Overview

May’s theoretical contributions emerged from his leadership of the remote viewing research program at SRI and later SAIC, where decades of experimental data demanded explanation. Rather than accepting psi as an anomalous force requiring new physics, May developed models that positioned anomalous cognition within existing frameworks of information theory, quantum mechanics, and goal-directed behavior. His approach represents a fundamental reorientation: instead of asking “how does the mind move objects” or “how does thought travel through space,” May asked “what information-theoretic processes could produce the observed statistical patterns?”

This shift proved consequential for how parapsychologists conceptualized their field. By treating psi as a selection process rather than a transmission or force mechanism, May’s frameworks made anomalous cognition amenable to analysis using tools from physics and information science. His work also addressed a persistent problem in parapsychology: the small effect sizes and high variability in psi experiments. Rather than viewing these as evidence against psi, May’s models explained them as natural consequences of weak information channels operating in noisy environments.

Decision augmentation theory

Decision Augmentation Theory (DAT) represents May’s most influential theoretical contribution. Rather than proposing that consciousness exerts a force on physical systems, DAT suggests that anomalous cognition operates through biasing the outcomes of random or quantum processes toward goal-relevant states. In this model, psi does not violate physical law; instead, it exploits the inherent indeterminacy in quantum systems to select among equally probable outcomes.¹

The theory emerged from analysis of random number generator (RNG) experiments, where May and colleagues observed that intention appeared to bias the distribution of random outputs. Rather than interpreting this as psychokinesis (a direct mental force) DAT reframes the phenomenon as decision augmentation: the subject’s goal state influences which of many possible quantum outcomes actually occurs. This is fundamentally different from classical psychokinesis, where the mind would need to exert force on macroscopic objects. Instead, DAT proposes selection among pre-existing quantum possibilities.¹

DAT also accounts for why psi effects are typically small. If consciousness were exerting a classical force, one might expect large, easily measurable effects. But if psi operates through quantum-level selection, effects would be constrained by the probabilities inherent in quantum mechanics. The theory thus explains both the existence of anomalous effects and their characteristic smallness as natural consequences of the proposed mechanism.

Informational psi framework

Building on DAT, May and collaborator Samir Marwaha developed the informational psi framework, which attempts to unify diverse psi phenomena under a single theoretical umbrella. Rather than treating telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition as distinct mechanisms requiring separate explanations, the informational psi model proposes that all these phenomena reflect information transfer through a common underlying process.¹

The framework rests on a crucial insight: from an information-theoretic perspective, the distinction between “knowing what someone is thinking” (telepathy), “knowing what is in a sealed envelope” (clairvoyance), and “knowing what will happen in the future” (precognition) may be less fundamental than it appears. All three involve acquiring information about a target that is not accessible through normal sensory channels. The informational psi model collapses these distinctions by focusing on the information transfer process itself rather than the spatial or temporal relationship between subject and target.¹

This unification has significant implications. It suggests that psi research should focus on identifying the properties of targets and experimental conditions that facilitate information transfer, rather than developing separate theories for each psi modality. It also implies that successful psi performance in one domain (e.g., remote viewing) might predict success in another (e.g., precognition), since both would draw on the same underlying information channel.¹

Signals mechanism

May and Marwaha further developed their theoretical framework through the signals mechanism, which proposes a specific model for how information flows in psi phenomena. The signals mechanism treats psi as operating through weak, noisy information channels, analogous to communication systems in engineering or neuroscience.²

In this model, the target (whether a remote location, a sealed image, or a future event) generates a weak signal that carries information about its properties. This signal propagates to the subject through an unknown channel, but the signal is degraded by noise during transmission. The subject’s task is to extract the target information from this noisy signal, a process that requires statistical analysis to distinguish signal from noise. The signals mechanism thus explains why psi effects require large sample sizes and statistical analysis: individual trials contain too much noise to be reliable, but aggregated data reveal the underlying signal.²

This framework has practical implications for experimental design. If psi operates through weak, noisy channels, then experimental protocols should be optimized to maximize signal-to-noise ratio. This might involve selecting targets with high information content, minimizing sensory leakage, and using statistical methods sensitive to weak signals. The signals mechanism also suggests that psi performance should improve with practice, as subjects learn to better extract signal from noise, a prediction supported by some remote viewing data.²

Integration with physics

A distinctive feature of May’s theoretical work is his effort to ground psi phenomena in established physics rather than invoking new forces or particles. May and colleagues have argued that anomalous cognition, properly understood, does not require physics beyond the standard model.³

Decision Augmentation Theory, for instance, relies on quantum indeterminacy (a well-established feature of quantum mechanics) rather than proposing new physical mechanisms. Similarly, the informational psi framework draws on information theory, a mature mathematical discipline developed for analyzing communication systems. By anchoring psi theory in established physics and mathematics, May positioned parapsychology as continuous with mainstream science rather than requiring revolutionary new principles.³

This approach also addresses a longstanding criticism of psi research: that anomalous cognition, if real, would require overturning fundamental physics. May’s frameworks suggest instead that psi phenomena, while unusual, operate within the constraints of known physical law. This does not make psi less interesting or important; rather, it suggests that understanding psi requires careful analysis of information flow and quantum processes rather than invoking new forces.³

May’s integration of psi theory with physics also reflects his background as a physicist rather than a psychologist. His theoretical contributions emphasize mathematical rigor, quantitative prediction, and consistency with established physical principles, standards that have influenced how contemporary parapsychology approaches theory development.

Responses and evaluation

May’s theoretical frameworks have generated substantial discussion within parapsychology and related fields. Proponents argue that his models provide the most rigorous and empirically grounded explanations for psi phenomena available, moving the field beyond vague appeals to “mental energy” or “psychic force.”⁴ The informational psi framework, in particular, has been praised for its parsimony, explaining multiple psi phenomena through a unified mechanism rather than requiring separate theories for telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition.⁵

May’s emphasis on information-theoretic approaches has also influenced how researchers conceptualize target properties and their relationship to psi performance. By treating targets as information sources with measurable properties (such as entropy or complexity), May’s framework made it possible to test specific predictions about which targets should be easier or harder to perceive anomalously.⁶ This shift from qualitative descriptions to quantitative target analysis represents a significant methodological advance in psi research.

The signals mechanism, with its emphasis on weak, noisy information channels, also provides a theoretical justification for the statistical methods used in psi research. If psi operates through weak signals, then large sample sizes and sophisticated statistical analysis are not merely practical necessities but theoretical requirements. This framework thus reconciles the small effect sizes characteristic of psi research with the reality of the phenomena themselves.²

May’s work has also contributed to broader discussions about the relationship between consciousness and physics. By proposing that anomalous cognition operates through quantum-level selection rather than classical force, May’s theories engage with fundamental questions about the role of observation and intention in quantum mechanics, though without requiring consciousness to violate physical law.³