Identical triplets electric shock telepathy experiment on ITV succesful?

[Michael R]

Watched last night's ITV programme (on Sky) on identical triplets to see what it had to say about telepathic connections. The four sets of triplets featured were startlingly alike, and closely bonded, but turned out to have quite different tastes and personalities.

However one of the sets, three 21-year-old males, gone through a test in which one received an electric shock and the others, in different rooms, were wired up to EDR machines to see if they showed any arousal. They were spooked to be told that the read-outs were closely synchronized, with small spikes occurring at the same time.

The results of the tests were definite - two of the boys who were at a distant sealed room had received spikes at exactly the same times as the boy who have been given the electric shock - if the tests are facts and not a fake/lie on a national TV scale, it changes the whole face of science.

However, I have not been informed of any similar tests or any criticism on those tests, nor have read any skeptics opinions on the matter on any skeptic site.

Have anyone watched the show? It can be googled "itv identical triplets" (As a new user I'm not allowed to post links)

Michael.

[Zep]

Did they boys all know what was going to happen and when?

[Pixel42]

The results of the tests were definite - two of the boys who were at a distant sealed room had received spikes at exactly the same times as the boy who have been given the electric shock
My first question would be: was the person who looked for the spikes blinded? i.e. did s/he know at what time the brother was shocked and then look at that precise time on the other brothers' charts and count any small spike at that time as a hit? Or did s/he look at the charts first, identify the most prominent spike, and only then check whether the time at which it occurred matched the time when the brother was shocked?

[Michael R]

No. One of the boys was sat in one room and was given a simple computer game. When he made a bad move, he automatically got an electric shock. There were many bad moves. Two other boys were sat in a distant sealed room with EDR on their heads, recording peaks.

[Michael R]

Pixel42, apparently, from what was shown on the show, a time graph with electric shock timings was recorded for the first boy, and for the 2 other boys a time graph with brain peaks was recorded. The persons who made the experiment sat in a different room and didn't interfere, and had shown the graphs to the cameras after the experiment was over. The peaks of the two other boys that were synchronized in time with the electric shockings of the first boy were significant and not small at all.

[Michael R]

A further note: the show was an entertainment show, and lacked any 'serious academic sense', but in spite of that, the experiment was simple, clear, un-ambigous, and the results were definite.

[fls]

These types of experiments have been going on for decades.

This paper provides a systematic review of the research.

http://www.mindmatter.de/mmpdf/wackermann.pdf

The author comments that "after about four decades of research, the status of dyadic brain state correlations not mediated by physical environment is still surprisingly unclear."

Linda

[fls]

A further note: the show was an entertainment show, and lacked any 'serious academic sense', but in spite of that, the experiment was simple, clear, un-ambigous, and the results were definite.

Yeah, that's often how it is presented. But it doesn't seem to represent the real state of affairs.

Linda

[Michael R]

Linda I will read this article through, however in meanwhile, from what you say, the invertible conclusion I can think is that what was presented on a public national tv show had been simply a lie/scam, because the graphs presented there have been most clear and un-ambigious.

[Freethinker]

The voltage levels of brainwaves and the amount of gain required on the front-end of a device to record them make the measurement subject to noise coupling from other electrical devices nearby. There could easily have been signals induced in the monitoring system from the equipment which generated the shock.

Two easy controls could have been added. First, a set of monitoring leads not connected to a human to ensure that no signal was present due to coupling of some type. Second, just for interest, a person who had never met any of the triplets (or maybe a dog) could also be monitored.

[Michael R]

That is a good point you make about electric shock could have aroused the EDR, although it was located at least 20 feet away from the shocks.

What I don't understand from what you say, is how a person who had never meet the triplets (or maybe a dog) is relevant to the experiment. The experiment deals with identical twins/triplets. Knowing/not knowing personally also doesn't seem relevant to the experiment, as the shocks generated are results of failing a computer game , not a common knowledge/understanding between the triplets.

[Zep]

No. One of the boys was sat in one room and was given a simple computer game. When he made a bad move, he automatically got an electric shock. There were many bad moves. Two other boys were sat in a distant sealed room with EDR on their heads, recording peaks.So the answer to my questions was "yes". Both boys both knew that one was to receive electric shocks, and when (i.e. the time span) this would happen, and quite possibly how frequent these shocks might reasonably occur.

You now say that there were many shocks in that time span, and pseudo-random intervals, based on your description of the method used. Let's say the time span was 60 minutes, and the shocks were average one per 30 seconds. That's 120 shocks in the time span. Now let's assume the second boy believed he was supposed to sense shocks in the same 60 minutes. Knowing the rough rate at which they should happen, he unconsciously reacts accordingly.

