A section of psychologists holds preposterous assertions of having first-hand evidence on extra-sensory perception, for instance, dreaming about something that actually happens later and foreseeing the future through mind reading (Plate & Joyce, 2013).The ideology of extra sensory perception was prompted by J. Rhine, a psychologist at the Duke University, by denoting physic abilities that include telepathy and clairvoyance. He elaborates the perception’s trans-temporal operation as being precognition or retrocognition in nature. However, most psychologists have refuted these claims asserting that the concept cannot be tested in the realm of science.
Ingrained in a series of retrospective experiments with particular emphasis on mind reading, this group of psychologist concluded that there is no sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis on the existence of extrasensory perception. Harvard University psychologists being led by Samuel Moulton used neuroimaging in their 2008 experiment to resolve this century-old controversial debate and concluded that extra sensory perception does not exist (McClure & Montague, 2014). In addition, their research employed brain scanning in order to test whether people have knowledge that cannot be accounted for through the normal perceptual processing. Their finds published in the cognitive neuroscience journal indicated that the brain of the participants responded in a similar manner to both extrasensory perception and non-extra sensory perception stimuli thus discrediting the existence of the ESP.
Further extensive research demonstrates that memory can be unreliable resulting to cognitive biases and misinterpretations. The probability laws may prompt coincidences that may appear like extra sensory perceptions. For instance, thinking of a friend whom you have not had a talk with for a while and then receiving a call from that friend may be purely coincidental (Plate & Joyce, 2013). They conclude their study by asserting that the existing hypothesis supporting the existence of extra sensory perception is controversial and methodologically flawed thus cannot be relied upon.
References
McClure, M. & Montague, R. (2014). Extra-sensory perception. Boston: B. Humphries.
Plate, K., & Joyce, G. (2013). Extra sensory perception. CA: Robert V. Fullerton Art Museum, California State University.
