Answers for “Telepathy” with explanations

Question 27-30:

27. E (para 2, line 4-6: “proof and failed. Sceptics and advocates alike do concur on one issue,
however: that the most impressive evidence so far has come from the so-called „ganzfeld‟
experiments, a German term that means „whole field„.”)

28. B (para 2, line 7-10: “„. Reports of telepathic experiences had by people during
meditation led parapsychologists to suspect that telepathy might involve „signals‟ passing
between people that were so faint that they were usually swamped by normal brain

29. A (para 7: “What they are certainly not finding, however, is any change in attitude of
mainstream scientists: most still totally reject the very idea of telepathy. The problem
stems at least in part from the lack of any plausible mechanism for telepathy.”)

30. F (para 6, line 5-7: “as current results suggest, telepathy produces hit-rates only
marginally above the 25 per cent expected by chance, it’s unlikely to be detected by a
typical ganzfeld study involving around 40 people”)

Question 31-40:
31. sender
32. picture/image
33. receiver

(para 3, line 5-9: “telepathy test involved identification of a picture chosen from a
random selection of four taken from a large image bank. The idea was that a person
acting as a ‘sender’ would attempt to beam the image over to the ‘receiver’ relaxing in
the sealed room. Once the session was over, this person was asked to identify which of
the four images had been used”)

34. sensory leakage
35. (outright) fraud
(para 4, line 5-8: “telepathy must exist; there were many other ways of getting positive
results. These ranged from „sensory leakage‟ — where clues about the pictures
accidentally reach the receiver ~ to outright fraud.”)

36. computers
37. human involvement
38. meta-analysis

(para 5, line 2-6: “automated variant of the technique which used computers to perform
many of the key tasks such as the random selection of images. By minimizing human
involvement, the idea was to minimize the risk of flawed results. In 1987, results from
hundreds of autoganzfeld tests were studied by Honorton in a „meta-analysis‟, a statistical

39. lack of consistency (para 6, first 2 lines: “Yet some parapsychologists remain disturbed by the lack of consistency between individual ganzfeld studies”)

40. big/large enough (para 6, line 7-8; “above the 25 per cent expected by chance, it’s
unlikely to be detected by a typical ganzfeld study involving around 40 people: the group
is just not big enough”)

Show More

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *