Posted: Jul 07, 2014 5:44 pm
by Transilvanian
p. 36:

The results of the overall SRI analysis are
consistent with results of similar experiments in other laboratories. For instance, an overview of
forced choice precognition experiments (Honorton and Ferrari, 1989) found an average "effect
size" per experimenter of 0.033, whereas all forced choice experiments at SRI resulted in a similar
effect size of .052. [...]

Methodologically sound remote viewing has not been undertaken at other laboratories, but a
similar regime called the ganzfeld (described in more detail in Chapter 5) has shown to be
similarly successful. The largest collection of ganzfeld experiments was conducted from 1983 to
1989 at the Psychophysical Research Laboratories in Princeton, NJ. Those experiments were also reported by separating novices from experienced subjects. The overall effect size for novice
remote viewing at SRI was 0.164, while the effect size for novices in the ganzfeld at PRL was a
very similar 0.17. For experienced remote viewers at SRI the overall effect size was 0.385; for
experienced viewers in the ganzfeld experiments it was 0.35. These consistent results across
laboratories help refute the idea that the successful experiments at any one lab are the result of
fraud, sloppy protocols or some methodological problem and also provide an indication of what
can be expected in future experiments.

How is possible, that overall results have found 0.052 effect size, but separately, novice and experimented have found bigger effect size??