Australian Journal of Parapsychology
Book Reviews Parapsychology: A Beginner’s Guide. By Caroline Watt (2016). London: Oneworld. 226 pages. ISBN: 978-1-78074887-0 (pb). (USD$14.99). Caroline Watt is a well-known parapsychologist in the UK. In 2016 she was appointed to the Koestler Chair for Parapsychology at the University of Edinburgh, which had been left vacant since the passing of her mentor Robert Morris in 2004. When the Koestler Parapsychology Unit was founded in 1985 she was one of the founding members. Watt started working as a research assistant to Morris and has remained in the field. Together with Harvey Irwin she co-authored the 5th edition of An Introduction to Parapsychology, which was published in 2007. The year after, Watt launched a distance introductory parapsychology course. More recently she contributed a book to the Oneworld beginner’s guide series, about parapsychology: that book is the subject of this review. In addition to a readable wide-ranging review of research the book includes an appendix about how laypersons can conduct experiments, a glossary, and an index. Watt also recommends some further reading. Proper citations and references are not given, parapsychologists should however be familiar with most of the research and there are usually clues in the text so that it should not be too difficult to find specific studies. The book starts with an explanation of terms and misconceptions about parapsychology. Watt then traces the development of parapsychology from the rise of spiritualism, sparked by the Fox sisters in 1848, outlines the foundation of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) in 1882, and mentions some of its early work. The introduction also briefly covers the telepathy studies with the Creery sisters, who were tested several times during a six-year period. Eventually it was discovered that two of the sisters signalled each other. Watt concludes: “These sorts of investigations highlight a key aspect of research into strong psychic claims, namely that those carrying out such work need to understand the psychology of deception” (p. 7). Psychical researchers would agree with Watt’s conclusion, but some would point out that the First Report on Thought-Reading (i.e., Barrett, Gurney & Myers, 1882) in which some of the tests with the Creery sisters are described, makes two things clear: First, its introduction shows that the researchers were aware of the possibility of unconscious cueing and the kind of signalling employed by entertainers who simulate telepathy. Second, the report makes it clear that the Creery sisters, in some cases, 92
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
achieved successes even when none of the family members were with the agents when the target was chosen: This fact is often omitted in the literature. Barrett never accepted that the detected fraud invalidated all results and this provoked friction within the SPR (Gauld, 1968, p. 148). Watt provides a brief overview of both the evidence for psi and the criticism of the research. Given the limited space this is understandably a very difficult task. The reader is quite often left with just the conclusion that opinions about the evidence differed. For example, a paragraph is devoted to Coover’s (1917) telepathy studies at Stanford University. The reader learns that Coover reported that he found no evidence for psi and that his conclusion was disputed, but the reason for the dispute is not revealed. Coover used a significance cut-off that made significant results very unlikely and regarded what in practice was a clairvoyance condition as a control condition (e.g., see Thouless, 1935): The reader is left to find this out. Research with psychics is reviewed, and Watt explains the psychology of deception. Her review includes the psychics Nina Kulagina, Uri Geller, D. D. Home, Ted Serios, and Katie (the Gold Leaf Lady), along with the gurus Sai Baba and Swami Premananda. Space is also devoted to research with the often fraudulent mini-Gellers, children who claimed to be able to bend metal with PK. Concerning the latter, Watt claims that John Taylor “. . . quickly discovered that they could only produce their feats when unobserved” (p. 24). This was however not really the case (Taylor, 1975), but according to the formal report metal-bending occurred when the conditions were lax (Balanovski & Taylor, 1978). Watt mentions Taylor’s recantation of his endorsement, but not that it was likely partly due the lack of evidence he found for his pet theory of psi phenomena (involving electromagnetism). Taylor considered his theory to offer the only feasible explanation for psi (see Taylor & Balanovski, 1979). Somewhat surprisingly space is devoted to the largely forgotten Hydrick, perhaps best known for having fraudulently made pages in open books turn while claiming that it was due to PK. Hydrick is currently residing in a locked psychiatric hospital and has a fascinating history (e.g., see Millard, 2014), which Watt due to the limited space cannot do justice. The story about Hydrick suggests that when such persons are taken seriously they may start to become guru-like. He is however mainly included because one can learn about the psychology of deception by studying fraudulent psychics. The psychology of deception was a topic of interest to Robert Morris and also to some of the Ph.D. students he mentored, including Richard Wiseman, Christopher Roe, and Peter Lamont. Watt clearly recognises its importance and the sections about the psychology of deception are, in general, good and includes sensible commentary. Her partner Wiseman is a 93
