There were no real targets. Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Target Feedb. The answer which participants chose could also have been dependent on other factors, regardless of whether it was a target or not or it was given as feedback or not. The other possible determinants could, for example, have been the position the answer had in relation to the other provided possibilities, how symmetrical or widely known the answer is, what it reminds most people of etc. In that case the response bias merely corresponded to the real target by chance.
Psychokinesis can probably only influence real chance events as for instance radioactive decay.
This process is also called a collapse of a wave function. In the EG there were real targets underlying the presented stimuli and all the participants of that group received a correct feedback on those underlying real targets. A possible PSI-effect in the EG can be estimated by a comparison of the empirically found frequencies of the possible answers in the Condition 1 with the empirically found frequencies of the possible answers in the Condition 2. In a comparison of the empirically ascertained frequencies of all possible answers in C 1 and C 2 systematic response sets could be controlled . This was possible because these response sets operated in the same direction in both Cs, whereas the real targets and the corresponding feedback were different.