The experimenter effect is something which can only be observed, if at all, by looking at a whole collection of scientific papers on the same subject. It works as follows: the results of experiments are positively correlated with the experimenters' prior expectations of what the results might be. Note that this is not the same as experimenter bias; this is even if the experiments are carried out correctly, using the same procedure each time, and the statistical analysis is exactly the same.
Now many scientists do not believe the experimenter effect exists, but there is evidence for it in the area of paranormal research. Sceptical scientists in this field have very, very rarely come out with 'positive' results, but scientists who suspect whatever phenomenon it is they are testing to be real will often obtain evidence in favour of it.
So, what do people think is going on? Is this itself a paranormal phenomenon, showing that ESP, telepathy etc do exist, but you can't see them unless you believe in them?
Originally posted by AcolyteNo. Even if one could empirically show that this "experimenter effect"
So, what do people think is going on? Is this itself a paranormal phenomenon, showing that ESP, telepathy etc do exist, but you can't see them unless you believe in them?
existed, it would not imply that ESP or telepathy exist, unless you define
the "experimenter effect" to only take the form of some paranormal
phenomenon. It seems to me any such definition of the effect would
be either too vague, too circular, or too useless to test by experiment
- "whatever makes ESP experiments work because ESP doesn't really exist"
doesn't really cut it when you're trying to observe it.
Don't you also find it suspicious that paranormal "researchers"
are the only ones to observe this effect? Out of all the scientific
research that is done in the world, only this small set of experimenters
conicidentally happen to exhibit this phenomenon? And coincidentally,
they happen to do "research" on the paranormal?
I guarantee you can read every biology journal published since
the invention of the printing press and you will not find any
biologists attributing funky growths of their bacteria cultures
to some "experimenter effect."
Cribs
Originally posted by CribsIf you keep looking for the devil you will find him, if he is there or not I believe the old saying goes.
No. Even if one could empirically show that this "experimenter effect"
existed, it would not imply that ESP or telepathy exist, unless you define
the "experimenter effect" to only take the form of some paranormal
phenomenon. It seems to me any such definition of the effect would
be either too vague, too circular, or too useless to test by experimen ...[text shortened]... ributing funky growths of their bacteria cultures
to some "experimenter effect."
Cribs
Originally posted by AcolyteI don't see how all these papers can come into existence in the first place.
The experimenter effect is something which can only be observed, if at all, by looking at a whole collection of scientific papers on the same subject. It works as follows: the results of experiments are positively correlated with the experimenters' prior expectations of what the results might be. Note that this is not the same as experimenter bias; this i ...[text shortened]... n, showing that ESP, telepathy etc do exist, but you can't see them unless you believe in them?
Just get one of these paranormal humans (abnormal?) and say to him:
"Right sonny Jim. Lift that car with your eyes."
X marks a failure.
"Right sonny Jim. What's the national lotteries numbers next week?"
X marks a failure.
"Right sonny Jim. I'm holding up a picture of something. What is it?"
X marks a failure.
I really, really, really, really, really, really don't see how this can be so difficult.
Originally posted by AcolyteUsuallly quite simple.A fair number of experiments don't 'work' - you decide you forgot to add an ingredient or something was off.You decide this when you see results.
The experimenter effect is something which can only be observed, if at all, by looking at a whole collection of scientific papers on the same subject. It works as follows: the results of experiments are positively correlated with the experimenters' prior expectations of what the results might be. Note that this is not the same as experimenter bias; this i ...[text shortened]... n, showing that ESP, telepathy etc do exist, but you can't see them unless you believe in them?
Now if the results are what you expect - you don't usually go around checking expiry dates. Hence a bias.
It is smalll - so it is more evident in the sort of experiments paranormal experimenters work with. A bad run is ignored - the subject was not feeling well or the lab ws noisy so it was not a fair test. A good run is always recorded.