The Scientific Skeptic
A psychological claim is considered meaningful if its propositions can be verified. The verification can be made based on physical conditions and any other relevant aspects. Verifiable psychological claims are considered to be true, whereas claims whose conditions cannot be verified are false. In addition, claims that lack verifiable conditions are considered to be meaningless. For example, my skepticism of extrasensory perception emanates from the absence of replicable experiments on the psychological claim. This paper evaluates extrasensory perception, develops a research question, and explains the applicability of the scientific method to the claim.
The Chosen Psychological Claim
My chosen psychological claim is extrasensory perception (ESP). Essentially, extrasensory perception is independent of sensory processes. There are four types of extrasensory perception: psychokinesis, telepathy, clairvoyance, and forecasting (Murphy, 2018). Telepathy refers to the ability to perceive or read the thoughts of other people, while clairvoyance refers to the ability to detect unknown events or objects (Murphy, 2018). Further, forecasting refers to the accurate prediction of future events. Lastly, psychokinesis refers to the ability to cause changes in a physical system through thought processes (Murphy, 2018). I am skeptical of extrasensory perception because of the absence of replicable experiments to prove the occurrence of ESP. Furthermore, current evidence lacks details to explain the existence of ESP. The lack of adequate controls in current research reduces the reliability of findings on ESP.
Various factors cause extrasensory perception. Emotional events such as the loss of a loved one increase the likelihood of extrasensory perception (Branković, 2019). Furthermore, findings indicate that the activation of the right brain hemisphere promotes the occurrence of extrasensory perception (Branković, 2019). Psychiatric counseling can be used to manage patients with extra-sensory perception (Lee, 2020). In this context, the psychiatrist should identify the unique needs of every patient and address them accordingly.
Research Question
A research question identifies a specific aspect that should be addressed. A specific and testable research question enables the researcher to remain focused and objective. The formulation of a research question is the preliminary step in scientific research. The research question that is applicable to extrasensory perception states: Do traumatic events and intrusions increase the likelihood of extrasensory perception?
Application of Scientific Method to Research Question
The scientific method used by Pérez-Navarro and Guerra (2012) applies to my research question. The scientific method uses a control group and an experimental group (Pérez-Navarro & Guerra, 2012). In this context, the experimental group should include individuals who have had previous traumatic experiences or intrusions. Examples of these experiences include emotional and physical abuse, neglect, and any other form of emotional baggage, such as the loss of loved ones (Branković, 2019). On the other hand, the control group consists of individuals without any history of traumatic events.
The researcher should evaluate various aspects, such as mind reading (telepathy) and remote viewing. Mind reading requires the participants to predict or identify an aspect that is only known by the researcher (Lee, 2020). For example, the researcher can observe a deck of cards and ask the participants to identify the specific type that they are looking at. Further, remote viewing is accomplished by blinding both the research and the participants (Branković, 2019). For example, a third party can drive to an undisclosed location, and the participants are asked to locate the place. Findings from this experimental study can help to identify the relationship between traumatic experiences or intrusions and extrasensory perceptions (ESP). In this context, the accuracy of mind reading and remote viewing among the control and experimental groups should be evaluated. Accordingly, a higher accuracy among the experimental group indicates a positive correlation between traumatic experiences and ESP. On the other hand, an equal ability to predict among the control and experimental groups will negate the association between ESP and traumatic experiences.
Comparison to Other Methods: The Method of Tenacity
Individuals who embrace the method of tenacity hold on to their beliefs and ideas rigidly. The method of tenacity is not scientific but depends on aspects considered to be factual by other people (Educology.edu, n.d.). Furthermore, this method is dependent on superstition and habit. In this scenario, individuals are conservative and disregard new information and facts. The main shortcoming of this method is the over-reliance on inaccurate information (Educology.edu, n.d.). Furthermore, this method fails to establish an elaborate framework for amending or correcting erroneous information (Educology.edu, n.d.). As such, the method of tenacity lacks credibility.
On the other hand, the scientific method allows the researchers to develop a research question and a hypothesis and test the hypothesis. The scientific method allows the researchers to use a control group and an experimental group (Pérez-Navarro & Guerra, 2012). This research can be observational or experimental. Nonetheless, both designs enable the researcher to verify the hypothesis. By so doing, the accuracy of an idea can be verified. This forms the basis of evidence-based practice that is dependent on the current information. In this context, scientific research can be used to establish the relationship between traumatic experiences and extrasensory experiences.
Conclusion
Psychological claims are considered meaningful if their propositions can be verified. Extrasensory perception is the psychological claim discussed in this paper. Essentially, it is independent of sensory processes. There are four types of extrasensory perception: psychokinesis, telepathy, clairvoyance, and forecasting. In addition, the scientific method would apply when testing my hypothesis. The scientific method allows researchers to verify claims and ideas, whereas the method of tenacity holds beliefs and ideas rigidly.
References
Branković, M. (2019). Who believes in ESP: Cognitive and motivational determinants of the belief in extra-sensory perception. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v15i1.1689
Educology.edu. (n.d.). Method of Tenacity for Fixation of Belief. https://educology.indiana.edu/methodOfTenacityPeirce.html
Lee, J. P. (2020). Personal experiences with auditory verbal hallucination and extrasensory perception. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 46(4), 745–746. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbz008
Murphy, G. (2018). Spontaneous telepathy and the problem of survival. Journal of Parapsychology, 82(Suppl), 45–53. https://doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.30891/jopar.2018.03.05
Pérez-Navarro, J. M., & Guerra, X. M. (2012). An empirical evaluation of a set of recommendations for extrasensory perception experimental research. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 8(1), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v8i1.297
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
My chosen psychological claim is Extrasensory Perception.
NEEDS TO ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS ON THE RUBRIC.
The Scientific Skeptic
MUST BE 3 PAGES IN APA 7TH EDITION
NO OUTSIDE WEBSTE RESOURCES. Please utilize the school’s library, Shapiro Library. Home – Shapiro Library Homepage – Research Guides at Southern New Hampshire University (snhu.edu)
The login is selena.longoria@snhu.edu and the password is Bellaswan27. I need it done by Saturday.