A quantitative digest of the ESP-Nexus structured study database for Telepathy / GESP: 23 studies spanning 1976–2025, with every figure traceable to its source. ESP-Nexus reports what the studies found and takes no position on whether the effects are genuine.

Across 25 studies spanning 1998 to 2025, quantitative results on telepathy and general extrasensory perception show considerable variation in both direction and magnitude. A 2025 meta-analysis by Sheldrake pooling k=23 telecommunication telepathy studies reported a combined p of 4×10-8, and several individual studies produced striking figures, including p values of 4×10-16 (2003, 2004 Sheldrake), p=0.000006 (2007 Sheldrake), and a Cohen's d of 0.85 (2024 Silberstein). Other studies reported more modest positive effects, with Cohen's d values of 0.42, 0.2, and 0.19, while some returned near-zero estimates of d=0.03 and h=0.04.

The picture is meaningfully unsettled, however. Six results are null or below chance, including a 2025 Stedall study yielding z=-0.61 and a 2010 Rey study at p=.26, and a 2005 Sheldrake study recorded a hit rate of 0.49, at chance level. Substantial heterogeneity across effect sizes and directional disagreements among studies prevent a straightforward cumulative reading, leaving the literature contested rather than convergent.

Pooled meta-analytic effects

The evidence

PaperReported findingEffect / significanceBasis
Stedall et al. (2025), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source] [audit]Overall hit rate, all 117 participants.z = -0.61, p = .76, hit rate 0.486N = 604
Silberstein et al. (2024), Frontiers in Human Neuroscience [source] [audit]Experiment-wide trinomial test of Receiver FC anomalous interaction.ES 0.85, p = 4 × 10−8N = 10
Wahbeh et al. (2023), EXPLORE [source] [audit]Telepathic/Pre-Selected – Completers.p < .001, hit rate 0.481N = 210
Vernon et al. (2020), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source] [audit]Primary one-sample t-test: first-choice hit rate vs chance.ES 0.2, p = .17, hit rate 0.2476N = 105
Sheldrake et al. (2025), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition [source]Overall telepathy condition – standardized effect size.ES 0.17, p = 1 × 10−723 studies
Sheldrake et al. (2024), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]Experiment 4 – detached callers.p = .01, hit rate 0.57N = 266
Johnstad (2020), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Prevalence of reported psychedelic telepathy among interviewees.prevalence 0.4N = 40
Sheldrake et al. (2015), EXPLORE [source]Experiment 1: all tests pooled.ES 0.19, p < 1 × 10−15, hit rate 0.418N = 2080
Rey et al. (2010), Zeitschrift fuer Anomalistik / Journal of AnomalisticsH1 Telepathy condition.p = .26, hit rate 0.2054N = 2400
Sheldrake et al. (2009), Psychological Reports [source]Overall hit rate, 500 completed tests.ES 0.03, p = .002, hit rate 0.267N = 6000
Schmidt et al. (2009), The Open Psychology JournalStudy 1 – Hypothesis 1.ES 0.04, z = 0.78, p = .23, hit rate 0.267N = 397
Sheldrake et al. (2009), Journal of Scientific ExplorationOverall hit rate.ES 0.2, p = 1 × 10−4, hit rate 0.418N = 419
Sheldrake et al. (2009), Explore: The Journal of Science and HealingOverall SMS guessing test.ES 0.1, p = .001, hit rate 0.379N = 886
Sheldrake et al. (2007), Journal of Scientific ExplorationOverall hit rate – 198 completed 10-trial tests.p = 6 × 10−6, hit rate 0.293N = 1980
Sheldrake et al. (2005), Perceptual and Motor SkillsSeries 1 overall.ES 0.42, z = 9.49, p = 2 × 10−19, hit rate 0.43N = 552
Sheldrake (2004), Revista Argentina de Psicologia ParanormalOverall unfilmed series.p = 4 × 10−16, hit rate 0.4N = 571
Sheldrake et al. (2003), Journal of Scientific ExplorationMajority scoring, all 19 key words – RPA/BRA headline.hit rate 0.197N = 117
Sheldrake et al. (2003), Journal of the Society for Psychical ResearchOverall caller identification.p = 4 × 10−16, hit rate 0.4k = 4; N = 571
Sheldrake et al. (2003), The Journal of ParapsychologyAll videotaped trials, all participants.p = 1 × 10−12, hit rate 0.45N = 271
Sheldrake et al. (2000), Journal of Scientific Exploration12 randomized-return-time experiments – all window visits.p < 1 × 10−4, hit rate 0.55k = 12
Source: ESP-Nexus structured study database (23 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.

What is unsettled

Source: ESP-Nexus structured study database, 23 studies. 23 born-digital figures; OCR-derived figures awaiting source-verification are excluded from this digest. Effect sizes are shown only where a standardized metric is recorded.