols.

Editorial commentary comparing Stefan Schmidt's meta-analysis of distant intention effects (11 studies, 576 sessions showing small but consistent effect sizes) with the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) laboratory's 30-year program. Schmidt's attention-focusing facilitation experiments (AFFEs) are part of the larger DMILS paradigm. PEAR's work with random-event generators found similarly small effect sizes but with extreme statistical significance from large databases. Key PEAR findings: no attenuation by distance or time, multiple operators producing stronger effects than individuals, and operator intentions correlating with RNG deviations regardless of generation method. Argues that both research programs are studying the same phenomenon from different disciplinary angles, and calls for cross-paradigm integration to identify common patterns rather than continuing to debate existence.