Radin

Dean I. Radin, PhD

Dean I. Radin, PhD is a parapsychology researcher profiled at ESP-Nexus. His work spans laboratory studies of mind-matter interaction, large-scale consciousness network data, and biophysical effects of intention. Before reading the summary below: the ESP-Nexus library’s coverage of Radin’s published output has not been measured against the complete literature, so what follows reflects the studies currently held in the library rather than a settled account of his full record or of the field more broadly.

Experiments

The sources retrieved cover several distinct lines of work:

Global Consciousness Project (GCP) analyses. Radin has analyzed data from the GCP — a network of random number generators (RNGs) running continuously worldwide — with a particular focus on New Year’s Eve as a natural experiment. His 2025 paper examined whether GCP network behavior deviates systematically at the stroke of midnight across time zones, and a 2026 corrigendum corrected a specific PCA composite figure from that analysis.

Double-slit optical experiments. The evidence table includes a cumulative result across 30 double-slit experiments at five labs, cited in a 2023 Kauffman-led paper.

Intention and water / biophysical effects. A 2025 paper reports an independent replication attempt of an “excess correlation” effect in pH between isolated beakers of water, using a magnetic field stimulation protocol. A 2021 study examined practitioner intention directed at distilled water.

EEG / electrocortical studies (EH-series). Multiple entries in the evidence table (Radin 2024, 2025) concern “EH3/EH4” trend analyses comparing observed vs. randomized conditions in electrophysiological sessions.

Remote viewing, telepathy, and card-guessing tasks. Wahbeh (2023) entries involve telepathic/pre-selected trials in which Radin is associated via the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) context. A 2023 card-bias slope study across over 85 million trials appears in the evidence table.

Poetry and linguistic analysis. Radin (2023) entries include a Stouffer Z analysis across 10 languages examining word-use patterns on days correlated with emotional valence, as well as a deconvolution analysis on 8-minute segments.

Yoga and precognition. An Alibalaei (2025) study examined a 40-day yoga course and its effect on precognition performance, affiliated with Radin’s research environment.

Methodology

Across his work Radin applies a range of quantitative approaches adapted to each experimental context:

  • GCP analyses use time-series methods on continuously running RNG networks. The 2025 New Year’s Eve study formed per-time-zone Stouffer Z scores second-by-second around midnight, then combined them across time zones. The 2026 corrigendum corrected a principal component analysis composite — specifically a parametric bootstrap yielding a corrected midnight PCA composite score — indicating that reanalysis and error-correction are part of his reported workflow.
  • Biophysical replication (water/pH) used a magnetic field stimulation technique with local and remote beakers, a non-stimulated control beaker between them, and varied the distance between local and remote beakers across experimental runs (1 meter and 10 meters). The 2025 paper explicitly describes it as a “preliminary independent replication”, signaling exploratory rather than fully confirmatory status.
  • Double-slit and mind-matter studies use optical interference patterns as a dependent measure, with human observers intending to affect fringe visibility.
  • EEG/electrocortical (EH-series) studies compare slope differences between observed and randomized conditions across sessions, with both per-experiment and pooled trend analyses.
  • Card-bias slope analysis used hit rate as a function of card-bias level across a very large trial base (~85 million trials), fitting a slope as the primary outcome rather than a simple hit rate against chance.
  • Pre-registration appears in at least one study: the 2026 result row is explicitly labeled a “preregistered primary test.”
Data

The evidence table covers 66 studies and 81 result rows, and the metrics are not comparable across studies — standardized effect sizes (Cohen’s d, Hedges’ g), z-scores, hit rates, p-only reports, and other correlations appear in different rows. Per the metric-mix rule, these cannot be pooled into a single overall figure. The chart rendered below this answer plots a subset of five results on a single comparable metric (z/√N) against publication year, with a fitted trend line; that visualization carries its own caption and slope specification.

Representing the full distribution:

