In this thread, we'll be discussing the methodology of the Ganzfeld experiment, its susceptibility to various experimental bias, protocols in place to control for those biases, and what we can gain in terms of experimental evidence in light of those these factors.
I'm going to ask Andy to keep this thread heavily moderated to stay on topic. We'll begin the thread by introducing various biases both in the experimental approach, and in the GRADE approach. And this point, it is senseless to debate on these biases, as they will not necessarily apply to the Ganzfeld. This will be as close to a total ' pool ' of bias we can draw from.
The second portion of this thread will deal with what potential biases actually apply to the Ganzfeld. Bare in mind that this section will not mean they necessarily are present in the experimental execution, but by the very nature of the Ganzfeld methodology, these biases could account for false positives. This portion should be open to debate somewhat, as there may be some disagreement between what should apply and should not, but too much time should not be spent on this section, as most biases are relatively obvious.
The third portion will be dealing with how the protocol controls for these biases. What safeguards are in effect to attempt to give us accurate results?
The last portion will be discussing whether or not the Ganzfeld gives us a high, or low, quality research. This does not mean whether the Ganzfeld was done sloppily or poorly. This has to do with whether there is a high risk of bias in the Ganzfeld. If there is a high risk, this does not necessarily mean that the Ganzfeld can't provide us accurate data; Just that it must be controlled for a lot more rigorously than a methodology that has a low risk of bias. This will be the most heavily debated of the sections.
Please keep responses tasteful and tactful. Keep under the assumption in drafting your replies in this thread that everyone is attempting, in their best efforts, to control their cognitive biases. Likewise, attempt to recognize those biases in yourself when you post a reply. If a term or bias is not clear, attempt hammer that out via private message, or post a brief question on the thread for someone to PM you and explain. We're going to try to prevent this thread from devolving into a deluge of worldview war.
If there's any questions or concerns about the way this communique will be structured, or any suggestions, feel free to post them now before we get started.
I'm going to ask Andy to keep this thread heavily moderated to stay on topic. We'll begin the thread by introducing various biases both in the experimental approach, and in the GRADE approach. And this point, it is senseless to debate on these biases, as they will not necessarily apply to the Ganzfeld. This will be as close to a total ' pool ' of bias we can draw from.
The second portion of this thread will deal with what potential biases actually apply to the Ganzfeld. Bare in mind that this section will not mean they necessarily are present in the experimental execution, but by the very nature of the Ganzfeld methodology, these biases could account for false positives. This portion should be open to debate somewhat, as there may be some disagreement between what should apply and should not, but too much time should not be spent on this section, as most biases are relatively obvious.
The third portion will be dealing with how the protocol controls for these biases. What safeguards are in effect to attempt to give us accurate results?
The last portion will be discussing whether or not the Ganzfeld gives us a high, or low, quality research. This does not mean whether the Ganzfeld was done sloppily or poorly. This has to do with whether there is a high risk of bias in the Ganzfeld. If there is a high risk, this does not necessarily mean that the Ganzfeld can't provide us accurate data; Just that it must be controlled for a lot more rigorously than a methodology that has a low risk of bias. This will be the most heavily debated of the sections.
Please keep responses tasteful and tactful. Keep under the assumption in drafting your replies in this thread that everyone is attempting, in their best efforts, to control their cognitive biases. Likewise, attempt to recognize those biases in yourself when you post a reply. If a term or bias is not clear, attempt hammer that out via private message, or post a brief question on the thread for someone to PM you and explain. We're going to try to prevent this thread from devolving into a deluge of worldview war.
If there's any questions or concerns about the way this communique will be structured, or any suggestions, feel free to post them now before we get started.