So what are the chances of correlation of the peaks? Depending on how close the correlation is deemed "a match", I suspect pretty frequently. Statisticians may help me here.

A better test would be to develop a baseline. Perform the same test, but, without telling either boy, provide no shocks at all to the first boy. See if the second boy still "reacts" unconsciously as he is "expected" to do if the shocks were happening.

[Freethinker]

What I don't understand from what you say, is how a person who had never meet the triplets (or maybe a dog) is relevant to the experiment. The experiment deals with identical twins/triplets. Knowing/not knowing personally also doesn't seem relevant to the experiment, as the shocks generated are results of failing a computer game , not a common knowledge/understanding between the triplets.

Seeing if an unknown individual also experienced the same reaction would clarify whether there was some special connection between the triplets. A connection that would presumably be different for a person unknown to them.

[Michael R]

Zep, I understand your sceptism about chances, statistics coincidences which can easily be concluded on either way, but -

I don't know how have you concluded from my response that both boys knew the first boy was to receive electric shocks. From what was shown on the TV show, the 2 boys didn't know the first boy is gonna be given shocks, they were just taken to the other room and were said to sit relax.

Also, the peaks on the graphs (there were about 5-6 in a span of about 3 minutes) were big and clear, and there weren't any other significant peaks as those 5-6 that coorelated with the timings of the electric shocks given to the first boy.

[Michael R]

Seeing if an unknown individual also experienced the same reaction would clarify whether there was some special connection between the triplets. A connection that would presumably be different for a person unknown to them.
If other individual was to experience the same reaction, it would only have proven that other individual also sensed impulses from distance with accurate co-relation, a.k.a telepathy.

[to.by]

In thw OP the spikes were small, but now "the peaks on the graphs (there were about 5-6 in a span of about 3 minutes) were BIG and clear".

[Michael R]

Alright, BIG isn't appropriate description for the spikes, however they were definite (I'll try to upload this part of the show later). In the opening I've partly quoted a description of the show from other site.

[Freethinker]

If other individual was to experience the same reaction, it would only have proven that other individual also sensed impulses from distance with accurate co-relation, a.k.a telepathy.

Indeed. So why use triplets? Setting up an experiment is about eliminating or controlling variables and uncertainty so that the results are unambiguous. If the point of the experiment was to indicate some special communication link between persons who had shared a womb, it would be important to perform the test in a manner that produced evidence that the effect was due to womb-sharing, not a physiological feature which all humans or animals share.

Regardless, controls were completely lacking in the cited demonstration, which invalidates the results.

[Michael R]

Indeed. So why use triplets? Setting up an experiment is about eliminating or controlling variables and uncertainty so that the results are unambiguous. If the point of the experiment was to indicate some special communication link between persons who had shared a womb, it would be important to perform the test in a manner that produced evidence that the effect was due to womb-sharing, not a physiological feature which all humans or animals share.

Regardless, controls were completely lacking in the cited demonstration, which invalidates the results.

I agree there's some shady aspect to the experiment in that only the triplet was experimented on. Also the lack of controls was apparent as you concluded, and that is shady too in my opinion.
In spite of that, the results were shown/presented as definite, and if they were wrongly concluded, that highlights the fault and the blatant irresponsibility of a national TV network, presenting to the public false impression/data which could be revolutionary.

[Professor Yaffle]

A review of the programme in The Scotsman:


Within the first ten minutes of Identical Triplets: Their Secret World, some academic or other declared that, beyond the initial novelty of seeing three clone-like siblings, there really isn't anything that interesting or special about this benign genetic quirk. ITV should've then faded to black and broadcast footage of a fluttering empty crisp packet for an hour.

What I learned from this programme: identical triplets may or may not have a more heightened sense of sibling rivalry than other people; they may or may not have a more heightened sense of ESP, although probably not; and depending on their attractiveness they may or may not become professional models or a rubbish pop guitar band called The Noise Next Door. Fascinating stuff.

[Michael R]

A review of the programme in The Scotsman:

Well that's 'The Scotsman' opinion on the programme. Why give value to opinions which are not rigidly explanatory?

[fls]

Linda I will read this article through, however in meanwhile, from what you say, the invertible conclusion I can think is that what was presented on a public national tv show had been simply a lie/scam, because the graphs presented there have been most clear and un-ambigious.

I wouldn't call it a lie, but rather "for entertainment purposes only". They are in the business of maximizing viewership, not scientific investigation, after all.