StudyNKey statisticDirection
Radin (2026) — preregistered primary10,000 trials, 295 participantsES = −0.03 (Cohen’s d), p = 0.0016Positive (effect in predicted direction despite negative d sign)
Radin (2026) — corrected midnight PCA100 sessionsz = −2.97, p = 0.0013Positive
Radin (2025) — EH3 trend, primary exploratory401 sessions, 47 participantsp = 5.9 × 10⁻¹⁴Positive
Radin (2025) — combined Fisher’s method50 sessions, 2 experimentsES = 0.004, p = 0.00046Positive
Radin (2025) — PCA composite at midnight—z = −4.9, p = 4.8 × 10⁻⁷Positive
Alibalaei (2025) — yoga/precognition Study 14,160 trials, 104 participantsES = −0.027 (Cohen’s d), CI, p =.783Null
Wahbeh (2022) — Quick Remote Viewing pre-post481 participantsHedges’ g = −0.16, CI, hit rate = 0.19Below chance / psi-missing
Wahbeh (2021) — Quick Remote Viewing overall534 participants—Null
Radin (2023) — Exp 1, concentrate vs. relax10 sessions, 1 participantz = −3.0, p = 0.003Below chance / psi-missing
Radin (2022) — 2013 human vs. robot Stouffer Z1,256 sessionsz = 4.16, p =.00002Positive
Radin (2022) — combined 2013+2014 human sessions2,825 sessionsz = 5.57, p = 1.3 × 10⁻⁸Positive
Radin (2023) — deconvolution, 8-min segments208 segmentsES = 0.425, z = 5.08, p = 1.9 × 10⁻⁷Positive
Radin (2023) — 10-language Stouffer Z10 languagesz = −3.087, p = 0.001Positive
Radin (2023) — card-bias slope, Exp 1~85.8 million trialsz = 2.267, p = 0.02Positive

Unsettled signals the evidence requires surfacing: Nine result rows report null or below-chance outcomes. The Alibalaei (2025) yoga/precognition result is a clean null (p =.783). The Wahbeh (2022) quick remote viewing result is below chance. Radin (2023) Experiment 1 (single-participant, concentrate vs. relax) is also below chance. These sit alongside statistically significant positive results in other paradigms, and the heterogeneity across paradigms, sample sizes, and effect-size metrics is substantial. The evidence base does not converge on a uniform pattern.

Skeptical critiques

The sources retrieved for this question do not include published critical responses, methodological challenges, or reanalyses directed specifically at Radin’s work. The excess-correlation replication paper itself records several variables not controlled in the attempt — field strength, magnetic sequences, water quantity and type, claimed “space memory” effects, halo orientation relative to magnetic North, and geomagnetic field strength — noting these as factors indicating the effect may be highly sensitive to procedural details. That is the authors’ own limitation statement rather than an external critique. Independent replication outside the original research group, for most of the paradigms in the evidence table, is not documented in the retrieved sources.