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
magician, who has done research on the subject, and the book sometimes reminds one of his book Paranormality (Wiseman, 2011). Watt reproduces the magician James Randi’s tongue-in-cheek advice to people with a desire to predict future events. She also briefly explains cold and hot reading, techniques used by fraudulent psychics and mediums. To some extent such techniques may be used unwittingly and are perhaps also sometimes unintentionally learnt. In addition, Watt paraphrases Morris’s (1986) guidelines about how to minimize the risk of subject fraud. Watt mentions psychic detectives, and gives a brief description of Hendrik Boerenkamp’s research with psychics.1 She concludes that the main value of the research with psychics has been a better understanding of the psychology of deception. Some may however argue that although psychic detectives more often than not provide little useful or accurate information there are a few exceptions (e.g., Playfair & Keen, 2004), and that Watt should have highlighted one of them rather than waste space on celebrity mediums. That said, most readers are (hopefully) more likely to see mediums on television or encounter psychic readers than they are to consult a psychic detective, and confirmed success stories involving the latter do seem to be quite rare. Some space is devoted to remote viewing, but Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ have been omitted from the history. In addition, the current large interest in remote viewing is not mentioned, there are currently at least two journals devoted to the topic: Aperture and Eight Martinis. The book also covers animal psi, but the paragraph about dogs who seem to sense when their owners are coming home barely leaves the reader wiser. Watt describes the well-known investigations of the mind-reading horse Lady Wonder. During the first investigation the researchers observed evidence for telepathy (Rhine & Rhine, 1929a), but during the second investigation it was evident that the horse was just responding to cues (Rhine & Rhine, 1929b). It has been all too easy for skeptics to declare that the Rhines’ will to believe in psychic phenomena had let sensory cues go unobserved in the first tests … Nevertheless … It neglects the fact that in 1927 the Rhines had still been emerging from a mood of skepticism and disillusionment with psychical research, it also overlooks the Rhines’ alertness to the dangers posed by sensory cues and their conscious attempts to overcome them. (Mauskopf & McVaugh, 1980, p. 84)
1 The results of Boerenkamp’s research were published in the European Journal of Parapsychology in the 1980s and were summarized in his Ph.D. dissertation: A study of paranormal impressions of psychics. 94
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
Watt notes that the magician Milbourne Christopher visited Lady Wonder in 1956. He was given an unusually small writing pad and a long pencil by the horse’s owner Mrs. Fonda. The magician found that he could cause the horse to select the wrong number by simply pretending to write it and concluded that Fonda used an old technique known as pencil reading and signalled the horse. Christopher (1970) assumed that the conditions had been the same when the horse had been tested in the late 1920s, and concluded that the Rhines must have been fooled. Watt’s description also leaves the reader with this impression. Although it is tempting to assume that all was fraud, Louisa Rhine recalled that her husband had been aware of the possibility of pencil reading and had shielded the pencil (Brian, 1982). In an informative section about mediumship the reader is taken back to the Fox sisters, D. D. Home, Indridi Indridason, and Leonora Piper. Watt notes: “Mid- to late-Victorian society was one of repressed sexuality. The popularity of séances is therefore perhaps unsurprising. Mediums were often young, attractive and female . . .” (p. 63). She could have noted that spiritualism has, in recent years, received an increased amount of attention in academia and the literature on the topic is now overwhelming. Watt describes both Faraday’s well-known table-tipping experiment and Davey’s investigation of the (un)reliability of eyewitness testimony. She acknowledges both the amount of fraud that occurred in séances and that a few mediums, who participated in research, were never caught cheating. However, according to her, the conclusions of modern overviews of mediumship research are basically that the studies that gave evidence for survival after bodily death (or psi) were flawed and that the well-controlled studies generally gave no convincing evidence. A few pages are devoted to cases suggestive of reincarnation, but more space is given to out-of-body experiences and near-death experiences. Watt describes both psychological and neuroscientific attempts to understand such experiences. Two well-known parapsychological experiments are also described: the study of “Miss Z” (Tart, 1968), and one involving the psychic Harary and a cat (Morris et al., 1978). Watt claims that “. . . other researchers have failed to follow up on this work, and so there is not yet consistent evidence . . .” (p. 88). That said, Tart’s study inspired a follow-up study (Krippner & Zirinsky, 1971; also described in Krippner, 1996). Interest in out-of-body experiences also increased in the 1970s, and research was conducted both with groups of people (e.g., see Palmer, 1978) and with psychics (e.g., see Rogo, 1978, 1986). In addition, the formal report about the experiments with Harary omitted some curious observations (e.g., see Rogo, 1986).