Linda

[Scazon]

Why not call it a lie? Sky is a Murdoch channel after all.

[theMark]

Well, my first question would’ve been: Was the equipment properly shielded? Y'know, there was this Marconi guy, coupla decades ago, an' he managed to send electric shocks across the Atlantic, without any triplets at all...

(that, and my PC speakers can pick up my mobile quite easily... ;)

Yes, I admit, I’m just being flippant because it’s been tried and failed so often before...

[catbasket]

Ignore the Sky reference, it was an ITV programme first transmitted on June 23rd.

Professor Nancy Segal, "world triplet expert", conducted the experiment ...

[Gord_in_Toronto]

To sum up:

The experiment is blindingly obvious.

It has been done before with better controls.

It does not demonstrate telepathy.

If previous experiments had done so, we would all be believers now.

Any further questions?

:boggled:

[blutoski]

Linda I will read this article through, however in meanwhile, from what you say, the invertible conclusion I can think is that what was presented on a public national tv show had been simply a lie/scam, because the graphs presented there have been most clear and un-ambigious.

I would say that television programming should be assumed to be contrived. My learning here in Vancouver where about half of my friends are involved in the industry is that everything that happens in a TV show is decided long in advance.

It's quite reasonable to assume that if they didn't get good correlations in the first run, that they did a few dozen retakes until they got one that fit the script that said "a positive result is obtained." This is the one they broadcast.

I predict that if you write them a letter saying you would like to use their data for research purposes, asking for a complete set of data including those from multiple takes, they will simply remind you that TV is entertainment, not education or research. If they reply at all.

[blutoski]

I would say that television programming should be assumed to be contrived. My learning here in Vancouver where about half of my friends are involved in the industry is that everything that happens in a TV show is decided long in advance.

It's quite reasonable to assume that if they didn't get good correlations in the first run, that they did a few dozen retakes until they got one that fit the script that said "a positive result is obtained." This is the one they broadcast.

I predict that if you write them a letter saying you would like to use their data for research purposes, asking for a complete set of data including those from multiple takes, they will simply remind you that TV is entertainment, not education or research. If they reply at all.

Further, the prominent skeptics who have participated in programming in the past always have interesting anecdotes. James Randi was asked to participate in a program where he was to duplicate Uri Geller's abilities. Normally, it wouldn't be a problem, except a stage manager came by at the last minute and siezed his special equipment - a trick notepad. He was able to improvise, but the point is that the writers had ordained in advance that the outcome would favour Geller.

Another anecdote was where Randi was asked to participate in a panel to watch a young girl 'read by feeling' on a TV show in Japan. The girl could read words on a piece of paper that was rolled up and taped and put in her hand in a mitten under a table. Randi discovered how she cheated - she unwrapped the tape that bound the paper, unrolled it, and peeked at it under the table. The producers' response: turn off the camera under the table so the viewers wouldn't see her cheating. The script did not say 'girl is exposed as cheat' - it said 'show closes, mystery maintained.'

So... hate to burst your bubble, but TV is entertainment; it is nothing more.

[Bee]

This may be a bit off topic but since it's about multiple births I'd like to say I have identical twin daughters and help run a twins club which has about 38 sets of registered twins and 2 sets of triplets. I can honestly say in the 4 years I've been a member of this club and a parent of twins I have not seen anything to even suggest twins/triplets share a telepathic link apart from the intimacy you'd expect from siblings who share such a special bond.

The only time I hear of 'telepathic stories' concerning twins/triplets is by people who are not parents of multiples. I'm often asked if my daughters have shown telepathic abilities and they always look disappointed when I reply 'no'.

[skeptical]

the results were shown/presented as definite, and if they were wrongly concluded, that highlights the fault and the blatant irresponsibility of a national TV network, presenting to the public false impression/data which could be revolutionary.

Michael, does this surprise you? The vast majority of TV is about entertainment, not fact. In the US, there is a show that features John Edward where he supposedly speaks to dead relatives. It has been known for quite some time that it is nothing more than cold reading that can be done by any side show carny. However, the show remains on the air and the audience members and many in the general public really think Edward can do what he claims. As I recall, the show starts with a disclaimer that it is for "entertainment purposes only". What gets on TV is what sells, and woo, unfortunately, sells big time.

[schlitt]

I have seen a similar television show before, with a similar test involving twins. What struck me was the fact that the results were simply interpreted by a person, looking at the graphs and trying hard to find a positive correlation. He found spikes that you could say coincided with a similar time, but failed to mention that these spikes were happing all over the graph, not just at a similar time.

