Discovery Lab Answers

Dean I. Radin, PhD is Chief Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) and an Associated Distinguished Professor at the California Institute of Integral Studies (from 2015), and co-founder of Cognigenics. His research centers on whether human consciousness can interact with physical systems in ways not explained by conventional models — spanning random-event generators, electrodermal presentiment, double-slit optical systems, the Global Consciousness Project, and anomalous cognition. His profile page is at Dean I. Radin, PhD.

A note on coverage: the evidence below reflects studies currently in the ESP-Nexus library. The library’s share of the published literature on Radin’s work has not been measured, so what follows is a summary of what the library holds, not a settled account of the field. The chart below plots effect size against publication year for a subset of results on a single comparable metric.

Experiments

Radin’s work in the sources retrieved here spans several distinct lines of inquiry:

• Global Consciousness Project (GCP): Two papers — Radin (2025) and a corrigendum Radin (2026) — examine whether the GCP’s network of random-number generators shows anomalous deviations around New Year’s Eve celebrations, treating global collective attention as a potential physical perturbation.

• Excess correlation in water pH: Radin (2025) reports a preliminary independent replication of a claimed “excess correlation” effect — correlated pH changes between physically isolated beakers of water stimulated by a magnetic field technique — testing whether a previously reported anomalous physical effect could be reproduced under controlled conditions.

• Double-slit mind-matter interaction: The library’s pages note a series of double-blind experiments and a multi-lab cumulative analysis (referenced via Kauffman 2023) examining whether directed mental intention alters the optical interference pattern in a double-slit apparatus.

• Random-event generator (REG) meta-analyses: Meta-analyses of more than 800 REG experiments and 148 dice-fall studies examining whether intention is associated with anomalous deviations in random physical systems.

• Electrodermal presentiment: Experiments measuring skin conductance responses in the seconds before randomly selected emotional stimuli, testing whether the body responds to a future event before it occurs.

• Anomalous cognition / ganzfeld / remote viewing: Work on precognition tasks, quick remote viewing, and related paradigms, including collaborative studies with Helané Wahbeh and others (Wahbeh 2021, 2022, 2023).

• Intention effects on water and biological systems: Including the beaker pH replication and studies in the structured evidence set measuring intention effects on biological targets.

• Meditation and consciousness: Studies examining whether meditation practice is associated with anomalous cognition performance (Alibalaei 2025; Radin 2021).

Methodology

Radin’s methodological approaches vary by research line, but share several recurring features:

GCP work uses data from an existing, continuously running global network of hardware random-number generators (RNGs). Radin (2025) formed per-second Stouffer Z scores across time zones around midnight on New Year’s Eve across 27 years of GCP data, testing whether deviations clustered at the moment of collective global attention. A Principal Components Analysis (PCA) composite across multiple signal features was computed, and a correction was issued in Radin (2026) after an error in a cited PCA score was identified.

Excess correlation (water pH) used a magnetic field stimulation protocol applied simultaneously to two beakers of water placed one meter apart, with a third unstimulated control beaker interposed. Later runs separated local and remote beakers by ten meters. The design tests whether pH changes in isolated water samples co-vary beyond chance when stimulated together.

Double-slit experiments use optical interference patterns as a physical readout, with participants instructed to direct attention toward or away from the apparatus. Blinding and randomization of attention conditions are built into the protocol.

Electrodermal presentiment studies record skin conductance continuously while participants view randomly selected images; the key test is whether physiological arousal precedes the stimulus onset for emotionally significant versus neutral images.

REG meta-analyses aggregate trial-level or study-level data from large numbers of independent experiments, applying quality-control filters and funnel-plot analyses to assess selective reporting. Dice-fall meta-analyses similarly aggregate across many independent studies to detect small but consistent directional effects.

Radin has also worked with sequential analysis and has argued for pre-registration as a methodological standard; the Radin (2026) corrigendum reflects the project’s commitment to public correction of analytical errors.

Data

The structured evidence set covers 66 studies and 81 result rows associated with Radin and closely related collaborators. Results span several non-comparable metrics — z-scores, standardized effect sizes (Cohen’s d, Hedges’ g), raw hit rates, correlations, and p-values only — so they cannot be pooled into a single overall figure, and the chart below plots only those results that share a single comparable metric (z/√N).

Critically, the evidence is not uniformly positive. Nine result rows report null or below-chance outcomes, and reported directions disagree across studies. This is a genuine feature of the record, not an artifact of selection.

A summary of the headline outcomes by study:

The pattern across the library’s holdings shows a majority of reported headline effects in the positive direction, several of them with small p-values. However, three result clusters — Alibalaei (2025) on precognition after a yoga course, Wahbeh (2022) on remote viewing pre-post change, and Wahbeh (2021) on overall quick remote viewing — report null or below-chance outcomes. Effect sizes where reported tend to be small (Cohen’s d near zero in the Alibalaei study; Cramér’s V = 0.09 in King 2022). The chart below plots the z/√N metric across years for the subset of results where that metric is available and a trend line has been fitted.

Skeptical critiques

What critics argue. No published critique of this work appears in the sources retrieved for this question.

The retrieved sources do not include a named critic with a specific year and publication title directed at Radin’s work specifically in the passages retrieved for this question. Accordingly, the critique section above reflects the methodological objections that Radin’s own papers acknowledge — including the correction issued in Radin (2026) after an analytical error in the cited PCA composite score was identified — rather than a named external publication. The sources retrieved for this question do not include a published external critique with the author and year needed to fully satisfy the citation form required here. The Alibalaei (2025) null result on precognition after a yoga intervention, and Wahbeh (2022)’s below-chance remote viewing result, constitute within-program null findings that any synthesis of this record must weigh alongside the positive outcomes.

What the experimental data show. The null and below-chance results in the library’s holdings — Alibalaei (2025), Wahbeh (2021), Wahbeh (2022) — were conducted within programs overlapping with Radin’s institution, which makes them harder to characterize as purely independent replications. The multi-lab Kauffman (2023) reference covering 30 double-slit experiments across 5 laboratories is the closest the retrieved evidence comes to independent replication at scale, reporting a cumulative p < 4 × 10⁻¹¹. Whether that result survives scrutiny of the individual lab protocols is not resolved in the retrieved sources.

Analysis. The corrigendum Radin (2026) correcting an error in the New Year’s Eve GCP analysis is a documented instance of self-correction in this research program. The variety of effect metrics across studies — and the fact that some result rows are positive while others in closely related paradigms are null or below chance — means the picture is more heterogeneous than any single headline figure conveys. Independent replication by researchers outside IONS and affiliated institutions has not been systematically documented in the sources retrieved here.