From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:11:37 -0700, Anima Rising wrote:   
      
   > Found it - the original staring studies were done at Stanford by Marilyn   
   > Schlitz and Stephen LaBerge!  The skeptic researcher was Richard Wiseman   
   > from the UK.  Here's more:   
   >   
   > In another study at Stanford conducted with Stephen LaBerge, Schlitz   
   > looked at the nature of remote staring. The experiment was set up so that   
   > in one room a person was being monitored by a video camera, while in   
   > another room someone intermittently stared at that person through the   
   > video camera's lens. The two participants were completely shielded from   
   > each other physically. Again, the person being stared at showed a higher   
   > galvanic skin response and greater autonomic nervous activity during the   
   > periods when stared at.   
   >   
   > What made this last set of results even more interesting was what happened   
   > next. To ensure the validity of her data, Schlitz enrolled the assistance   
   > of a skeptical researcher from the University of Hertsfordsher named   
   > Richard Wiseman (a professional magician). Following all of the same   
   > protocols that Schlitz did, Wiseman did not get any significant results.   
   > To see if he had done anything different, Schlitz went to England and did   
   > the experiment together with Wiseman. What they found is that the subjects   
   > who did the experiment with Schlitz got results, while Wiseman's did not.   
   > These findings were repeated in a second study conducted in Schlitz's lab   
   > in California. Altogether, this has led Schlitz to postulate that there is   
   > a significant "experimenter effect" influencing the results. She   
   > conjectures that her own openness and positive attitude, in contrast to   
   > Wiseman's skepticism, does in fact influence the experimental outcome.   
   > Even the skeptic Wiseman now believes there is something significant going   
   > on in the studies, although he is not certain what it is yet. One idea   
   > Schlitz has for the next round of experiments is to have Wiseman interview   
   > and set up the experiment with one group of subjects and then at the last   
   > minute have Schlitz do the actual testing, and vice versa. This way they   
   > can attempt to see if it is the preparation and setting of expectations   
   > that is creating the effect or if it occurs during the actual testing   
   > itself.   
      
   Or he's a conscientious researcher, and she's a kook who wants the   
   hypothesis validated.  (Not that I'm suggesting that for a moment, you   
   understand. ;-)   
      
   Be interesting to have them both do it together, to see who wins!   
      
   BTW, I'm glad to see you're such a fan of the scientific method. ;-)   
      
   --   
   =======================================================================   
   = David    --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get   
   = Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.   
   =======================================================================   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)