Information and Uncertainty in Remote Perception Research
📄 Original study📌 Appears in:
Plain English Summary
For 25 years, the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) lab asked volunteers to psychically describe faraway locations being visited by a partner. After 653 trials with 72 people, the results were striking: a statistical score so strong (p = 3 in 100 million) that chance alone basically can't explain it. Even wilder, it didn't matter how far away the target was or whether the attempt happened before or after the visit. But here's the twist — as the researchers sharpened their scoring tools to pin down exactly what was happening, the effect got smaller. They call this 'uncertainty complementarity,' suggesting that the harder you try to measure this phenomenon precisely, the more it slips through your fingers. It's a fascinating paradox that may help explain why psi effects so often shrink under tighter lab controls.
Research Notes
The definitive archival publication of the PEAR remote perception program — one of the largest single-laboratory databases in parapsychology. Its 'uncertainty complementarity' thesis directly addresses why psi effects appear to decline under tighter experimental controls, a central question in the replication debate.
Presents the complete results of 25 years of remote perception research at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) laboratory, comprising 653 formal trials by 72 volunteer participants. Percipients attempted to describe unknown geographical targets visited by agents, with 24 analytical scoring methods applied across binary, quaternary, and distributive descriptor formats. The composite database yielded z = 5.418 (p = 3×10⁻⁸), confirming anomalous information acquisition with no attenuation by distance or time. However, progressive refinement of scoring methods correlated with declining effect sizes, suggesting a complementarity between analytical precision and the subjective process generating the anomaly.
Related Papers
Cites
- Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding — Targ, Russell (1974)
- A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research — Puthoff, Harold E (1976)
- Correlations of Random Binary Sequences with Pre-Stated Operator Intention: A Review of a 12-Year Program — Jahn, Robert G (1997)
- Advances in Remote-Viewing Analysis — May, Edwin C (1990)
Same Research Program
- The Persistent Paradox of Psychic Phenomena: An Engineering Perspective — Jahn, Robert G (1982)
- Engineering Anomalies Research — Jahn, Robert G (1987)
- Mind/Machine Interaction Consortium: PortREG Replication Experiments — Jahn, Robert G (2000)
- The PEAR Proposition — Jahn, Robert G (2005)
- Precognitive Remote Viewing in the Chicago Area: A Replication of the Stanford Experiment — Dunne, Brenda J (1979)
- On the Quantum Mechanics of Consciousness, with Application to Anomalous Phenomena — Jahn, Robert G (1986)
Companion
Cited By
- The MegaREG Experiment: Replication and Interpretation — Dobyns, Y. H (2004)
- Remote Viewing as Applied to Futures Studies — Lee, James H (2008)
- The Experimental Evidence for Parapsychological Phenomena: A Review — Cardeña, Etzel (2018)
- Explicit Anomalous Cognition: A Review of the Best Evidence in Ganzfeld, Forced-choice, Remote Viewing and Dream Studies — Baptista, Johann (2015)
- Anomalous Cognition: An Umbrella Review of the Meta-Analytic Evidence — Tressoldi, Patrizio (2021)
Also by these authors
More in Remote Viewing
Exploring the Correlates and Nature of Subjective Anomalous Interactions with Objects (Psychometry): A Mixed Methods Survey
Follow-up on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) Remote Viewing Experiments
The Location and Reconstruction of a Byzantine Structure in Marea, Egypt, Including a Comparison of Electronic Remote Sensing and Remote Viewing
Greg Kolodziejzyk's 13-Year Associative Remote Viewing Experiment Results
Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence: The Case of Non-Local Perception, a Classical and Bayesian Review of Evidences
📋 Cite this paper
Dunne, Brenda J, Jahn, Robert G (2003). Information and Uncertainty in Remote Perception Research. Journal of Scientific Exploration.
@article{dunne_jahn_2003_pear,
title = {Information and Uncertainty in Remote Perception Research},
author = {Dunne, Brenda J and Jahn, Robert G},
year = {2003},
journal = {Journal of Scientific Exploration},
}