Julie Beischel writes in “Beyond Reasonable: Scientific Evidence for Survival,” her prize-winning essay in the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies competition:
UVO**-III Study: Quantitative Analysis
For the UVO-III Study, our aim was to see if mediums’ reports of differentiating between the two psi experiences would hold up under blinded and controlled laboratory conditions. The goal was to see if empirical research findings would mirror what was found during the previous qualitative and quantitative phenomenological studies. (Are you on the edge of your seat?!) Again, because somatic psi is a theoretical construct and is not an experience that mediums report having, it cannot be requested of participants during an experiment. Therefore, psychic readings for the living serve here again as the best surrogate experience to include during research. The UVO-III Study examined—under randomized, counter-balanced, and blinded conditions with prescreened participants—the phenomenology of mediumship readings for deceased targets in which survival psi is used and of psychic readings for living targets in which ‘regular’ psi (i.e., telepathy, clairvoyance, and/or precognition) is used.
The UVO-III Study examined the experiences of 10 WCRMs who had previously demonstrated AIR (anomalous information reception; reporting accurate information about the deceased under blinded conditions with no feedback or any shenanigans). The 10 WCRMs participated in two counter-balanced experimental conditions: a blinded reading for a living target and a blinded reading for a deceased target. After each condition they completed a questionnaire about their experiences. The reading conditions were recorded phone sessions in which only the blinded medium and a blinded experimenter were on the phone.
At the start of each reading, the WCRM was given the first name of a target person by an experimenter. Targets could be living or could be deceased. WCRMs had been given these instructions at the beginning of the study: “You will be randomly assigned two readings. Each of the readings may be a psychic reading for a living target or a mediumship reading for a deceased target. That is, you may read for two living people, two deceased people, or one of each.” When directly asked by my scientifically-minded research participants how we would see any differences in conditions when they might read for two living or two deceased targets, they were told that combining the results from all the participants would allow us to see differences when averages were compared. In reality, they each read for one living target and one deceased target. The experimenter on the phone with them was also blinded to which names were living targets and which were deceased.
After being given the first name of a target, the WCRMs were asked questions about the target’s physical appearance, personality, and hobbies and asked to provide any other relevant information. The questions were identical regardless of whether a target was living or deceased. This ensured that the medium and the experimenter stayed blinded to whether a given target was living or deceased.
During 19 of the 20 readings in the UVO-III Study, the WCRM mentioned their impressions regarding whether the named target was living or deceased. In a statistically significant portion (14 of 19, 74%), those impressions were accurate (50% is what could be expected from guessing). Six of the 10 WCRMs were able to accurately determine the status of the targets in both of their readings.
After each reading condition, the WCRMs completed a questionnaire called the Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory about their experiences. The WCRMs were told, “It is essential that you simply attempt to answer each question during the reading and then fill out the PCI about that experience.” The PCI is a widely used valid and reliable 53-item questionnaire that quantifies 26 different aspects of consciousness grouped into 12 major and 14 minor dimensions. WCRMs also completed PCIs after an initial baseline condition and after a control condition.
When all four conditions (baseline, control, living target reading, deceased target reading) were compared statistically, differences were seen in the PCI scores reflecting the experiences of the reading conditions as compared to the scores reflecting the experiences of the baseline and control conditions. That is, the psi readings induced experiential situations that were quantitatively different from the WCRMs’ normal, usual waking consciousness (represented by baseline and control conditions). Similar to previous research, the reading conditions created changes in the mediums’ level of mental imagery, in the focus of their mental attention, and in their subjective sense of the passage of time.
The two different types of psi readings, however, were similar to each other in their PCI profiles. And this is what we expected. Psi is an anomalous situation and its variants can only be so different. Also, the PCI was not designed to capture differences between mediumistic and psychic experiences. It may not be able to measure the “phenomenological variables that are fundamental constituents of mediumistic states”. We may need to specifically develop an instrument or method that can capture the nuanced differences between mediumistic and psychic experiences in order to accurately capture the holistic nature of psi. However, one of the dimensions the PCI does quantify is love and that is important here.
 |
| Kim Russo |
Mediums anecdotally talk about feelings of love related to mediumship readings. When, years ago, I informally asked the mediums on my team about their experiences, their responses often focused on love. For example, Joanne Gerber reported that, “The energy of love is the bond between the physical and spiritual worlds”. Kim Russo described mediumship readings as including “many emotions running through my body... especially love. The emotion of love comes to me in the strongest way".
When all four conditions (baseline, control, living target reading, deceased target reading) were compared statistically, differences were seen in the PCI scores reflecting the experiences of the reading conditions as compared to the scores reflecting the experiences of the baseline and control conditions. That is, the psi readings induced experiential situations that were quantitatively different from the WCRMs’ normal, usual waking consciousness (represented by baseline and control conditions). Similar to previous research, the reading conditions created changes in the mediums’ level of mental imagery, in the focus of their mental attention, and in their subjective sense of the passage of time.
The two different types of psi readings, however, were similar to each other in their PCI profiles. And this is what we expected. Psi is an anomalous situation and its variants can only be so different. Also, the PCI was not designed to capture differences between mediumistic and psychic experiences. It may not be able to measure the “phenomenological variables that are fundamental constituents of mediumistic states”. We may need to specifically develop an instrument or method that can capture the nuanced differences between mediumistic and psychic experiences in order to accurately capture the holistic nature of psi. However, one of the dimensions the PCI does quantify is love and that is important here.
* WCRMs stands for Windbridge Certified Research Mediums
** UVO stands for sUrvival psi Vs sOmatic psi examinations
Dr. Julie Beischel is the Director of Research at the Windbridge Research Center. She received her PhD in Pharmacology and Toxicology with a minor in Microbiology and Immunology from the University of Arizona and uses her interdisciplinary training to apply the scientific method to controversial topics. For over 15 years, Dr. Beischel has worked full-time studying mediums: individuals who report experiencing communication with the deceased and who regularly, reliably, and on-demand report the specific resulting messages to the living. References cited in her paper are deleted from these excerpts but a full paper with references is available at the Bigelow website (https://bigelowinstitute.org/contest_winners3.php).
No comments:
Post a Comment