Remote Mental Influence of Electrodermal Activity

📌 Appears in:

Plain English Summary

Can one person calm or activate another's body just by thinking about it — from a separate room? That's what William Braud tested across 15 experiments at the Mind Science Foundation. A subject sat in a shielded room while an influencer 20 meters away tried to mentally calm or activate them during randomly timed 30-second windows. The subject had no clue when influence was happening. The measure was electrodermal activity — tiny changes in skin conductance reflecting nervous system arousal. With 323 sessions and 271 ordinary community volunteers (not specially selected psychics), the results were striking. Thirteen of 15 experiments pointed in the predicted direction, and 6 were individually significant — 40% versus the 5% expected by chance. Combined, the odds against chance were about 43,000 to 1, with an effect size comparable to accepted findings in mainstream medicine. That unselected people produced these results suggests this might be widely shared. This paper became a cornerstone for later meta-analyses of distant mental influence.

Research Notes

Foundational summary of Braud's 15-experiment DMILS electrodermal series at the Mind Science Foundation. Companion to the fuller Braud & Schlitz (1991) account. Notable for unselected volunteers producing significant effects, a multi-experiment Stouffer combination rarely seen in psi literature at the time, and effect size d=0.29 comparable to biomedical benchmarks. Originally presented at the 1991 Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback conference; published in Journal of Indian Psychology, Vol. 10, 1992, pp. 1-10. Widely cited in subsequent DMILS meta-analyses (Schmidt 2004, Roe 2015).

Reviews 15 experiments testing whether mental intention of one person can influence the electrodermal activity (skin resistance responses, SRR) of another person in a separate, isolated room. Conducted at the Mind Science Foundation, the protocol seated subjects in a shielded room while an influencer 20 m away attempted to mentally calm or activate them during randomly scheduled 30-second periods (10 influence, 10 control per session), with subjects blind to the timing. Data from 323 sessions with 271 subjects and 62 influencers were analyzed using Stouffer's z. Thirteen of 15 experiments yielded results in the expected direction; 6 of 15 (40%) were independently significant at p < .05, versus 5% expected by chance; combined Stouffer z = 4.08, p = .000023; mean effect size d = 0.29. Subjects and influencers were unselected community volunteers, suggesting the effect may be broadly distributed. Traces historical precedents in Soviet psychophysiology (Vasiliev, Bekhterev) and calls for independent laboratory replications.