It is easy to make positive correlations when you are dealing with such ambiguous data, and you have a vested interest in finding positive results.

[sthomson]

I have seen a similar television show before, with a similar test involving twins. What struck me was the fact that the results were simply interpreted by a person, looking at the graphs and trying hard to find a positive correlation. He found spikes that you could say coincided with a similar time, but failed to mention that these spikes were happing all over the graph, not just at a similar time.

It is easy to make positive correlations when you are dealing with such ambiguous data, and you have a vested interest in finding positive results.

Indeed. There are mathematical techniques that could be used to demonstrate if there is correlation between the graphs, even if that correlation is time-shifted, but saying, "We went to a statistician and he said that there is a 10% chance of correlation" does not make for good TV.

[godless dave]

In spite of that, the results were shown/presented as definite, and if they were wrongly concluded, that highlights the fault and the blatant irresponsibility of a national TV network, presenting to the public false impression/data which could be revolutionary.

And? I don't know about the UK, but on US TV that happens several times every day.

[jadebox]

Well, my first question would’ve been: Was the equipment properly shielded? Y'know, there was this Marconi guy, coupla decades ago, an' he managed to send electric shocks across the Atlantic, without any triplets at all...

(that, and my PC speakers can pick up my mobile quite easily... ;)

Yes, I admit, I’m just being flippant because it’s been tried and failed so often before...

On "Mythbusters" they were suprised, at first, when it seemed that a plant actually did register "emotion" on a polygraph when someone in the same room yelled at it. Later, they discovered that the polygraph machine was sensitive enough to be affected by someone yelling in the same room with it.

In a similar manner, it's quite possible that the devices used in this demonstration picked up electrical signals from the shocks. It's a more likely scenario than "ESP."

-- Roger

[Gord_in_Toronto]

On "Mythbusters" they were suprised, at first, when it seemed that a plant actually did register "emotion" on a polygraph when someone in the same room yelled at it. Later, they discovered that the polygraph machine was sensitive enough to be affected by someone yelling in the same room with it.

In a similar manner, it's quite possible that the devices used in this demonstration picked up electrical signals from the shocks. It's a more likely scenario than "ESP."

-- Roger

Maybe we need a new thread on psychic polygraphs? :duck:

[Skeptic Ginger]

If other individual was to experience the same reaction, it would only have proven that other individual also sensed impulses from distance with accurate co-relation, a.k.a telepathy.That's not true. I think Free noticed no controls were in the room with the receiving siblings was a critical flaw in the study. If everyone in the room experienced the same brain wave spike, at a minimum the hypothesis fails. Then you would need to fire the jolt into a control brain and another into the air without hitting anyone with it or into an inanimate object. All those controls would have made this actual science vs a TV stunt.

[Zep]

Indeed. There are mathematical techniques that could be used to demonstrate if there is correlation between the graphs, even if that correlation is time-shifted, but saying, "We went to a statistician and he said that there is a 10% chance of correlation" does not make for good TV.Precisely my point in my previous post.

To me the obvious "leakage" is as Freethinker described: very basic EMF detection by the outside recording equipment. I understand the human body makes a decent aerial for some electromagnetic frequencies. So the second boy could simply have been picking up the original shock transmissions. Easy to test, obviously - was that done?

[Spektator]

In one of his books, Allen Koningsberg wrote of the mysterious case of two twins who had been separated soon after birth. Years later, one of the twins took a bath, and at the same time, hundreds of miles away, the second twin inexplicably got clean!

[Beerina]

Linda I will read this article through, however in meanwhile, from what you say, the invertible conclusion I can think is that what was presented on a public national tv show had been simply a lie/scam, because the graphs presented there have been most clear and un-ambigious.

QFT


The goal is to earn money on a TV show, not to earn billions finding a real psychic bootstrap example that can be explored and expanded and turned into massively profitable products.

[Jeff Corey]

In one of his books, Allen Koningsberg wrote of the mysterious case of two twins who had been separated soon after birth. Years later, one of the twins took a bath, and at the same time, hundreds of miles away, the second twin inexplicably got clean!

Without Feathers, Chapter 2, "Examining Psychic Phenomona".

[Elaedith]

Linda I will read this article through, however in meanwhile, from what you say, the invertible conclusion I can think is that what was presented on a public national tv show had been simply a lie/scam, because the graphs presented there have been most clear and un-ambigious.

Do you know whether the graphs presented were cherry-picked from a larger sample of data?