DIRT – A2 Mock Anomalistic

Anomalistic section Outline one or more methodological issues related to the use of the Ganzfeld procedure in the study of paranormal cognition (4 marks) Examiners comments- Answers varied in quality, many of the more successful answers focused on sensory leakage and researcher bias. Weaker answers lacked detail or focused on non- methodological issues. No marks for just outlining the procedure

Examiners commentary Students did not always address the requirement to stay focused on coincidence and/or probability and included a range of reasons for Joe’s beliefs that were not in the stem.

Joe started following his local football team when he was ten years old. The first four times he went to a match he wore a special scarf knitted by his mum and each time his team won. For the next match that he went to Joe could not wear the scarf as it was in the wash. His team lost. Joe blamed the defeat on not wearing the scarf. Joe is now 25 and still folllows the same team. Even though they have lost lots of matches he still makes sure he always wears his scarf. He believes it helps his team to win. Use your knowledge of the role of coincidence and/or probability judgements in anomalous experience to explain Joe’s beahviour and his belief in the power of the scarf (10 marks) Task one – Wall boards Apply each of the following explanations to Joe’s theory 1. Probability misjudgement 1.Operant Conditioning 2.Subjective Validation- Cognitive Bias 3.Superstitious behaviour/magical thinking 4.Individual differences related to superstitious behaviour 5.Multiple End Points/Law of truly large numbers

Discuss psychological research studies that have investigated psychic healing. [4 marks + 6 marks] “Evaluation was usually a little generic and few students achieved full marks for commentary because of this.” You will be given examples of generic evaluation points Improve these to form a full mark evaluation

Relevant points include: Controlled studies usually find no support for psychic healing, but provide evidence for significant placebo effects Single case studies provide support for psychic healing, but are usually methodologically unsound, eg lack of control for the natural healing process or for placebo effects Single case studies rarely satisfy Randi’s (1987) criteria for valid studies of psychic healing. Wirth’s work on TT has failed to be replicated, even by Wirth. Cha has subsequently been accused of plagiarism, and Wirth himself convicted of criminal fraud, raising serious doubts about the validity of their findings Lyvers et al (2006), in a study of psychic healing at a distance, found no objective evidence for psychic healing, but also that ‘believers’ thought they had improved

Further studies include Wirth’s work (Wirth, 1990) on therapeutic touch (TT), which claimed to show that TT speeded up wound healing. Also from Wirth’s group, Cha et al., (2001) studied the power of prayer in helping women being treated for infertility become pregnant. They found that twice as many women prayed for by strangers became pregnant, compared with those women not prayed for.

Most believers in psychic healing are convinced that it works because of individual cases. There are many recorded cases of people who have recovered after receiving psychic healing. When such cases have been analysed, for instance by James Randi, doubt can be cast on whether psychic healing has really occurred. Randi (1987) offers criteria to test whether a true psychic healing event has occurred. He suggests that The disease must not normally be self terminating The recovery must be complete There must be no other medical treatment administered There is adequate medical opinion that the disease was present before the application There is adequate medical opinion that the disease is not present after the healing.

Evaluation of the methodology ‘tension headache’ was operationalised by very distinct symptoms which made sure that participants were suffering in the same way. (Positive) The assessment of whether participants meet the definition of feeling better can be subjective on the part of the participant and the researcher, although some studies do take other observable and objective measurements into account Sample sizes are usually not large enough to be able to generalise results to the larger population Volunteer sampling is the least representative sample type as participants who are keen to take part may all be of a particular type which may bias the results. The single blind technique meant that participants did not know what to expect. They all went through the same process, but did not know whether they were receiving healing treatment or not. There could have been a psychosomatic effect. If participants thought they would get better and do so regardless of the healer’s thought during the procedure. The placebo effect is known to be a powerful one. The idea that people are born with special powers of healing goes against known scientific experience. Ethical issues - The participants did not know which group they were assigned to so there was an element of deception involved. There may have been some apprehension on the part of some of the participants. Wider reaching ethical issues include concerns about people who use psychic healing are not using conventional medicine that has been rigorously scientifically tested.

Example 1 Lyvers study supported the placebo effect. A strength of Lyvers study was that it was a controlled environment with no outside influences effecting the participants scores. This is a strength because it means the study was high in Internal validity

Example 2 This was a single case study which supports psychic healing but which cannot be generalised as it has low population validity

Example 3 Wirth’s work cannot be replicated and there is unreliable and Wirth himself convicted of criminal fraud