95
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
In the section about near-death experiences, Watt describes the AWARE2 study (Parnia et al., 2014): It took seven years to conduct, and involved over a thousand shelves being installed above head height in critical and acute medical wards. To test claims of visual awareness during unconsciousness, various visual symbols were placed on the shelves. Of 2,040 cardiac arrest events, 140 survivors went on to be interviewed for the study. No evidence was found that any of the survivors had perceived the concealed symbols … (p. 102)
Nevertheless many argue that one cannot just dismiss the number of spontaneous cases which involve veridical perception as mere anecdotes (e.g., see Rivas, Driven & Smit, 2016). In general, Watt appears to be sceptical of both evidence for survival after bodily death and psi, she thinks “… that there is sufficient evidence to justify further work, but not enough to conclude that paranormal abilities exist” (p. 2). Emphasis in the book is on normal causes for psychic experiences. Watt seems to favour the hypothesis that hauntings, in general, occur due to psychological and environmental factors. The well-known Cheltenham ghost case and the Cock Lane haunting are described. Watt also describes the Census of Hallucinations (Sidgwick et al., 1894), and West’s (1990) follow-up survey. Concerning the latter, West (2012) recalled: “Only one response came near to the many cases of apparitions coinciding with crisis or death of the person ‘seen’ that were frequent in earlier surveys” (p. 221). Watt speculates that this might be “. . . because improvements in recording the time of death prevented respondents from misremembering or misreporting when a person had died” (p. 111). Cases of crisis apparitions are however still occasionally reported (e.g., see Haraldsson, 1987; Smith, 2012). Schmeidler’s research in which mediums toured haunted houses and reported their impressions is described. Watt does however seem unaware of the fact that after Maher’s study with Schmeidler (Maher & Schmeidler, 1975) the former continued this line of research and subjected the results of several studies to a meta-analysis (Maher, 1999). Watt outlines Tandy’s research (i.e., Tandy, 2000, 2001, 2002; Tandy & Lawrence, 1998),3 which suggested that infrasound might cause some hauntings: “Although not every haunting will be the result of infrasound, Tandy’s theory seems likely to provide a fascinating explanation for certain cases” (p. 122). Tandy’s research has however been criticised and the importance of both infrasound 2 AWARE: AWAreness during REsuscitation. 3 These papers (except Tandy, 2001) and Parsons’ (2012) review are reprinted in Parsons and Cooper (2015). 96
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
(Braithwaite & Townsend, 2006; Parsons, 2012) and magnetic activity (Braithwaite, 2008) still remain uncertain. This is not made clear. The final chapters concern, among other things, card-guessing, dream telepathy, ganzfeld research, precognition, and PK. Watt tries to impress on the reader the impact of J. B. Rhine, “a charismatic and visionary figure” (p. 141), and the criticism of the psi research. Concerning the latter it would however have been proper to point out that Kennedy and Uphoff (1939) found that recording errors were made by both believers and disbelievers and that the errors tended to be in line with the recorder’s belief. Watt only mentions that believers were found to make mistakes, and leaves the reader uncertain about the importance of recording errors. This was considered by Pratt et al. (1940)—rechecks suggested that the presence of such errors had little effect on the results. Tart (1966) basically provided a general criticism of the Rhinean paradigm and called for attempts to improve psi-scoring through training, but, perhaps due to lack of space, this is not mentioned. Watt outlines the foundation of the dream laboratory at the Maimonides Medical Center in 1962, acknowledges that some of the criticism that the research there attracted was unfair, and describes a wellknown study. She notes that Sherwood and Roe (2013) meta-analysed both the results of the Maimonides studies and the post-Maimonides studies: They found that analysis of the latter produced a smaller effect size (see also Storm & Rock, 2015). Watt mentions possible