Skip to main content

A Faulty PK Meta-Analysis

Contested
Kugel, Wilfried 2011 Modern Era psychokinesis

📌 Appears in:

Plain English Summary

This paper is a fascinating detective story about a major meta-analysis (a study that pools results from many experiments) on psychokinesis — the supposed ability to influence physical objects with your mind. A 2006 analysis published in a top psychology journal had concluded the evidence for PK was just publication bias (where only positive results get published). But Kugel dug into the actual data files and found serious problems: the database accidentally included about 40 studies on ESP instead of PK, contained made-up statistical scores, and left out big chunks of relevant data. Here is the real kicker — the entire negative conclusion hinged on just three studies from one lab using a possibly malfunctioning random number generator that contributed roughly 100 times more data than everything else combined. Remove those three outliers, and the overall result actually flips to supporting PK. A striking example of how data quality issues can completely reverse a scientific conclusion.

Research Notes

The most detailed published rebuttal to BSB (2006) — the only major PK meta-analysis in a top-tier psychology journal. Uniquely credible because Kugel demonstrates coding errors using his own experimental data that BSB misclassified. Despite folder placement in 10_Skeptical, this paper defends PK evidence against a skeptical conclusion.

Critique of the Bösch, Steinkamp, and Boller (BSB, 2006) PK meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin, which concluded micro-PK evidence was attributable to publication bias. Examination of BSB's original SPSS data files reveals the database included at least 40 ESP (mainly precognition) studies despite being limited to PK, contained fabricated z-scores and arbitrarily coded control data, and excluded substantial portions of the PEAR database. The entire negative overall z-score (z = −3.67) resulted from three PEAR MegaREG studies using a potentially malfunctioning high-speed RNG contributing ~100× more trials than all other studies combined; without these three studies, z = +3.59.

Related Papers

More in Psychokinesis

📋 Cite this paper
APA
Kugel, Wilfried (2011). A Faulty PK Meta-Analysis. Journal of Scientific Exploration.
BibTeX
@article{kugel_2011_faulty_pk_meta,
  title = {A Faulty PK Meta-Analysis},
  author = {Kugel, Wilfried},
  year = {2011},
  journal = {Journal of Scientific Exploration},
}