Abstract

The present authors (see PA, Vol 73:5166, 5165, respectively) emphasize their points of agreement on parapsychological research. It is agreed that there is an overall significant effect in this database that cannot reasonably be explained by selective reporting or multiple analysis. The degree to which the effect constitutes evidence for psi is still an area of disagreement, but it is agreed that the final verdict awaits the outcome of future experiments conducted by a broader range of investigators and according to more stringent standards. Recommendations about how such experiments should be conducted and reported are made. Specific recommendations are about randomization, judging and feedback procedures, multiple analysis and statistics, documentation, and the growing role meta-analysis will play in the evaluation of research quality and the assessment of moderating variables.