reasons for this finding.4 Space is also devoted to ganzfeld and micro-PK research. Watt notes that there have been considerable debate about the results of meta-analyses of this research; incidentally, this is just what Akers (1985) expected: . . . it is time for parapsychologists and their critics to shift attention away from past research and to focus on designs for future research. If experimental standards can be agreed upon before this research begins, much of the methodological controversy can be avoided. Once a body of data has been generated under conditions that satisfy those on both sides, the debate can shift to the meta-analytic level. Until that time, reanalysis of past ESP studies will only lead to endless debate . . . (p. 624)
Watt outlines the strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis and encourages researchers to pre-register their planned studies at the Koestler Parapsychology Unit registry, which she and James Kennedy created in 2012. 4 This is not the right place to describe in detail my own reservations about meta-analyses of dream ESP studies, but suffice to say some studies (e.g., Hearne, 1980, 1981; Hearne & Worsley, 1977) are quite different compared to the others, and a large study with a nonsignificant result (i.e. Honorton, Ullman, & Krippner, 1975) is always omitted from metaanalyses because the results were not properly reported. 97
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
The section on precognition cover, among other things, Cox’s (1956) finding that trains involved in accidents had fewer passengers. This seems consistent with Stanford’s psi-mediated instrumental response (PMIR) model which Watt mentions, almost in passing. She also describes Schmidt’s (1969) early research with a random number generator, and sketches the development of the presentiment studies. However, space does not allow her to outline the controversy about how results from the latter kind of studies should be analysed (e.g., see Dalkvist, Mossbridge, & Westerlund, 2014; Kennedy, 2014). Watt mentions Bem’s (2011) “feeling the future” meta-analysis, but discussion about this deserve more space. Laypersons have no clue about what a Bayesian factor analysis is and most likely have little understanding of the impact the controversy about Bem’s research had on psychology. Essentially what happened was that the meta-analysis became subject to much attention in the mass media, and since many psychologists were unwilling to accept the results, they questioned the widely used statistical methods. The last review of research covers healing, DMILS5 studies, and research on the feeling of being stared at. Watt notes that the poor quality of some of the studies have made it difficult to draw conclusions about the existence of the phenomena, and ends her review with a discussion about experimenter effects. Despite strong evidence of such effects, Watt’s conclusion is guarded: The judge is still out on the existence of experimenter effects within parapsychology, but, if they are shown to exist for certain, they will have profound implications for those hoping to develop experimental techniques that produce reliable evidence of psychic ability. Furthermore, the idea of experimenters influencing their own study outcomes would open a Pandora’s box for all scientists who are attempting to conduct objective observations of data. (p. 183)
In her final conclusions Watt notes that parapsychology has contributed to recognition of methodological problems and acknowledges that parapsychologists have used masked methods far more often than other researchers (Watt & Nagtegaal, 2004). Watt thinks that the main value of research with psychics and mediums is more psychological knowledge about eyewitness testimony. In addition, it has given an increased understanding of the psychology of deception. She also notes that investigations of psychic experiences have uncovered many possible normal explanations. The main value of the book is, in fact, the sections concerning 5 DMILS = Direct Mental Interaction with Living Systems. 98
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
