C. Roe, L. Storm, A. Rock, S. Sherwood, Patrizio E. Tressoldi
{"title":"回应Howard(2018):对“梦ESP研究的元再分析”的评论","authors":"C. Roe, L. Storm, A. Rock, S. Sherwood, Patrizio E. Tressoldi","doi":"10.11588/IJODR.2019.1.59265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dream-ESP is a form of extra-sensory perception (ESP) in which a dreaming perceiver ostensibly gains information about a randomly selected target without using the normal sensory modalities or logical inference. We conducted a meta-analysis on dream-ESP studies (dating from 1966 to 2016), and found a number of significant effects indicating support for the ESP hypothesis (Storm et al., 2017). Howard (2018) critiqued our study, and found much weaker effects based on a re-analysis of our data, to which he applied inverse-variance weights to the study values. Although Howard replicated a number of our findings, his other findings can be challenged. We discuss meta-analytic approaches, including the controversial issues of publication bias and what to do with outliers, and we present some re-analyses.","PeriodicalId":38642,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Dream Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"147-152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response to Howard (2018): Comments on ‘A Meta-Reanalysis of Dream-ESP Studies’\",\"authors\":\"C. Roe, L. Storm, A. Rock, S. Sherwood, Patrizio E. Tressoldi\",\"doi\":\"10.11588/IJODR.2019.1.59265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dream-ESP is a form of extra-sensory perception (ESP) in which a dreaming perceiver ostensibly gains information about a randomly selected target without using the normal sensory modalities or logical inference. We conducted a meta-analysis on dream-ESP studies (dating from 1966 to 2016), and found a number of significant effects indicating support for the ESP hypothesis (Storm et al., 2017). Howard (2018) critiqued our study, and found much weaker effects based on a re-analysis of our data, to which he applied inverse-variance weights to the study values. Although Howard replicated a number of our findings, his other findings can be challenged. We discuss meta-analytic approaches, including the controversial issues of publication bias and what to do with outliers, and we present some re-analyses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Dream Research\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"147-152\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Dream Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11588/IJODR.2019.1.59265\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Dream Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11588/IJODR.2019.1.59265","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
做梦ESP是一种超感官感知(ESP)形式,做梦的感知者表面上获得关于随机选择的目标的信息,而不使用正常的感官模式或逻辑推理。我们对做梦的ESP研究(1966年至2016年)进行了荟萃分析,发现了一些显著的影响,表明支持ESP假说(Storm et al.,2017)。霍华德(2018)批评了我们的研究,并根据对我们数据的重新分析发现效果要弱得多,他将逆方差权重应用于研究值。尽管霍华德复制了我们的一些发现,但他的其他发现可能会受到质疑。我们讨论了元分析方法,包括有争议的出版偏见问题和如何处理异常值,并提出了一些重新分析。
Response to Howard (2018): Comments on ‘A Meta-Reanalysis of Dream-ESP Studies’
Dream-ESP is a form of extra-sensory perception (ESP) in which a dreaming perceiver ostensibly gains information about a randomly selected target without using the normal sensory modalities or logical inference. We conducted a meta-analysis on dream-ESP studies (dating from 1966 to 2016), and found a number of significant effects indicating support for the ESP hypothesis (Storm et al., 2017). Howard (2018) critiqued our study, and found much weaker effects based on a re-analysis of our data, to which he applied inverse-variance weights to the study values. Although Howard replicated a number of our findings, his other findings can be challenged. We discuss meta-analytic approaches, including the controversial issues of publication bias and what to do with outliers, and we present some re-analyses.