Enhanced mind-matter interactions following rTMS induced frontal lobe inhibition

Freedman, Morris; Binns, Malcolm A.; Meltzer, Jed A.; Hashimi, Rohila; Chen, Robert

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2023.10.016

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, any evidence challenging the “deficit hypothesis” as it relates to their own cognition about the legitimacy of psi phenomena should be highlighted. On the other hand, skeptics' engagement with psi research, which is increasingly finding its way into psychology and related journals (Bösch et al, 2006 ; Bem, 2011 ; Cardeña, 2018 ; Freedman et al, 2023 ), will benefit from viewing psi researchers as fellow academics who may disagree rather than individuals prioritizing belief over evidence (Reber and Alcock, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the survey's framing around “consciousness surviving bodily death,” rather than as a survey of “elite scientists” (McClenon, 1982 ), may have skewed responses. Nevertheless, academic research on psi phenomena dates back to the nineteenth century and continues today, yielding some studies published in psychology and neuroscience journals (Bösch et al, 2006 ; Storm et al, 2010 ; Bem, 2011 ; Cardeña, 2018 ; Freedman et al, 2023 ). In stark contrast to academics more generally, most researchers in the field of psi appear to endorse the reality of psi, estimating its likelihood at an average of 79% (Irwin, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cognitive styles and psi: psi researchers are more similar to skeptics than to lay believers

Pehlivanova,

Weiler,

Greyson

2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionBelief in psi, which includes psychic phenomena such as extra-sensory perception and post-mortem survival, is widespread yet controversial. According to one of the leading and perhaps most tested hypotheses, high belief in psi can be explained by differences in various aspects of cognition, including cognitive styles. Most of this research has been conducted with lay individuals. Here, we tested the hypothesis that academic researchers who investigate psi may exhibit different cognitive styles than lay individuals interested in psi, and are more similar to skeptics.MethodsWe measured two cognitive styles—actively open-minded thinking (AOT) and the need for closure (NFC)—and assessed differences among four heterogeneous groups regarding belief in psi and involvement in related research. Specifically, our study included academic psi researchers (N = 44), lay individuals who believe in psi (N = 32), academics who are skeptics of psi (N = 35), and lay individuals who are skeptics (N = 33).ResultsWe found group differences in AOT (p = 0.003) but not in NFC scores (p = 0.67). Post hoc tests showed no significant difference in AOT scores between academics who conduct psi research (4.5 ± 0.3) and academic skeptics (4.5 ± 0.3; p = 0.91) or lay skeptics (4.5 ± 0.4; p = 0.80). The lay psi group had significantly lower AOT scores (4.2 ± 0.4) than the other three groups (ps: 0.005–0.04), indicating a decreased willingness to consider a range of evidence when forming an opinion, including evidence that challenges their beliefs. AOT was negatively associated with psi belief in the two skeptic groups combined (r = −0.29, p = 0.01), but not in the psi groups (r = −0.03, p = 0.78).DiscussionOur research shows that academics who work with psi differ from lay psi individuals, but not from skeptics, in actively open-minded thinking. In other words, despite their high belief in psi phenomena, psi researchers demonstrate a commitment to sound reasoning about evidence that is no different from that of skeptics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive styles and psi: psi researchers are more similar to skeptics than to lay believers

Pehlivanova,

Weiler,

Greyson

2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still other trends in psychology have emerged, such as that of Nummenmaa et al [6], who were able to link basic emotions with culturally universal sensory body maps, further linking cognition, body, and emotion. Mounting evidence of so-called 'psi' phenomena [7,8] which outright contradict any dualism between mind and body, has continued to accumulate.…”

Section: The Embodied Nature Of the Mindmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Spontaneous Symbolism in Psychotherapy Using Embodied Thought

Goodwyn

2024

Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spontaneous, unwilled subjective imagery and symbols (including dreams) often emerge in psychotherapy that can appear baffling and confound interpretation. Early psychoanalytic theories seemed to diverge as often as they agreed on the meaning of such content. Nevertheless, after reviewing key findings in the empirical science of spontaneous thought as well as insights gleaned from neuroscience and especially embodied cognition, it is now possible to construct a more coherent theory of interpretation that is clinically useful. Given that thought is so thoroughly embodied, it is possible to demonstrate that universalities in human physiology yield universalities in thought. Such universalities can then be demonstrated to form a kind of biologically directed universal “code” for understanding spontaneous symbolic expressions that emerge in psychotherapy. An example is given that illustrates how this can be applied to clinical encounters.

show abstract

“…

A recent study (Freedman et al, 2023) claims that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the frontal cortex enables paranormal "Psi" abilities in human participants. They could apparently influence the output of an external random number generator by focusing their mind, effectively willing an arrow shown on a screen to move.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implausible paraneuroscience - A commentary on Freedman et al. (2023)

Schwarzkopf

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent study (Freedman et al., 2023) claims that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the frontal cortex enables paranormal “Psi” abilities in human participants. They could apparently influence the output of an external random number generator by focusing their mind, effectively willing an arrow shown on a screen to move. I was initially surprised to see this study published in Cortex, the very journal that first brought the world the Registered Reports format (Chambers, 2013) and which is widely regarded as a pioneer of rigorous open science practices1. But in the interest of academic freedom, researchers should have space to pursue seemingly crazy hypotheses, provided the research is ethical. Blocking research simply because it doesn’t conform to our current understanding would be committing the same hubris that led past scholars to reject tectonic plates or germ theory. That said, irrespective of its parapsychological nature, there are considerable problems with the scientific validity of this study.

show abstract

Enhanced mind-matter interactions following rTMS induced frontal lobe inhibition

Cited by 10 publications

References 25 publications

Cognitive styles and psi: psi researchers are more similar to skeptics than to lay believers

Cognitive styles and psi: psi researchers are more similar to skeptics than to lay believers

Understanding Spontaneous Symbolism in Psychotherapy Using Embodied Thought

Implausible paraneuroscience - A commentary on Freedman et al. (2023)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About