Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

iPhone ESP Trainer

Remote viewing research pioneer Russell Targ isn’t getting left behind by the march of technology – he’s just released a new, free iPhone (and iPod touch) app named the ESP Trainer. Originally developed at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) as part of a NASA program, the trainer is meant to help improve ‘psychic talent’ (if such a thing exists – though you can always substitute ‘intuitive awareness’ if it sounds too woo…) by giving feedback to the ‘player’ after each hit or miss in order that they may recognize that ‘psychic’ feeling for future reference. Don’t stress though, there’s no Peter Venkman-style negative feedback:

We have found that people are able to improve their ESP scores by using a machine just like this and get in touch with the part of themselves that is psychic. This is often called a clairvoyant ability, and can enhance your life in many surprising ways.

The player is presented with four colored squares. For each trial, one has been selected at random by the ESP Trainer. Your task is to choose the correct square.

If you succeed, you will hear a chime, feel a vibration, and see a large color picture. Otherwise, the system lights up the correct square, and you proceed with the next trial. The score indicator at the top counts the number of correct choices. Words of encouragement appear as you achieve the scoring levels of 6, 8. 10, 12 or 14 hits. After 24 trials you may begin a new game.

…When you don’t have that special feeling, we encourage you to press the Pass button. (So this is not a “forced choice” test.)

With four targets, and 24 ‘tests’, obviously six correct guesses is the chance result. If you’re like me, you can be anti-psi and get 4 or 5 each time, or perhaps if you’re more intuitive like my wife, you can get 7 or higher each time. Or maybe it’s all simple variation around the chance result and there is no such thing as psi. In any case, Targ does ask any players “frequently scoring 12 or more” to contact him.

I like this a lot. It’s a simple, no-nonsense test with the ability to indicate if any individuals out there truly do have a ‘psychic talent’. By spreading such simple, fun tools freely through Apple’s App Store, more people out there will test themselves and may help to identify future areas/subjects for research into psi. Alternatively, it may also show people that though they might feel like they are able to guess things well, over 24 trials their ‘skill’ tends to work out at chance only.

There is a link on Targ’s page directly to the ESP Trainer in the App Store – you’ll need an iPhone or iPod Touch and version 3.0 or higher of the OS.

So, any Grailers out there able to clock the game?

Editor
  1. ESP Trainer
    I’ve downloaded this app and really enjoy using it. I reckon there should be some kind of automatic feedback to Targ to pick up on trends based on age, location, time of day etc and to see whether results from all users produce an effect larger than what individual users can achieve.

    My scores are consistently between 6 and 8 with an occassional 12 but I’ve tried approaching the test from different angles. Sometimes I use visual clues around me to prompt decisions, sometimes randomly generated numbers and sometimes visualising the boxes flashing randomly and see where they stop. I do seem to get higher scores when I randomly tap the squares in rapid, random succession, i.e. without giving myself time for distracting thought in between.

    I’d love to hear other peoples experiences and whether anybody has experienced methods of increasing their scores.

    1. Random thoughts
      [quote=earthling]You are assuming that the random number generator works right.[/quote]

      Indeed I am. One would hope though that a device aimed at finding deviations from the average, designed by someone with a long history of testing such claims, would do this properly. I therefore blindly have assumed that 6 is a correct indication of the expected average from 24 trials.

      Regardless of that though, I already find it interesting that from 30 to 40 ‘trials’, I average a score of around 5, while my wife averages around 7.5. Interesting because I’ve always found myself overly logical and not at all prone to ‘paranormal’ experiences, while my wife has all the hallmarks of an intuitive/psychic personality (experiencing things like telepathic and precognitive dreams, OBEs etc). Of course, very tentative in terms of the number of tests – hence the ‘interesting’, rather than ‘amazing’.

      1. actually
        actually I was somewhat serious. Making a good random number generator is really difficult. Most of them show repeating patterns, which destroys the randomness.

        In this case repeating patterns could affect the results. This would be interesting in itself – some people might detect the patterns, and follow them. Other people might
        disagree with the patterns, and choose what is ‘supposed to happen’ to even them out. Yet other people might try to follow
        the patterns but get out of phase.

        I am not talking about the random numbers bot being ‘fair’, as in more yellow than green. The common problem with random number generators is repeating sequences.

        Purposely testing with patterns would be quite interesting.

  2. Am I psychic-talented?
    Am I psychic-talented? Who knows; but one thing is certain though: I’m not talented economically-wise to own neither an iPhone nor an iPod Touch :-/

  3. rng’s
    i too do not have the funds to get an iphone or ipod touch. although i think it is a brilliant way to get gen-y and beyond involved. i doubt, however, that too many of them would have the patience to perform enough trials to obtain a significant result.

    if anyone from gen-y would like to jump in an correct my prejudice i would be glad.

    regarding the prior comment about rng’s – i would love to see an experiment in which people try to guess the output (obviously mapped to a small-ish number of choices) of an “improper” rng, compared with a second group who try and guess the outputs for a “real” rng.

    regarding psi in general – i once read (perhaps on dean radin’s blog) that these effects will not obtain wide acceptance until a piece of technology is created which demonstrates them reliably for joe average; i completely agree with this. the path to change is not going to be via academic science publications.

  4. rng’s
    i too do not have the funds to get an iphone or ipod touch. although i think it is a brilliant way to get gen-y and beyond involved. i doubt, however, that too many of them would have the patience to perform enough trials to obtain a significant result.

    if anyone from gen-y would like to jump in and correct my prejudice i would be glad.

    regarding the prior comment about rng’s – i would love to see an experiment in which people try to guess the output (obviously mapped to a small-ish number of choices) of an “improper” rng, compared with a second group who try and guess the outputs for a “real” rng.

    regarding psi in general – i once read (perhaps on dean radin’s blog) that these effects will not obtain wide acceptance until a piece of technology is created which demonstrates them reliably for joe average; i completely agree with this. the path to change is not going to be via academic science publications.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal