![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the Ghostbusters example, the term "negative reinforcement" is used in the non-technical (that is, incorrect) sense of "reinforcement that is bad" -- i.e., to refer to what is technically termed "punishment." "Negative reinforcement" properly refers to no enforcement at all, "negative" here meaning "none, nothing." Seinfeld capitalizes on this misunderstanding -- Geroge receives a "negative prognosis" and panics. He understanding "negative" to mean" "bad;" in medicine, however, as in science generally, "negative" means nothing, no cancer, for example, is present -- a negative prognosis is a good thing! The example ought to be changed so as not to be misleading and further "reinforce" this common misunderstanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeletaylor ( talk • contribs) 20:31, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This article's rather poor explanation of the law of averages/ law of large numbers should be replaced with a link. - Smack 03:15, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Doesnt this article violate NPOV? I mean, it seems to be throwing ESP around quite casually, while the ESP page itself is careful to refer only to 'people who believe in ESP' or 'proponents of ESP'. Is a change warranted? - Aparajit
I've created an online experiment that utilizes zener cards to test for clairvoyance/precognition in a statistically meaningful manner; I plan to include a reference to it in this wikipedia article if there are no objections. Also, the mathematics in this article is lacking, I (being a professional mathematician and Masters in Applied Mathematics) can correct it, also if there are no objections. Let me know your thoughts. Thank you. - Scotopia 10:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I just implemented my edit, which comprised an additional paragraph in "Use in Experiments" to describe online tests and an added reference. In addition I swept up the "Statistics" section a little to make it more mathematically accurate. I can expand on this much more but I figured I'd let my edits sit for a while and give you guys a chance to poke holes in them. Let me know your thoughts. Thank you. - Scotopia 12:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
This article could use a lot of rewriting to balance out the POV, it seems to me. Particularly galling is how it throws about the Psi assumption (yeah, I plan to write an article on that soon. For now, see [1]). Basically, the problem is how it implies that any score over 20% would definately indicate Psi. Why Psi, and not God sending messages to the subject? For that matter, why not use it as evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is manipulating the cards with His Noodly Appendage?
Additionally, the statistical analysis is flawed. Zener cards are presented in decks of 25, with five of each card. With the predisposition of a subject to not guess the same card twice, the hit rate immediately rises to around 25%.
I'm putting the NPOV tag on this now to inform readers, but I'll try to get back to it and fix it myself. --- DrLeebot 15:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Should a short explanation of psi present and psi missing be included in this article? (i.e. low scores also indicate a possible existence of psi) or should that be confined to articles on general explanations on research? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.159.114.88 ( talk) 14:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC).
Aren't there 2 N's in the word Zener, and not one? SmileToday☺( talk to me , My edits) 20:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Just curious if there is any better/worse statistics if each card was a different color? -- 70.167.58.6 ( talk) 00:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Has somebody devised alternate uses for Zener cards? Such as playing cards? -- Error ( talk) 22:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Zener cards are also known as Rhine cards —Shouldn't there be a redirect? 67.243.186.3 ( talk) 05:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Or can people freely print them and sell them without violating anyone's intellectual property? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crenchaboodar ( talk • contribs) 20:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Need a bit of work here, especially regarding an impartial skeptical perspective. Material gathering begins for me now. I would, of course, enjoy help and suggestions and concerns and etc... her and on my talk page.
Will likely be sandboxed as a copy of the article and rewritten in parts, rearranged in others, and hopefully substantially added to. Cheers. Rap Chart Mike ( talk) 14:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Given the age of the topic and it's largely dead-in-the-water nature there is not a lot of super current stuff out there on it. I did what I could and hopefully it'll spur some activity and people can expand/revise to create an ever better piece of work. Cheers. Rap Chart Mike ( talk) 15:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Zener cards are always printed with black on white background. 108.200.234.93 ( talk) 05:01, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Guessing 20 out of 25 has a probability of about 1 in 5 billion.
Guessing all 25 correct has a chance of (.2) = 3.3 x 10, or about 1 in 300 quadrillion.
Numbers look strangely formatted, as if exponents were missing. The formula in the picture in the source article where this was taken from also looks as if it had missing parts.
Also probabilities look as if 25 cards were drawn from infinite deck, not of a permutation of a finite desk.
For permutation I get P = 1/623360743125120, which is much lower.
Update: now I see that the section talks about a test with 25 one-in-five questions, not about a deck of 25 cards, which is what the article is about. Isn't this misleading? _Vi ( talk) 11:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)