Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T20:14:59.180Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Science, pseudoscience, and anomaly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 1998

James E. Alcock
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Glendon College, York University, Toronto, Canada M4N 3M6 jalcock@glendon.yorku.ca www.glendon.yorku.ca/jalcock
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

My criticisms of parapsychology are neither based on its subject matter per se, nor simply on a charge of sloppy research, but rather on the whole pattern of theory and research in this domain. The lack of a positive definition of psi, the use of ad hoc principles such as psi-missing and the experimenter psi effect to account for failures to confirm hypotheses, and the failure to produce a single phenomenon that can be replicated by neutral investigators are among the major problems that keep parapsychology outside regular science. Glicksohn and I agree that anomalous experiences should be investigated.

Type
Author's Response
Copyright
© 1998 Cambridge University Press