Precognition

Precognition (from the Latin prae- 'before', and cognitio 'acquiring knowledge') is the purported
psychic phenomenon of seeing, or otherwise becoming directly aware of, events in the future.

There is no accepted scientific evidence that precognition is a real effect, and it is widely
considered to be pseudoscience.[1] Precognition violates the principle of causality, that an effect
cannot occur before its cause.[2]

Precognition has been widely believed in throughout history. Despite the lack of scientific
evidence, many people believe it to be real; it is still widely reported and remains a topic of
research and discussion within the parapsychology community.

Precognitive phenomena
Precognition is sometimes treated as an example of the wider phenomenon of prescience or
foreknowledge, to understand by any means what is likely to happen in the future. It is distinct
from premonition, which is a vaguer feeling of some impending disaster. Related activities such
as predictive prophecy and fortune telling have been practised throughout history.

Precognitive dreams are the most widely reported occurrences of precognition.[3] Usually, a
dream or vision can only be identified as precognitive after the putative event has taken place.
When such an event occurs after a dream, it is said to have "broken the dream".[4][5]
 "Joseph's Dream", a painting by
Gaetano Gandolfi, c. 1790. According
to the Book of Genesis, God granted
Joseph precognition through
prophetic dreams and the ability to
interpret the dreams of others.

In religion
In Judaism it is believed that dreams are mostly insignificant while others "have the potential to
contain prophetic messages".[6] According to the Book of Genesis, God granted Joseph
precognition through prophetic dreams and the ability to interpret the dreams of others.[7]

Hinduism has a subsystem of psychology called Indian psychology with dreams believed to
contain information about the future. There are seven classifications of dream or 'swapna', in
which those which become 'manifest' are called 'bhāvita'.[8]

Precognition has a role in Buddhism with dreams believed to be 'mind-created phenomena'.

Those dreams which 'warn of impending danger or even prepare us for overwhelming good
news" are considered the most important.[9]
History
Throughout history it has been believed that certain individuals have precognitive abilities, or
that certain practices can induce such experiences, and these visions have sometimes been
associated with important historical events.[3] Despite the lack of scientific evidence, many
people still believe in precognition.[10][11] A poll in 2005 showed 73% of Americans believe in at
least one type of paranormal experience, with 41% believing in extrasensory perception.[12][13]

Antiquity
Since ancient times precognition has been associated with dreams and trance states as well as
waking premonitions, giving rise to acts of prophecy and fortune telling. Oracles, originally seen
as sources of wisdom, became progressively associated with previsions of the future.[3]

Such claims of seeing the future have never been without their sceptical critics. Aristotle carried
out an inquiry into allegedly prophetic dreams in his On Divination in Sleep. He accepted that "it is
quite conceivable that some dreams may be tokens and causes [of future events]" but also
believed that "most [so-called prophetic] dreams are, however, to be classed as mere
coincidences...". Where Democritus had suggested that emanations from future events could be
sent back to the dreamer, Aristotle proposed that it was, rather, the dreamer's sense impressions
which reached forward to the event.[14]

17th–19th centuries
The term "precognition" first appeared in the 17th century but did not come into common use
among investigators until much later.[3]

An early investigation into claims of precognition was published by the missionary Fr. P. Boilat in
1883. He claimed to have put an unspoken question to an African witch-doctor whom he
mistrusted. Contrary to his expectations, the witch-doctor gave him the correct answer without
ever having heard the question.[3]

