A quantitative digest of the ESP-Nexus structured study database for Mind–Matter Interaction: 18 studies spanning 2002–2026, 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 17 studies spanning 2002 to 2026, the quantitative picture for mind-matter interaction is mixed. A meta-analytic pooled estimate from Schmidt (2012), drawing on 11 studies, places the effect at a Cohen's d of 0.11. Individual studies show wide variation: Maier (2024) reports a Cohen's d of 0.35, Caswell (2014) a Pearson r of 0.57, and several studies report striking significance levels, including a p of 5.9 × 10−14 (Radin, 2025) and a z of -5.78 (Cavanaugh, 2025). Hinterberger (2010) returned a z of 4.0, and Richards (2005) a Bonferroni-corrected p ≤ 0.017.
Against these, directional disagreement is evident. Radin (2026) produced an effect of -0.03, Radin (2008) a z of -2.82, and both Ambach (2008) and Pinto (2024) returned nonsignificant p values of .492 and .49 respectively. At least two results are null or below chance. This heterogeneity, spanning effect sizes, statistical significance, and sign, means the dataset does not converge on a consistent quantitative conclusion, and the evidence remains genuinely contested.
Pooled meta-analytic effects
- Schmidt (2012), Zeitschrift für Anomalistik: ES 0.11 (cohens_d) (k = 11)
The evidence
| Paper | Reported finding | Effect / significance | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Radin et al. (2026), Draft (preprint, May 9, 2026; journal not specified) | Human cohort – Observed sensor – Intention vs. | ES -0.03, p = .0016 | N = 10000 trials; 295 participants |
| Cavanaugh et al. (2025), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source] | Model 1: H1 — DEMO period 2006-2014 vs baseline 1851-2005. | z = -5.78, p < 1 × 10−8, hit rate 0.714 | N = 171 trials |
| Radin (2025), Physics Essays [source] | EH3: Trend analysis – slope difference RL vs RR during observation. | p = 5.9 × 10−14 | N = 401 sessions; 47 participants |
| Maier et al. (2025), Journal of Anomalistics / Zeitschrift für Anomalistik [source] | Study 1 – Primary DV: brightness variation. | — | N = 945 participants |
| Maier et al. (2024), Journal of Anomalistics (Zeitschrift für Anomalistik) [source] | Study 2 – Main analysis. | ES 0.35 | N = 246 participants |
| Radin (2024), Draft (preprint, October 8, 2024) | EH1 – skewness. | p < .05 | N = 401 sessions |
| Maier et al. (2024), Journal of Anomalistics (Zeitschrift für Anomalistik) [source] | Study 2 – Pre-registered main analysis. | ES 0.35 | N = 246 participants |
| Pinto (2024), Unpublished grant final report (project A-19274) | Experiment 1 – primary: intention vs. | p = .49 | N = 17 participants |
| Holmberg (2022), Explore [source] | ARMA model: 5-word Weighted index vs Max, full sample. | — | N = 216 trials |
| Holmberg (2021), Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research [source] | S&P Global 1200 – No interaction model. | p = .0493 | N = 5599 trials |
| Holmberg (2020), Journal of Consciousness Studies | Dow Jones Global Equity Index – Open returns on Max_t. | — | N = 5237 trials |
| Caswell et al. (2014), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source] | Sunspot number vs. | ES 0.57, p = .002 | N = 26 participants |
| Schmidt (2012), Zeitschrift für Anomalistik [source] | Attention Focusing Facilitation Experiments – Random Effects Meta-Analysis. | ES 0.11, p = .03 | 11 studies; N = 576 sessions; 576 participants |
| Hinterberger (2010), Presented at Parapsychology Conference, Utrecht | Combined alpha-band effect across all three studies. | z = 4.0, p = 3 × 10−5 | 3 studies; N = 76 sessions; 46 participants |
| Ambach et al. (2008), European Journal of Parapsychology ⚠ relayed figures | Figures are Etzold (2008) — as relayed/re-derived in this paper, not its own experiment. Etzold Fourmilab RetroPS — Full-moon window results across six sliding-window widths. | p < .05 | 1 studies; N = 199632 trials |
| Radin (2008), Explore [source] | Overall All Experimental Sessions. | z = -2.82, p = .002 | N = 18 trials; 14 participants |
| Richards et al. (2005), The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine | fMRI Trial 2 Replication. | p = .017 | N = 1 trials; 2 participants |
| Radin (2002), Journal of Scientific Exploration | Intercorrelation Analysis: September 11, 2001 Peak Daily Mean Correlation. | z = 3.714, p < 1 × 10−4 | — |
What is unsettled
- Reported directions disagree across studies (some positive, some null or below-chance).
- 2 result(s) report a null or below-chance (negative) effect.
Source: ESP-Nexus structured study database, 18 studies. 20 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.