Brain Correlation Experiments

A reader asked for references to papers on EEG correlation experiments between isolated people. The following list may not be exhaustively complete, it is not in any particular order, and it includes a few fMRI studies. I am aware of at least one other published paper by Grinberg-Zilberbaum et al, but I don't have that reference handy. Study 5 is, I think, relevant but is not a psi study.

1. Achterberg, J., Cooke, K., Richards, T., Standish, L.J.,Leila Kozak, L. & Lake, J.. (2005). Evidence for Correlations Between Distant Intentionality and Brain Function in Recipients: a Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 11, 6, 965–971.

2. Duane TD, Behrendt T. Extrasensory electroencephalographic induction between identical twins. Science 1965, 150-367.

3. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J. & Ramos, J. (1987). Patterns of interhemispheric correlation during human communication. International Journal of Neuroscience, 36, 41-53.

4. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., Delaflor, M., Attie, L. & Goswami, L. (1994). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox in the brain: The transferred potential. Physics Essays, 7,422–428

5. Hasson U., Nir Y., LevyI., Fuhrmann G., & Malach R. (2004). Intersubject synchronization of cortical activity during natural vision. Science 303, 1634– 1640.

6. Hearne K. Visually evoked responses and ESP. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 1977, 49, 648-657.

7. Hearne K. Visually evoked responses and ESP: Failure to replicate previous findings. J Society for Psychical Research 1981, 51, 145-147.

8. Kalitzin S. & Suffczynski P. (2003). Comments on “Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects”. Neuroscience Letters 350, 193–194.

9. Kelly EF, Lenz J. EEG changes correlated with a remote stroboscopic stimulus: A preliminary study. In Morris J, Roll W, Morris R. J (eds.). Research in Parapsychology 1975, Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, p. 58-63 (abstracted in Journal of Parapsychology, 1975, 39, 25) 1976.

10. Kittenis M, Carul P, Stevens P. Distant psychophysiological interaction effects between related and unrelated participants, Proceedings of the Parapsychological Association Convention 2004, 67-76
(meeting held in Vienna, Austria, August 5-8, 2004).

11. Lloyd DH. Objective events in the brain correlating with psychic phenomena. New Horizons, 1973, 1, 69-75.

12. May, E. C., Targ, R. & Puthoff, H. E. (2002). EEG correlates to remote light flashes under conditions of sensory shielding. In C. T. Tart, H. E. Puthoff & R. Targ (Eds.). Mind at large: IEEE symposia on the nature of extrasensory perception. Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, 1979/2002

13. Millar B. An attempted validation of the “Lloyd effect.” In Morris JD, Roll WG, Morris RL. (eds.). Research in Parapsychology 1975, Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 25-27.
Millay J. Multidimensional Mind: Remote Viewing in Hyperspace. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1999.

14. Moulton ST, Kosslyn SM. Using neuro-imaging to resolve the psi debate. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2008; 20(1): 182-192.

15. (deleted -- it was a duplicate entry)

16. Orme-Johnson, D.W., Dillbeck, M.C., Wallace, R. K.& Landrith, G. S. (1982). Intersubject EEG coherence: Is consciousness a field? International Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 203-209.

17. Radin D. Event-related electroencephalographic correlations between isolated human subjects. J Altern Complement Med 2004, 10, 315–323.

18. Rebert, C. S. & Turner, A. (1974). EEG spectrum analysis techniques applied to the problem of psi phenomena. Behavioral Neuropsychiatry, 6, 18–24

19. Richards TL, Kozak, L, Johnson LC, Standish LJ. (2005). Replicable functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence of correlated brain signals between physically and sensory isolated subjects. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 11(6), 955–963.

20. Sabell, A., Clarke, C. & Fenwick, P. (2001). Inter-Subject EEG correlations at a distance—the transferred potential. In: Alvarado, CS, ed. Proceedings of the 44th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association, New York, NY, pp. 419–422

21. Schmidt, S., Schneider, R., Utts, J., Walach, H. (2004). Distant intentionality and the feeling of being stared at: Two meta-analyses. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 235–247. [Note: This describes meta-analyses of 3 dozen ANS tests, not CNS.]

22. Shealy CN, Smith T, Liss S, Borgmeyer V. EEG alterations during absent ‘healing.’ Subtle Energies 2000, 11(3), 241-248.

23. Standish L et al. J. Electroencephalographic evidence of correlated event-related signals between the brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects. J. Alternative and Complementary Medicine 2004, 10(2), 307-314.

24. Standish L, Johnson LC, Richards T, Lozak L. Evidence of correlated functional MRI signals between distant human brains. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 2003, 9, 122-128.

25. Sugano H, Uchida S, Kuramoto I. A new approach to the study of subtle energies. Subtle Energies 1994, 5(2), 143-165.

26. Targ, R & Puthoff, H. (1974). Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding. Nature, 252, 602-607.

27. Tart, C. T. (1963). Possible physiological correlates of psi cognition. International Journal of Parapsychology, 5, 375.386.