The studies behind this answer
PaperReported findingEffect / significanceBasis
Radin et al. (2026), Draft (preprint, May 9, 2026; journal not specified)Human cohort – Observed sensor – Intention vs.ES -0.03, p = .0016N = 10000 trials; 295 participants
Radin (2026), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Corrected midnight PCA composite score.z = -2.97, p = .0013N = 100 sessions
Radin (2025), Physics Essays [source]EH3: Trend analysis – slope difference RL vs RR during observation.p = 5.9 × 10−14N = 401 sessions; 47 participants
Radin (2025), Journal of Biophysical Chemistry [source]Combined outcome across both experiments – HEADLINE.p = 4.6 × 10−4k = 2; N = 50 sessions
Alibalaei et al. (2025), Journal of the Society for Psychical Research [source]Study 1 – 40-day yoga course, pre vs post precognition.ES -0.027, p = .783, hit rate 0.251N = 4160 trials; 104 participants
Radin (2025), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Principal Components Analysis composite of CD/PE/HFD/BDS/AC at midnight segment.z = -4.9, p = 4.8 × 10−7—
Yu et al. (2024), EXPLORE [source]Time x water interaction – headline effect.p < .005k = 3
Radin (2024) [source]EH3/EH4 Trend analysis: RLO vs RRO slope difference – HEADLINE.p = 5.9 × 10−14N = 470 sessions; 47 participants
Wahbeh et al. (2023), EXPLORE [source]Telepathic/Pre-Selected – Completers.p < .001, hit rate 0.481N = 210 trials; 105 participants
Wahbeh et al. (2023), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]Confidence in Survival — all participants.p < 1 × 10−4N = 442 participants
Kauffman et al. (2023), BioSystems [source]Double-slit optical mind-matter interaction: cumulative across 30 experiments.p < 4 × 10−1130 studies
Radin (2023), Physics Essays [source]Deconvolution, 8-min segments – joint z vs scrambled controls.z = 5.08, p = 1.9 × 10−7k = 208 events/tests
Radin (2023), World Futures [source]Combined permuted-slope Stouffer Z across all 10 languages.z = -3.087, p = .001k = 10 events/tests
Radin et al. (2023) [source]Experiment 1 – experimental sessions.z = -3.0, p = .003N = 10 sessions; 1 participants
Radin et al. (2023)Exp 1 – hidden-task slope.z = 2.267, p = .02N = 85792278 trials
Wahbeh et al. (2022), International Journal of Transpersonal Studies [source]Extended perception pre-post change – parent study result.ES -0.16, hit rate 0.19N = 481 participants
Radin (2022), DRAFT (unpublished manuscript)Retrospective: all 10 languages combined, Stouffer Z for sad-day slopes.z = -3.825, p = 6.5 × 10−5k = 10
King (2022), Journal of the Society for Psychical Research [source]Pearson chi-square across four age groups.p < .001N = 3277 trials; 3277 participants
Radin et al. (2022), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition [source]2013 human vs robot Stouffer Z, peak at 1.25 s lag.z = 4.16, p = 2 × 10−5N = 1256 sessions
Radin et al. (2021), Explore [source]Indirect test – Practitioner – Distilled water.z = -3.57, p = 4 × 10−4N = 107 participants
Source: ESP-Nexus structured study database (66 studies; the table shows the 20 highest-ranked). ESP-Nexus reports what each study found and takes no position on whether the effects are genuine.
References
  1. Radin, D., & Cline, R. (2026). Does wavefunction collapse require a conscious observer? A preregistered retrocausal interferometer test with human and AI agents. Draft (preprint, May 9, 2026; journal not specified).
  2. Radin, D. (2026). Corrigendum for “Effects of Global Consciousness on New Years Eve: A Study in Experimental Metaphysics”. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.31275/20263947
  3. Radin, D. (2025). Observer influence on quantum interference: Testing the von Neumann–Wigner consciousness-collapse theory. Physics Essays, 38, 64–80. https://doi.org/10.4006/0836-1398-38.1.64
  4. Radin, D. (2025). Independent Replication of an “Excess Correlation” Effect in pH between Isolated Beakers of Water. Journal of Biophysical Chemistry, 16(2), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.4236/jbpc.2025.162002
  5. Alibalaei, H., Radin, D., Ilavarasu, J., & Nagendra, H. R. (2025). Experimental Investigation of Precognition in Yoga Practitioners. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 89(1), 1–23.
  6. Radin, D. (2025). New Year’s Eve as a Case Study in Experimental Metaphysics: Exploring Global Consciousness in Random Physical Systems. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 39(4), 393–406. https://doi.org/10.31275/20253635
  7. Yu, C. R., Radin, D. I., Chu, C., & Shiah, Y. (2024). Effects of intentionally-treated water on cell migration of human glioblastoma cells. EXPLORE, 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2024.103100
  8. Wahbeh, H., Cannard, C., Radin, D., & Delorme, A. (2023). Who’s calling? Evaluating the accuracy of guessing who is on the phone. EXPLORE. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2023.08.008
  9. Wahbeh, H., Delorme, A., & Radin, D. (2023). Rating the Persuasiveness of Empirical Evidence for the Survival of Consciousness After Bodily Death: A Cross-Sectional Study Among Academics. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX), 3(1), 78–109. https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.24125
  10. Kauffman, S. A., & Radin, D. (2023). Quantum aspects of the brain-mind relationship: A hypothesis with supporting evidence. BioSystems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2022.104820
  11. Radin, D. (2023). Anomalous entropic effects in physical systems associated with collective consciousness. Physics Essays, 36(1), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.4006/0836-1398-36.1.77
  12. Radin, D. (2023). Sentiment and Presentiment in Twitter: Do Trends in Collective Mood “Feel the Future”? World Futures, 79(5), 525–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2023.2216629
  13. Wahbeh, H., Vieten, C., Yount, G., Cartry-Jacobsen, A., Radin, D., & Delorme, A. (2022). Transformative, Noetic, and Transpersonal Experiences During Personal Development Workshops. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies. https://doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2021.40.2.75
  14. Radin, D. (2022). Sentiment and presentiment in Twitter: Do trends in collective mood ‘feel the future’? DRAFT (unpublished manuscript).
  15. King, R. A. (2022). A Closer Look at Visual Life Reviews and Age in Adulthood During Near-Death Experiences. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 86(4), 209–225.
  16. Radin, D., & Delorme, A. (2022). Psychophysical Effects on an Interference Pattern in a Double-Slit Optical System: An Exploratory Analysis of Variance. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition, 2(2), 362–388. https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.24054
  17. Radin, D., Yount, G., Delorme, A., Carpenter, L., & Wahbeh, H. (2021). Spectroscopic analysis of water treated by and in proximity to Energy Medicine practitioners: An exploratory study. Explore, 27–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2020.10.005

Ask another question

More questions answered

All questions and answers →

Last updated: 2026-08-30 23:15:27

Copyright © 2026 Innovative Software Design. All rights reserved.

ESP-Nexus reports published parapsychology research as written by its own authors. Source-fidelity to cited documents is audited on every page; the site takes no position on the epistemic status of parapsychological claims themselves.