Early 20th century

In the early 20th century J. W. Dunne, a British soldier and aeronautics engineer, experienced
several dreams which he regarded as precognitive. He developed techniques to record and
analyse them, identifying any correspondences between his future experiences and his recorded
dreams. He reported his findings in his 1927 book An Experiment with Time. In it he alleges that
10% of his dreams appeared to include some element of future experience. He also persuaded
some friends to try the experiment on themselves, with mixed results. He noted a strong
cognitive bias in which subjects, including himself, were reluctant to ascribe their dream
correspondences to precognition and determinedly sought alternative explanations.[15] Dunne
concluded that precognitive elements in dreams are common and that many people
unknowingly have them.[16][17] He suggested also that dream precognition did not reference
future events of all kinds, but specifically the future experiences of the dreamer. He was led to
this idea when he found that a dream of a volcanic eruption appeared to foresee not the disaster
itself but his subsequent misreading of an inaccurate account in a newspaper.[16] Edith Lyttelton,
who became President of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR), regarded his theory as
consistent with her own idea of the superconscious.[18] In 1932 he helped the SPR to conduct a
more formal experiment, but he and the Society's lead researcher Theodore Besterman failed to
agree on the significance of the results.[19][20] Nevertheless, the Philosopher C. D. Broad
remarked that, "The only theory known to me which seems worth consideration is that proposed
by Mr. Dunne in his Experiment with Time."[21] An Experiment with Time was widely read and
"undoubtedly helped to form something of the imaginative climate of [the interwar] years",
influencing many writers of both fact and fiction both then and since.[22] According to Flieger,
"Dunne's theory was so current and popular a topic that not to understand it was a mark of
singularity."[23] Major writers whose work was significantly influenced by his ideas on
precognition in dreams and visions include H. G. Wells, J. B. Priestley and Olaf Stapledon.[24][25]
Vladimir Nabokov was also later influenced by Dunne.[26]

In 1932 Charles Lindbergh's infant son was kidnapped, murdered and buried among trees.
Psychologists Henry Murray and D. R. Wheeler used the event to test for dream precognition, by
inviting the public to report any dreams of the child. A total of 1,300 dreams were reported. Only
five per cent envisioned the child dead and only 4 of the 1,300 envisioned the location of the
grave as amongst trees.[27]

The first ongoing and organised research program on precognition was instituted by husband-
and-wife team Joseph Banks Rhine and Louisa E. Rhine in the 1930s at Duke University's
Parapsychology Laboratory. J. B. Rhine used a method of forced-choice matching in which
participants guessed the order of a deck of 25 cards, each five of which bore one of five
geometrical symbols. Although his results were positive and gained some academic
acceptance, his methods were later shown to be badly flawed and subsequent researchers using
more rigorous procedures were unable to reproduce his results. His mathematics was
sometimes flawed, the experiments were not double-blinded or even necessarily single-blinded
and some of the cards to be guessed were so thin that the symbol could be seen through the
backing.[28][29][30]

Samuel G. Soal, another leading member of the SPR, was described by Rhine as one of his
harshest critics, running many similar experiments with wholly negative results. However, from
around 1940 he ran forced-choice ESP experiments in which a subject attempted to identify
which of five animal pictures a subject in another room was looking at. Their performance on
this task was at chance, but when the scores were matched with the card that came after the
target card, three of the thirteen subjects showed a very high hit rate; Rhine now described Soal's
work as "a milestone in the field".[31] However analyses of Soal's findings, conducted several
years later, concluded that the positive results were more likely the result of deliberate fraud.[32]
The controversy continued for many years more.[31] In 1978 the statistician and parapsychology
researcher Betty Markwick, while seeking to vindicate Soal, discovered that he had tampered
with his data.[32] The untainted experimental results showed no evidence of precognition.[31][33]
Late 20th century
As more modern technology became available, more automated techniques of experimentation
were developed that did not rely on hand-scoring of equivalence between targets and guesses,
and in which the targets could be more reliably and readily tested at random. In 1969 Helmut
Schmidt introduced the use of high-speed random event generators (REG) for precognition
testing, and experiments were also conducted at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research
Lab.[34] Once again, flaws were found in all of Schmidt's experiments, when the psychologist C.
E. M. Hansel found that several necessary precautions were not taken.[35]

SF writer Philip K Dick believed that he had precognitive experiences and used the idea in some
of his novels,[36] especially as a central plot element in his 1956 science fiction short story "The
Minority Report"[37] and in his 1956 novel The World Jones Made.[38]

In 1963 the BBC television programme Monitor broadcast an appeal by the writer J.B. Priestley
for experiences which challenged our understanding of Time. He received hundreds of letters in
reply and believed that many of them described genuine precognitive dreams.[39][10] In 2014 the
BBC Radio 4 broadcaster Francis Spufford revisited Priestley's work and its relation to the ideas
of J.W. Dunne.[40]