the psychology of deception and normal explanations for psychic experiences. Watt makes it clear that she is not convinced that veridical perception has occurred during out-of-body experiences and seems impressed by the attempts to explain out-of-body experiences and neardeath experiences with psychology and neuroscience. Eventually, concerning parapsychology, she concludes: . . . the only way forward is to carry out carefully the necessary work and be guided by the data … people will always have experiences that they believe are paranormal, and the study of these experiences will, one way or another, help extend the frontiers of knowledge. (p. 197)
—NEMO C. MÖRCK REFERENCES Akers, C. (1985). Can meta-analysis resolve the ESP controversy? In P. Kurtz (Ed.), A skeptic’s handbook of parapsychology (pp. 611-627). Amherst, NY: Prometheus House. Balanovski, E., & Taylor, J. G. (1978). Can electromagnetism account for extra-sensory phenomena? Nature, 276, 64-67. Barrett, W. F., Gurney, E., & Myers, F. W. H. (1882). First report on thought-reading. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 1, 13-34. Bem, D. J. (2011). Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 100, 407-425. Braithwaite, J. J. (2008). Putting magnetism in its place: A critical examination of the weak intensity magnetic field account for anomalous haunt-type experiences. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 72, 34-50. Braithwaite, J. J., & Townsend, M. (2006). Good vibrations: The case for a specific effect of infrasound in instances of anomalous experience has yet to be empirically demonstrated. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 70, 211-224. Brian, D. (1982). The enchanted voyager: The life of J. B. Rhine. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Christopher, M. (1970). ESP, seers and psychics. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company. Coover, J. E. (1917). Experiments in psychical research. Stanford University Press. Cox, W. E. (1956). Precognition: An analysis, II. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 50, 99-109. 99
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
Dalkvist, J., Mossbridge, J., & Westerlund, J. (2014). [Letter to the Editor]. Journal of Parapsychology, 78, 275-276. Gauld, A. (1968). The founders of psychical research. New York: Schocken Books. Haraldsson, E. (1987). [Letter to the Editor]. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 54, 82-83. Hearne, K. M. T. (1980). Lucid dreams and “ESP”: An initial experiment using one subject. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 51, 711. Hearne, K. M. T. (1981). The effect on the subject (in waking, SWS and REM states) of electric shocks to the agent: An ESP experiment. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 51, 87-92. Hearne, K. M. T., & Worsley, A. (1977). An experiment in telepathic phobic fear & REM sleep. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 49, 434-439. Honorton, C., Ullman, M., & Krippner, S. (1975). Comparison of extrasensory and presleep influences on dreams: A preliminary report. In J. D. Morris, W. G., & R. L. Morris (Eds.). Research in parapsychology 1974 (pp. 82-84). Metuchen: Scarecrow Press. Kennedy, J. E. (2014). [Letter to the Editor]. Journal of Parapsychology, 78, 273-274. Kennedy, J. L., & Uphoff, H. F. (1939). Experiments on the nature of extrasensory perception: III. The recording error criticism of extra-chance results. Journal of Parapsychology, 3, 226-245. Krippner, S. (1996). A pilot study in ESP, dreams and purported OBEs. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 61, 88-95. Krippner, S., & Zirinsky, K. (1971). An experiment in dreams, clairvoyance, and telepathy. A.R.E. Journal, 6(1), 12-16. Maher, M. C. (1999). Riding the waves in search of the particles: A modern study of ghosts and apparitions. Journal of Parapsychology, 63, 47-80. Maher, M., & Schmeidler, G. R. (1975). Quantitative investigation of a recurrent apparition. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 69, 341-351. Mauskopf, S. H., & McVaugh, M. R. (1980). The elusive science: Origins of experimental psychical research. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Millard, S. (2014). Smoke and mirrors and Steven Seagal. Frantic Planet. Morris, R. L. (1986). Minimizing subject fraud in parapsychology laboratories. European Journal of Parapsychology, 6, 137-149. Morris, R. L., Harary, S. B., Janis, J., Hartwell, J., & Roll, W. G. (1978). Studies of communication during out-of-body experiences. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 72, 1-21. 100
