A respected psychology journal has agreed to publish a paper presenting what its author describes as strong evidence for extrasensory perception, the ability to sense future events. Though the paper was peer reviewed, there are many critics who say the research is nonsense. A group of psychologists published a rebuttal paper in the same journal.
How does the peer review process ensure good quality research? Are there factors that the standard process cannot take account of? Or is ESP simply a claim that should not be entertained as a subject of scientific inquiry?
To read the rest of the article, click here.