Distorted visions 2

December 17, 2004

Given his propensity for talking to the press about his unrefereed work, it is ironic that Richard Wiseman dismisses my web commentary on his research for being unrefereed.

It is because of his tendency to ask subjects to "jump high" and then to announce that they have failed, as well as his carelessness in experimental design (in this case, some of the medical conditions of the subjects were ones that Natasha Demkina had in the past had difficulties with), that parapsychologists are doubtful about Wiseman's approach.

Simply to have stated that the investigation had not definitively confirmed Natasha's claims would have been unproblematic, but the investigators also drew the further, scientifically unwarranted, conclusion that they had r efuted her claims.

Brian Josephson
Professor of physics
Cambridge University

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October

Sponsored

Featured jobs

Senior Lecturer in Law

University Of The West Of England (uwe)

Lecturer in Marketing

Edinburgh Napier University

Resource Planner

Bpp University