A quantitative digest of the ESP-Nexus structured study database for Micro-PK (RNG / REG): 39 studies spanning 1989–2025, with every figure traceable to its source. ESP-Nexus reports what the studies found and takes no position on whether the effects are genuine.

The largest meta-analytic summary of micro-PK research using random number and random event generators is Bösch (2006), which pooled k=380 studies and returned a proportion-index effect of 0.499997, a value extremely close to chance expectation. Individual studies in the 1987-2025 corpus show pronounced disagreement in both direction and magnitude. On the positive side, Williams (2021) reported z=7.31, Mossbridge (2021) and Jakob (2024) each reported p<0.001, Nelson (2018) produced z=5.0, and Dechamps (2021) reached p=.002. Contrasting those, Penberthy (2024) returned z=-0.0013, Maier (2022) showed r=0.01, and Grote (2021) yielded p=0.76, while Pisoni (2024), Alexander (2019), and Grote (2017) all produced non-significant results.

Across the 44 extracted results, 12 report null or below-chance outcomes, and effect-size estimates range from near zero to moderately positive values such as Collesso (2021) at d=0.49 and Vares (2013) at r=0.185. This wide spread signals substantial heterogeneity in the literature. Whether that heterogeneity reflects true variation in experimental conditions, differences in participant selection, methodological inconsistencies, or selective reporting remains an active point of disagreement among researchers, and the body of evidence does not yet converge on a stable estimate.

Pooled meta-analytic effects

The evidence

PaperReported findingEffect / significanceBasis
Dechamps et al. (2025), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Lucky condition – micro-PK toward 50%.ES 0.09, hit rate 0.59N = 16020 trials; 801 participants
Pisoni et al. (2024), Cortex [source]Re-run unweighted ANOVA – three-way Stimulation x Intention x Direction interaction.p = .21N = 216000 trials; 108 participants
Jakob et al. (2024), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]DE-PT high scorers.p < .001, hit rate 0.506N = 42000 trials; 1400 participants
Penberthy et al. (2024), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]RNG psi task – Meditation Cohort 1.z = -0.0013, p = .4995N = 1796 trials
Maier et al. (2022), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Preregistered primary: Correlation between experimental and control condition micro-PK scores.ES 0.01N = 2052 participants
Maier et al. (2022), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]Study 1: C-reduced-subjective.N = 884 participants
Williams (2021), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Updated retro-PK RNG pooled estimate.z = 6.82, p = 4.6 × 10−1242 studies
Collesso et al. (2021), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Experiment 2 – intended-direction REG deviation.ES 0.49, p = .01N = 30000 trials; 30 participants
Grote (2021), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Experiment 1 – main CMM matrix.p = .76N = 200 participants
Mossbridge et al. (2021), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]Heart Quest micro-PK: reference bit zeros excess, second batch.p < .001N = 70165 trials
Radin et al. (2021), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition [source]All four lab experiments combined.p < .0174 studies
Dechamps et al. (2021), Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition (JAEX) [source]Study 1 – Positive Priming Condition.p = .002, hit rate 0.505N = 81840 trials; 4092 participants
Alexander (2019), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Bit-wise effect – combined results of all operators.p = .3N = 127000 trials; 13 participants
Dechamps et al. (2019), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Study 3 – Smokers.hit rate 0.49775N = 81200 trials; 203 participants
Maier et al. (2018), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Study 1 – Smokers.N = 48800 trials; 122 participants
Maier et al. (2018), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Study 1 – Smokers.N = 400 trials; 122 participants
Grote (2017), Journal of Scientific Exploration [source]Analysis 1 – distribution of 20 participant hit-rate z-scores.p = .438N = 20 participants
Vares et al. (2013), Journal of Nonlocality [source]Stepwise multiple regression: hourly RNG z-score predicted by antecedent photon density.ES 0.185, p < .001N = 743 sessions
Bösch et al. (2006), Psychological Bulletin [source]Overall FEM — all 380 intentional studies.ES 0.499997, z = -3.67, p < .001380 studies
Lumsden-Cook et al. (2006), Journal of the Society for Psychical ResearchIzangoma healing/intention condition – non-directional analysis.p = .009N = 80 trials; 20 participants
Source: ESP-Nexus structured study database (39 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, 39 studies. 43 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.