Can We Help Just by Good Intentions? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Distant Intention Effects
📄 Original study ↗📌 Appears in:
Plain English Summary
Can simply wishing someone well from afar actually help them concentrate? In the AFFE experiments (short for "attention focusing facilitation"), a person stares at a candle and hits a button whenever their mind wanders, while a distant helper either sends supportive intentions or does nothing, randomly switching between the two. Pooling eleven studies with 576 sessions from three continents, the meta-analysis found a tiny but statistically real effect (d = 0.11) -- people's focus was slightly better during "help" periods. Here's the kicker: this effect size lines up almost perfectly with two other meta-analyses on related "distant intention" experiments covering 62 total studies, all landing around d = 0.11. That eerie convergence across different labs, methods, and cultures is the strongest card in the argument that distant mental intention does something -- even if that something is small.
Research Notes
The only meta-analysis dedicated to the AFFE paradigm; its convergence with Schmidt et al. 2004's EDA-DMILS and remote-staring meta-analyses at d ~ 0.11 is a central argument in the distant intentionality evidence base and relevant to the distant healing debate (Controversy #5).
Eleven attention focusing facilitation experiments (AFFE) with 576 sessions across three continents were meta-analyzed. In each study, a participant focused on a candle and pressed a button upon noticing mind-wandering, while a remote helper either directed supportive intention or not, following a randomized epoch schedule. A random-effects model yielded d = 0.11 (p = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.22]). Balinese participants pressed the button roughly five times less often than Western participants (p < 0.001), though the culture × condition interaction was not significant. Comparison with two earlier meta-analyses of related DMILS paradigms (EDA-DMILS, d = 0.106; Remote Staring, d = 0.128) revealed convergent effect sizes across 62 studies and 1,970 sessions, suggesting a genuine if small distant-intention effect.
Links
Related Papers
Cites
- The Efficacy of "Distant Healing": A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials — Astin, John A (2000)
- Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in Cardiac Bypass Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Uncertainty and Certainty of Receiving Intercessory Prayer — Benson, Herbert (2006)
- Evidence for Correlations Between Distant Intentionality and Brain Function in Recipients: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis — Achterberg, J (2005)
- Consciousness Interactions with Remote Biological Systems: Anomalous Intentionality Effects — Braud, William G (1991)
Same Research Program
Cited By
Also by these authors
More in Telepathy
Telecommunication Telepathy: A Meta-Analysis
Rethinking Communication and Consciousness: Lessons from The Telepathy Tapes Podcast
Who's Calling? Evaluating the Accuracy of Guessing Who Is on the Phone
A Comparison of Four New Automated Telephone Telepathy Tests
Detecting Telepathy: A Meta-Analysis for Extrasensory Perception Experiments in Last 20 Years
📋 Cite this paper
Schmidt, Stefan (2012). Can We Help Just by Good Intentions? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Distant Intention Effects. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2011.0321
@article{schmidt_2012_help,
title = {Can We Help Just by Good Intentions? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Distant Intention Effects},
author = {Schmidt, Stefan},
year = {2012},
journal = {Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine},
doi = {10.1089/acm.2011.0321},
}