28. Vassy, Z. (1978). Method for measuring the probability of 1 bit extrasensory information transfer between living organisms. Journal of Parapsychology, 42, 158-160;

29. Wackerman, J, Seiter, C, Keibel, Walach, H. Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects. Neuroscience Letters 2003, 336, 60-64.

30. Wackermann J. (2003). Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects. Reply to the commentary by S. Kalitzin and P. Suffczynski. Neuroscience Letters 350, 194.

31. Wackermann, J. (2004). Dyadic correlations between brain functional states: Present facts and future perspectives. Mind and Matter, 2 (1), 105-122.

32. Walach H., Seiter C., and Keibel H. (2001). Transferred potentials – fact or artefact? Results of a pilot study. In Bridging Worlds and Filling Gaps in the Science of Healing, Ed. R. A. Chez, Samueli Institute for Information Biology, Hawaii, pp. 303–325.

33. Blake T. Dotta, Bryce P. Mulligan, Mathew D. Hunter, Michael A. Persinger (2009). Evidence of macroscopic quantum entanglement during double quantitative electroencephalographic measurements of friends vs strangers. NeuroQuantology, Vol 7, Issue 4, Page 548-551.

34. Michael A Persinger, Eric W Tsang, J Nicholas Booth, Stanley A Koren. (2008). Enhanced power within a predicted narrow band of theta activity during stimulation of another by circumcerebral weak magnetic fields after weekly spatial proximity: Evidence for macroscopic quantum entanglement? NeuroQuantology, Vol 6, No 1, Page 7-21.


Sharon Day said…
Very impressive listing! Do you know if anyone has studied the correlations between synesthesia and psychic skills?
antiskeptic said…
But,'re just throwing out a whole lot of studies that are all bunk just to try to confuse us, even though I have not read any of them, but I still know that they're bunk pseudoscience! Just kidding. That would be my reaction if my name was Skeptic.
sandalwood said…
Hi Dean... I'm a first time poster and an admirer of your work and gumption. Two things for your attention below:

1. Welcome to my country of birth (India).

2. There is a very useful and interesting discussion about consciousness going on at the following NPR blog. I have added in that discussion a particular experiment of yours, and it is now part of the discussion around the nature of consciousness. I thought you might want to check it out. I referenced your following study:

The discussion is at:

It is on a blog called, "Consciousneness: The Hard Problem", by Stuart Kaufmann, Biologist:

Finally, you might enjoy this India travel blog... my wife and I spent 9 months in India last year, shooting footage for films on Yoga philosophy:

Pankaj Seth, Naturopath - Canada
sandalwood said…
I see that the web address of the blog didn't appear in full (at least on my browser): Here it is again:

If it doesn't take again, one can go to the following link and proceed to the blog posted by Stuart Kaufmann on March 30/2010.

Pankaj Seth
Enfant Terrible said…
In your list I could not find:

Ambach, Wolfgang (2008): Correlations between the EEGs of two spatially separated subjects – a replication study. In: European Journal of Parapsychology 23, 2, 131-146.

The results were negative. It would be good to say in each study which were the results, if positive or negative.
Dean Radin said…
I wasn't aware of that last paper. Thanks. And yes, an accounting of positive/negative outcomes would be a good idea. I suspect there is a filedrawer effect here, as in all domains of publications, but I'm aware of several successful studies that haven't been published, so the filedrawer is not exclusively negative.
David Bailey said…
Dean said, "I'm aware of several successful studies that haven't been published"

Is that the taboo in operation, or is it just pending?

Aren't you tempted to record an EEG when doing presentiment experiments?
Dean Radin said…
> Is that the taboo in operation, or is it just pending?

In one case, the taboo. In another, part of a long to-do list.

> Aren't you tempted to record an EEG when doing presentiment experiments?

I did one a few years ago, published as "Radin D.I. & Lobach E. (2007). Toward understanding the placebo effect: Investigating a possible retrocausal factor, Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 13, 733–739." That paper was prompted by a comment from the statistician I. J. Good, who, a half-century ago suggested that if precognition existed, then an easy way to test for it would be to put a person in a dark room, measure their EEG continuously, and at random times flash a light. Then see if the brain responds before the light flash. That's what we did, and that's what we found (significantly in females, not so in males).

We just finished data collection on a new 32 channel design and we're preparing to write up that paper now.
MrEvidential said…
I found another study. Here it is, translated from German:

Hinterberger, T., Mochty, U., Schmidt, S., Erath, L.-M., Walach, H. (2008). EEG correlations between spatially distant pairs. Anomalistics Journal, 8, 55-75.

In German:

Hinterberger, T., Mochty, U., Schmidt, S., Erath, L.-M., Walach, H. (2008). EEG-Korrelationen zwischen räumlich entfernten Paaren. Zeitschrift für Anomalistik, 8, 55-75.

