Researchers: Debra Lynne Katz &amp; Michelle Freed Bulgatz, Data Analyst: Nancy McLaughlin-WalterPublisher: Eight Martinis | Issue 15AbstractIn this double-blind Associative Remote Viewing Project, 41 moderate to highly experienced Remote Viewers were tasked with describing a feedback photo they would see at a future date. The photo was to be associated with the winner of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Researchers compared the remote viewers’ written transcripts to a set of four photos– two associated with to the Republican and Democratic frontrunners, one with a third-party candidate opinion, and one with an impossible opinion that served as the control group. A formal prediction was issued for a short period with some viewers being exposed to it and some not, to assess whether exposure to a potentially wrong prediction might result in displacement to the wrong photo. Other variables such as viewer preferences and voting behaviors were also assessed. Based on the suggestion to reject the null hypothesis during the hypothesis test summary a Wilcoxon test was conducted to assess the judge’s scoring value of viewer transcript across photos. The results indicated a significant difference where z= -3.147, p&lt;.01. The mean of the ranks of Hilary (the popular vote front-runner) was 13.71, while the mean of the ranks in favor of Trump (the electoral vote front-runner) was 17.28. Results indicated that rather than describing the photo the remote viewers consciously saw at the future date, they instead tuned into photos they would not see. Why did this happen? Is a large group consensus-based approach really the best to use in projects such as these? And what does this mean for the future of Associative Remote Viewing projects that encounter similar incidents of displaced psi despite what seems to be a logical and theoretically sound design?<a target="_blank" href="https://www.debrakatz.com/s/Election_Article_Eight_Martinis_pdf.pdf">Click here to access entire article by PDF</a>

Predicting the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Using a Double-Blind Associative Remote Viewing Protocol

Read articles, tips, and resources to help you learn, grow, and succeed. Explore our latest posts covering education, community, and personal growth

Blog – Insights, Tips & Resources for Learning and Growth

Explore articles, tips, and insights to help you succeed in learning, community building, and personal development.

Blog – Learn, Grow & Get Inspired

English

Unlimited

CaslonPro-Regular

MinionPro-Regular

MinionPro-Medium

MinionPro-Semibold

MinionPro-Bold

Figtree

First Name

Last Name

Email

City

What is your background with the subject matter?

What are your goals for this class or program?

Dashboard

Profile

Memberships

Courses

Coaching Programs

Bundle Courses

Communities

Groups

Digital Products

Physical Products

Live Products

Video Library

Audio Library

Events

Appointments

Premium Pages

Certificates

Badges

Order History

Coin History

Organization Orders

Subscription

Affiliate Dashboard

Settings

Billing

debrakatz

Primary Menu

Predicting the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Using a Double-Blind Associative Remote Viewing Protocol

Predicting the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Using a Double-Blind Associative Remote Viewing Protocol

Related Posts

Merten J. Mandeville Library of Parapsychology and Occultism Explorations and Adventures in Library Research at the University of Illinois

A 50 year history of remote viewing

Fridays with Ingo: Scientist and Psychic

Remote Viewing: A 1974- 2022 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis