Abstract

The majority of academic psychologists, in contrast to college profes­sors from other disciplines, do not yet accept the existence of psi. This article in a leading psychology journal argues that the replication rates and effect sizes achieved using the ganzfeld experimental procedure are now sufficient to warrant the attention of the broader psychological community. Competing meta-analyses of the ganzfeld database are reviewed, one by R. Hyman, a leading critic of psi research, and one by C. Honorton, a leading ganzfeld researcher. Eleven autoganzfeld studies which comply with guidelines jointly authored by Hyman and Honorton are summarized. Issues of replication and theoretical explanations of psi are discussed.