In 1965 G. W. Lambert, a former Council member of the SPR, proposed five criteria that needed
to be met before an account of a precognitive dream could be regarded as credible:[41]

1. The dream should be reported to a

credible witness before the event.
2. The time interval between the dream
and the event should be short.
 3. The event should be unexpected at
the time of the dream.
4. The description should be of an event
destined literally, and not
symbolically, to happen.
5. The details of dream and event
should tally.
David Ryback, a psychologist in Atlanta, used a questionnaire survey approach to investigate
precognitive dreaming in college students during the 1980s. His survey of over 433 participants
showed that 290 or 66.9 per cent reported some form of paranormal dream. He rejected many
of these reports, but claimed that 8.8 per cent of the population was having actual precognitive
dreams.[42]

21st century
In 2011 the psychologist Daryl Bem, a Professor Emeritus at Cornell University, published
findings showing statistical evidence for precognition in the Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology.[43] The paper was heavily criticised, and the criticism widened to include the journal
itself and the validity of the peer-review process.[44][45] In 2012, an independent attempt to
reproduce Bem's results was published, but it failed to do so.[46][47][48][49][50] The widespread
controversy led to calls for improvements in practice and for more research.[51][52]
Scientific reception
Claims of precognition are, like any other claims, open to scientific criticism. However, the nature
of the criticism must adapt to the nature of the claim.[53]

Pseudoscience
Claims of precognition are criticised on three main grounds:

There is no known scientific mechanism

which would allow precognition. It
breaks temporal causality, in that the
precognised event causes an effect in
the subject prior to the event itself.
The large body of experimental work
has produced no accepted scientific
evidence that precognition exists.
 The large body of anecdotal evidence
can be explained by alternative
psychological mechanisms.
Consequently, precognition is widely considered to be pseudoscience.[1][54][55]

Violation of causality
Precognition would violate the principle of antecedence (causality); that is, that an effect does
not happen before its cause.[56][53] Information passing backwards in time (retrocausality) would
need to be carried by physical particles doing the same. Experimental evidence from high-energy
physics suggests that this cannot happen. There is therefore no direct justification for
precognition from a physics-based approach.[2]

Precognition would also contradict "most of the neuroscience and psychology literature, from
electrophysiology and neuroimaging to temporal effects found in psychophysical research."[57]

Lack of evidence
A great deal of evidence for precognition has been put forward, both as witnessed anecdotes
and as experimental results, but none has been accepted as rigorous scientific proof of the
phenomenon. Even the most prominent pieces of evidence have been repeatedly rejected due to
errors in those experiments as well as follow-on studies contradicting the original evidence. This
suggests that the evidence was not valid in the first place.[58][59]
Alternative explanations
Various known psychological processes have been put forward to explain experiences of
apparent precognition. These include:

Coincidence, where apparent instances

of precognition in fact arise from the law
of large numbers.[60][61]
Self-fulfilling prophecy and unconscious
enactment, where people unconsciously
bring about events which they have
previously imagined.
Unconscious perception, where people
unconsciously infer, from data they have
unconsciously learned, that a certain
event will probably happen in a certain
context. When the event occurs, the
former knowledge appears to have been
acquired without the aid of recognised
channels of information.
Retrofitting, which involves the false
interpretation of a past record of a
dream or vision, in order to match it to a
recent event. Retrofitting provides an
explanation for the supposed accuracy
of Nostradamus's vague predictions. For
example, quatrain I:60 states "A ruler
born near Italy...He's less a prince than a
butcher." The phrase "near Italy" can be
construed as covering a very broad
range of geography, while no details are
provided by Nostradamus regarding the
era when this ruler will live. Because of
this vagueness, and the flexibility of
retrofitting, this quatrain has been
interpreted by some as referring to
Napoleon, but by others as referring to
the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II,
and by others still as a reference to
Hitler.[62]
False memories, such as identifying
paramnesia and memory biases, where
the memory of a non-existent
precognitive event is formed after the
real event has occurred.[63] Where
subjects in a dream experiment have
been asked to write down their dreams
 in a diary, this can prevent selective
memory effects such that the dreams
no longer seem accurate about the
future.[64]
Déjà vu, where people experience a false
feeling that an identical event has
occurred previously. Some recent
authors have suggested that déjà vu and
identifying paramnesia are the same
thing.[65] This view is not universally
held, with others instead treating them
as distinct phenomena.[66]
Psychological explanations have also been proposed for belief in precognition. Psychologists
have conducted experiments which are claimed to show that people who feel loss of control in
their lives will turn to belief in precognition, because it gives them a sense of regaining
control.[67]
See also

