MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168587080 · doi:10.2466/pms.2002.94.3.927

Remote Viewing with the Artist Ingo Swann: Neuropsychological Profile, Electroencephalographic Correlates, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Possible Mechanisms

2002· article· en· W2168587080 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Persinger, William G. Roll, S. G. Tiller, Stanley A. Koren, Charles M. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenuePerceptual and Motor Skills · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingNeuroimagingElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceAudiologyCognitive psychologyMedicineCognitionRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, the artist Ingo Swann, who helped develop the process of remote viewing (awareness of distant objects or places without employing normal senses), was exposed during a single setting of 30 min. to specific patterns of circumcerebral magnetic fields that significantly altered his subjective experiences. Several times during subsequent days, he was asked to sit in a quiet chamber and to sketch and to describe verbally distant stimuli (pictures or places) beyond his normal senses. The proportions of unusual 7-Hz spike and slow wave activity over the occipital lobes per trial were moderately correlated (rho=.50) with the ratings of accuracy between these distal, hidden stimuli and his responses. A neuropsychological assessment and Magnetic Resonance Imaging indicated a different structural and functional organization within the parieto-occipital region of the subject's right hemisphere from organizations typically noted. The results suggest that this type of paranormal phenomenon, often dismissed as methodological artifact or accepted as proofs of spiritual existence, is correlated with neurophysiological processes and physical events. Remote viewing may be enhanced by complex experimentally generated magnetic fields designed to interact with the neuromagnetic "binding factor" of consciousness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptual and Motor SkillsSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207