You can read the paper for free at Stefan Schmidt's University Medical Center Freiburg page (use Google Translate):
Dean Radin said…
Thank you for that paper. It provides a good, short summary of previously conducted experiments.
Tor said…
Because of MrEvidental (tanks btw), I found an article by Walach et al that was interesting to read:

Spirituality: The Legacy of Parapsychology

Here the recent concept of Weak Quantum Theory (WQT) is used to account for psi research and a more general holistic reality. The authors are also quite pessimistic about replication attempts in psi research (in their view replication is lacking) without being dismissive of psi as a phenomena. In fact, they claim the the apparent problem of stable repeatability in parapsychology is to be expected if the universe works according to WQT.

Interesting article. Any thoughts on it Dean? They specifically mention you in there.
Dean Radin said…
I don't agree with their assessment that replication has not been achieved. Meta-analyses suggest that when one takes the grand view, it has been achieved. What they mean, and what most scientists mean by replication, is a recipe whereby anyone can reproduce predictable effects on demand. That kind of strong replication does not exist in psi research, and it is certainly one of the major reasons for continuing skepticism.

The question is why don't we see strong replication? Is this an inherent property of psi, or is it due to most of psi being mediated through unconscious processes, or buffeted about by subtle correlates like GMF, or .... Perhaps all of these are true. The WQT proposal is that, as with conventional QT, observation of a system changes the behavior of that system, so if you try to repeatedly achieve the same outcome by measuring the system repeatedly in the same way, you're going to go away disappointed. It's just not how complex systems work. You will see strange anomalies, but not necessarily the ones you had planned for.

I think the analogy is interesting because it offers ways of thinking about what psi is and how it works that is quite different from the usual mechanistic models.
kukan said…
Just have to share this one:
antiskeptic said…
" if you try to repeatedly achieve the same outcome by measuring the system repeatedly in the same way, you're going to go away disappointed. It's just not how complex systems work"

Hmm...if this is true it may signal some real problems and inadequacies with the scientific method itself (or at least some people's vision of the scientific method) when it comes to psi. I mean, if you could come up with some rules as to how to change the system of measurement each time that you try to measure the effects in order to get some sort of consistency in the data, then that might work - but such a course of action might not be considered "scientific" by many in the field, even though the reasoning may be sound. This reminds me of a passage from Stephen Braude's book called The Gold Leaf Lady. It reads:

"...once I began that course of study I came to appreciate how profoundly and inevitably unilluminating parapsychological lab experiments were and how naive it was to think that one could conduct tests for psychic (or as many prefer to call them, psi) abilities under strict experimental controls"

Dean, I believe that you said before that you knew Braude. I'm not trying to stir the pot here, but he seems to be firing on you. What are your thoughts on this passage and on the possibility that we may have to "go outside" of science into other realms of epistemology in order to finally solve the psi puzzle?
Dean Radin said…
As I've mentioned before, we don't know enough yet to provide foolproof on-demand replication recipes. But in the long term there is no doubt that psi effects are repeatable, both in the lab and in human experience.

I've conducted field investigations with Steve Braude, and I understand his frustration (and others') with lab studies. I attribute some of this frustration to the abstract nature of laboratory work as compared to juicy real-life effects. But this tension is always present between scientists and scholars, between scientists from different disciplines, between scientists and clinicians, and certainly between academics and the general public.

It's just difficult to know how to appreciate the details of another's discipline without lots of training. My own sense is that psi is complex enough to require many approaches to understand. No one method or discipline is necessarily better than another.
SRI said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
LimarUkraine said…
Enfant Terrible said…
Hi, Dean

the article with negative results is online:

The authors say:

It is expected that the results of those preceding studies, which used the statistical method discussed here without the two proposed modifications, and which claimed effects unexplainable by conventional physiology and physics, will undergo a decrease in effect size and significance when the revised method is applied on these data. From here, it cannot be estimated with precision, to what extent the previous results have been biased by the statistical method, and to what extent either of the modifications would affect these previous results. However, both of the methodological annotations must have led into the same direction, namely to overestimate the effects under investigation

This would be the end for these experiments? Do you know any other replicaton using better statistical methods?
LimarUkraine said…
Carl G. Jung's Synchronicity and Quantum Entanglement: Schrödinger’s Cat ‘Wanders’ Between Chromosomes

One of the most prospective directions of study of C.G. Jung’s synchronicity phenomenon
is reviewed considering the latest achievements of modern science. The attention is
focused mainly on the quantum entanglement and related phenomena – quantum
coherence and quantum superposition. It is shown that the quantum non-locality capable
of solving the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox represents one of the most adequate
physical mechanisms in terms of conformity with the Jung’s synchronicity hypothesis. An
attempt is made on psychophysiological substantiation of synchronicity within the context
of molecular biology. An original concept is proposed, stating that biological molecules
involved in cell division during mitosis and meiosis, particularly DNA may be considered
material carriers of consciousness. This assumption may be formulated on the basis of
phenomenology of Jung’s analytical psychology.

Key Words: consciousness, synchronicity, quantum entanglement, nucleic acids, mitosis,

Popular posts from this blog

Feeling the future meta-analysis

Skeptic agrees that remote viewing is proven

Show me the evidence