- Join CSI as an associate member to receive the newsletter
CSI
Special Features
Web Columns
Center for Inquiry
Resources
|
Home
: Skeptical Inquirer magazine
: May/June 1996 : Buy this back issue
Workshop Report:
To Err Is Human
Nancy Shelton
More than one hundred skeptics from twenty-one states and two Canadian
provinces attended the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of
the Paranormal's superb Human Error
Workshop August 17-21, 1995, at the University of Oregon.
Our guides throughout the five-day program, all CSICOP Fellows, were:
- James Alcock, professor of psychology, York University, Toronto;
- Jerry Andrus, inventor, magician, illusionist, and philosopher;
- Barry Beyerstein, professor of psychology, Simon Fraser
University, Vancouver;
- Ray Hyman, professor of psychology, University of Oregon; and
- Loren Pankratz, clinical psychologist, Oregon Health Sciences
University.
Alcock, Beyerstein, and Hyman are also members of CSICOP's Executive
Council.
Hyman, a cognitive psychologist, coordinated and moderated the talks,
all of which were characterized by lively interaction with the
attendees, and humor. Though others' gullibility frequently elicited
mirth, Hyman quickly warned us that everyone is subject to errors both
in belief and action. He explained that Piltdown man, supposedly an
early man but reconstructed by hoaxers from human and animal bones,
fooled both laypeople and scientists for about 40 years. Was it a
clever hoax? Hyman said no; filing the ape jawbone to make it fit the
reconstructed human skull was crude and quite obvious after it was
examined with the probability of fraud in mind. Canals on Mars, which
spawned books about Martian residents, the Face on Mars, and N-rays
are other examples of mistaken beliefs, as was the discovery of the
nonexistent planet Vulcan.
The Central Intelligence Agency hired Hyman and a parapsychologist to
evaluate psychics working for the government. Hyman told the workshop
attendees that not only were previous studies flawed, but their
psychic accuracy was about 15 percent. The problem was that no one
could determine which 15 percent was right. (See Hyman's "Special
Report," SI, March-April 1996.)
In his syllabus "How To Do Cold Readings," Hyman said his purpose was
not to teach us how to be cold readers; rather he wanted us to know
how powerful this suggestive activity can be. "Many errors result from
the human tendency to discover hidden meaning in seemingly random
events," Hyman said. He also cautioned us to be very gentle in
disabusing those who believe such exercises are paranormal. "Cold
readings work in the sense that the client is typically satisfied with
the results . . . the error involved is in falsely assuming that the
meaning and accuracy of the reading stems from some special occult
powers of the reader. A related error is the assumption that the
meaning of the reading is contained in the words of the reader."
Instead, subjects create their own inferences from proposed
generalities. The more personal information the client supplies, such
as day, month, year of birth, the more credence he or she gives to the
reader's accuracy and the greater the belief that the reader is
psychic.
Andrus demonstrated how mystified we can be by visual cues. Among his
many amazing creations that he encouraged us to play with were the
Nutty Nuts and Bewildering Blocks. He challenged our auditory
perception by playing his Never-Ending Chords on the piano. While
watching his hands drop to lower octaves, we all "heard" the chords
ascending.
Pankratz, an expert in medical anomalies and insurance fraud,
discussed self-deception, a vulnerability within all of us. He told of
patients who each had numerous hospital admissions for diverse
symptoms within a short time period. The subjects had made up,
distorted, or hidden medical information. Even though doctors were
informed beforehand that these patients appeared to have factitious
symptoms (as in Munchausen syndrome, a feigning of illness), some
doctors persisted in treating for the nonexistent illnesses. He said
that because patient malingering is intentional and voluntary, it is
not considered a psychiatric disorder.
Alcock explained that we have both experiential and rational
psychological systems, which collide with each other. "Feelings and
rationality often produce contradictory results." We have two sets of
rules: one for religion, based on faith; another for the lab. We feel
we have experience of psi even though it remains unproven. Frequency
distribution is such that, in tests, some individuals will "get it
right," thus convincing themselves -- and others -- that they have
psychic powers. Such convictions may be extremely difficult to
extinguish. Often the belief comes first: We believe, and then find
corroborative evidence while ignoring negative evidence. Occurrences
close in time are frequently inferred to be causally connected. A
dream followed by an experience that can be perceived as correlative
may seem precognitive.
Alcock also said that beliefs that reduce concern are more readily
accepted. Prejudice permits one to feel "I'm not responsible for
others' dire straits; it's their genes." Religion offers the
comforting belief that departed loved ones will be met again in
heaven. We often hold beliefs that have no rationale. "`To be a good
teacher you must be a good researcher' is nonsense, but offends some
notion of what universities are all about," he said.
Hunches are not necessarily processed rationally, he noted. Coca-Cola
took down its billboards because, the company stated, "Nobody looks at
them." Sales dropped, and the billboards reappeared. Smokers
rationalize evidence for cancer: "They'll have a cure for it when I'm
40." Behavioral change precedes attitude change. If you get people to
act contrary to their beliefs, they will shift beliefs over time.
Beyerstein discussed how the human brain evolved, and how technology,
just in the last 100 years, has confounded our programming, thus
leading to human errors. Electric lights have lengthened our awake
cycle. Jets that cross time zones in a day play havoc with the natural
rhythms acquired through evolution. Biochronometry (not to be confused
with pop-psychology's biorhythms) is the scientific study of
rhythmicity and biological clocks. Among the cycles we are attuned to
are: circadian (about a day) -- sleep/waking cycle; ultradian (much
less than 24 hours -- breathing, heart rate, EEG rhythms; the basic
rest-activity cycle (BRAC) -- 90-minute period; infradian (a month or
longer) -- menstrual cycle, other hormonal rhythms, and seasonal
changes.
Abrupt time shifts result in "desynchronosis," the uncoordinated
free-running of subsystem rhythms. Some effects are sleep disorders,
gastrointestinal problems, and decreased vigilance. Optimum well-being
depends upon the various cycles operating synchronically. Yet about a
quarter of our population, often emergency workers whom we trust to
make the right decisions (police, firemen, doctors and nurses, air
traffic controllers), must operate under these adverse conditions,
sometimes leading to fatal errors.
"Re-entraining," or resetting the biological clocks, he explained,
usually takes about ten days to two weeks. Since out-of-sync
biological clocks favor a longer day, east-to-west flights have less
effect than do west-to-east. Further, change is easier when everyone
in the new time zone is on the same waking/eating/sleeping
schedule. Shift workers, who have their days turned upside down, and
whose duty hours are advanced from evening to afternoon to morning,
have the most difficult adaptation. (Reversing the shift order, e.g.,
morning/afternoon/evening would be more effective for the workers and
result in fewer mistakes -- life threatening or otherwise.)
The workshop demonstrated why errors are part of the human condition. Some contributors to error are not enough information, overabundance of misinformation, excessive repetition, and innumeracy. We automate as much as possible to save precious resources. Our brains are not video recorders; many stimuli never get to long-term memory. Much of what we think we remember is reconstructed from codified bits and imagination. The purpose of scientific methodology is to find the truth. It can also help us to minimize our errors.
About the Author
Nancy Shelton is a freelance writer/editor who retired
recently from the Defense Nuclear Agency and is a member of New Mexicans for Science and
Reason. Address: 11617 Snowheights Blvd. NE, Albuquerque, NM 87112-3157.
|
|