How many precognition studies were conducted with RNGs and what is the summary of those collected studies? Include all the studies that you source in a reference list in MLA standard.

Question

ESP-Nexus Discovery Lab · Accepted Answer

Precognition studies with RNGs in the ESP-Nexus library

Short answer: the current reference material retrieved for this question does not establish a count of precognition studies conducted with random number generators (RNGs). I don’t want to manufacture a figure — so let me be precise about what is and isn’t here.

What the retrieved sources actually cover

The two numbered sources in front of me are not precognition-with-RNG studies:

Bösch, Steinkamp & Boller (2006) is a meta-analysis of psychokinesis (PK) — specifically, the interaction of human intention with random number generators ^[2]. That is a PK question (influencing an RNG’s output), not a precognition question (foreknowledge of a future RNG output). The two are methodologically distinct even though both use RNG hardware. The keyword list quoted in the source mentions precognition only as part of a search-term string, not as the study’s subject ^[2].
Kugel (2011) is a critique — “A Faulty PK Meta-Analysis” — again in the PK domain, and its quoted text is a general definition of ESP terms (telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, PK) rather than any precognition-RNG dataset ^[1].

So neither retrieved source is a precognition-RNG study, and no structured evidence table, count, or effect-size data accompanied this question. I therefore cannot give you a number of precognition-RNG studies or a summary of their pooled results from the library without inventing it, which the site’s grounding policy forbids.

General framing (not from the ESP-Nexus library)

For context — and flagged clearly as background, not a site citation: precognition RNG work is a real experimental paradigm (participants attempt to predict, rather than influence, an RNG’s future output; the best-known modern examples are forced-choice and presentiment-style designs). But the specific corpus of such studies is not represented in the sources retrieved here, so I can’t characterize its size or findings for you.

On the reference list you asked for

I can only build a citation list from sources that are actually in front of me, and I should not present PK meta-analyses as though they were the precognition-RNG studies you asked about. For completeness, the two retrieved works, in MLA form, are:

Bösch, Holger, Fiona Steinkamp, and Emil Boller. “Examining Psychokinesis: The Interaction of Human Intention with Random Number Generators—A Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 132, no. 4, 2006, pp. 497–523. DOI, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.4.497.
Kugel, Wilfried. “A Faulty PK Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Scientific Exploration, vol. 25, 2011.

Note that both are psychokinesis items, not precognition-RNG studies — so they answer a neighboring question, not your actual one.

Where to go next

The Studies section groups single-study audit pages by topic, including a Precognition grouping, and the Phenomena section has topic pages. If precognition-RNG studies are audited on the site, they’d surface there — but I’d rather point you to those pages than assert a count the retrieved material doesn’t support.

If you rephrase toward PK-with-RNG (the actual subject of both retrieved sources), I can give you a grounded summary of what those two works claim.