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
Palmer, J. (1978). ESP and out-of-body experiences: An experimental approach. In D. S. Rogo (Ed.), Mind beyond the body (pp. 193-217). New York: Penguin Books. Parnia, S., Spearpoint, K., de Vos, G., Fenwick, P., Goldberg, D., Yang, J., … Schoenfeld, E. R (2014) AWARE-AWAreness during REsuscitation-A prospective study. Resuscitation, 85, 1799-1805. Parsons, S. (2012). Infrasound and the paranormal. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 76, 150-174. Parsons, S., & Cooper, C. E. (Eds.). (2015). Paracoustics: Sound and the paranormal. Hove, UK: White Crow Books. Playfair, G. L., & Keen, M. (2004). A possibly unique case of psychic detection. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 68, 1-17. Pratt, J. G., Rhine, J. B., Smith, B. M. Stuart, C. E., & Greenwood, J. A. (1940). Extra-sensory perception after sixty years. New York: Henry Holt. Rivas, T., Dirven, A., & Smit, R. H. (2016). The self does not die. Durham, NC: International Association for Near Death Studies. Rhine, J. B., & Rhine, L. E. (1929a). An investigation of a “mind-reading” horse. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 23(4), 449-466. Rhine, J. B., & Rhine, L. E. (1929b). Second report on Lady, the “mindreading” horse. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 24, 287292. Rogo, D. S. (Ed.) (1978). Mind beyond the body. New York: Penguin Books. Rogo, D. S. (1986). Researching the out-of-body experience: The state of the art. In K. R. Rao (Ed.), Case studies in parapsychology (pp. 97119). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Schmidt, H. (1969). Quantum processes predicted? New Scientist, 44, 114115. Sherwood, S. J., & Roe, C. A. (2013). An updated review of dream ESP studies conducted since the Maimonides dream ESP program. In S. Krippner, A. J. Rock, J. Beischel, H. Friedman, & C. L. Fracasso (Eds.), Advances in parapsychological research 9 (pp. 38-81). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Sidgwick, H., Johnson, A., Myers, F. W. H., Podmore, F., & Sidgwick, E. M. (1894). Report on the Census of Hallucinations. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 10, 25-422. Smith, R. L. (2012). Century of apparitions: Revisiting the Census of Hallucinations in the 21st century. Coventry University Press. Storm, L., & Rock, A. J. (2015). Dreaming of psi: A narrative review and meta-analysis of dream-ESP studies at the Maimonides dream laboratory and beyond. In J. A. Davies & D. B. Pitchford (Eds.), 101
Australian Journal of Parapsychology
Stanley Krippner: A life of dreams, myths, and visions (pp. 117-138). Colorado Springs, CO: University Professors Press. Tandy, V. (2000). Something in the cellar. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 64, 129-140. Tandy, V. (2001). Ghost sounds: A review and discussion of the infrasound theory of apparitions. International Journal of Parapsychology, 2, 131146. Tandy, V. (2002). A litmus test for infrasound. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 66, 167-174. Tandy, V., & Lawrence, T. R. (1998). The ghost in the machine. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 62, 360-364. Tart, C. T. (1966). Card guessing tests: Learning paradigm or extinction paradigm? Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 60, 46-55. Tart, C. T. (1968). A psychophysiological study of out-of-the-body experiences in a selected subject. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 62, 3-27. Taylor, J. G. (1975). Superminds. London: Macmillan London. Taylor, J. G., & Balanovski, E. (1979). Is there any scientific explanation of the paranormal? Nature, 279, 631-633. Thouless, R. G. (1935). Dr Rhine’s recent experiments on telepathy and clairvoyance and a reconsideration of J. E. Coover’s conclusions on telepathy. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical, 43, 24-37. Watt, C., & Nagtegaal, M. (2004). Reporting of blind methods. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 68, 105-114. West, D. J. (1990). A pilot census of hallucinations. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 57, 163-207. West, D. J. (2012). Gay life straight work. London: Paradise Press. Wiseman, R. (2011). Paranormality: Why we see what isn’t there. London: Spin Solutions Ltd.
Torggatan 6A lgh 1203 282 31 Tyringe SWEDEN Email:
[email protected]
102