List of topics characterized as

pseudoscience
Oneiromancy: Divination using dreams.
Remote viewing
Retrocognition: Direct knowledge of
past events at which one was not
present.
Third eye: Organ of mystical vision.

References

Notes

1. Alcock, James. (1981). Parapsychology-

 Science Or Magic?: A Psychological
Perspective Pergamon Press. pp. 3–6.
ISBN 978-0080257730
2. Taylor, John. (1980). Science and the
Supernatural: An Investigation of
Paranormal Phenomena Including Psychic
Healing, Clairvoyance, Telepathy, and
Precognition by a Distinguished Physicist
and Mathematician. Temple Smith. p. 83.
ISBN 0-85117-191-5.
3. Inglis (1986), Chapter on "Precognition"
4. Inglis (1985), p.89
5. Wyndham Lewis; "You Broke My Dream",
The Wild Body: A Soldier of Humour and
Other Stories, Chatto and Windus, London,
1927.
6. Freedman, Rabi Dr Moshe. "Do our dreams
have any meaning?" (https://www.thejc.co
m/judaism/features/do-our-dreams-have-a
ny-meaning-1.430516) . thejc.com. The
Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 25 January
2022.
7. Lang, Bernhard (2009). Joseph in Egypt: A
Cultural Icon from Grotius to Goethe. Yale
University Press. p. 23. ISBN 978-0-300-
15156-5.
8. Eranimos, Boban; Funkhouser, Dr. Art. "The
Concept of Dreams and Dreaming: A Hindu
Perspective" (https://ijip.in/wp-content/uplo
ads/ArticlesPDF/article_3f1b04e59834e06
80497f01adadf84cd.pdf) (PDF).
www.ijip.in. The International Journal of
Indian Psychology. Archived (https://ghosta
rchive.org/archive/20221009/https://ijip.in/
wp-content/uploads/ArticlesPDF/article_3f
1b04e59834e0680497f01adadf84cd.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
Retrieved 8 February 2022.
9. Sri Dhammananda, K. "Dreams and their
Significance" (https://www.budsas.org/ebu
d/whatbudbeliev/321.htm) .
www.budsas.org. Buddhist Study and
Practice Group. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
10. Priestley (1964).
11. Peake, Anthony; The Labyrinth of Time,
Arcturus, 2012, Chapter 10: "Dreams and
precognition".
12. Moore, David W (16 June 2005). "Three in
Four Americans Believe in Paranormal" (htt
ps://news.gallup.com/poll/16915/three-fou
r-americans-believe-paranormal.aspx) .
www.news.gallup. Gallup Inc. Retrieved
8 February 2022.
13. van der Linden, Sander. "How Come Some
People Believe in the Paranormal?" (https://
www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-c
ome-some-people-believe-in-the-paranorma
l/) . www.scientificamerican.com. Scientific
American. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
14. Aristotle. (350 BC). On Prophesying by
Dreams. Trans. J.I. Beare (http://classics.mi
t.edu/Aristotle/prophesying.html) , MIT.
(Retrieved 5 September 2018).
15. Dunne (1927), pp.62-3. "The waking mind
refuses point-blank to accept the
association between the dream and the
subsequent event. For it, this association is
the wrong way round, and no sooner does it
make itself perceived than it is instantly
rejected. The intellectual revolt is automatic
and extremely powerful."
16. Dunne (1927).
17. Flew, Antony; "The Sources of Serialism, in
Shivesh Thakur (Ed). Philosophy and
Psychical Research, George Allen & Unwin
Ltd. 1976, pp. 81–96. ISBN 0-04-100041-2
18. Lyttelton, Edith. Our Superconscious Mind.
Philip Allan. 1931.
19. Inglis (1986) p.92.
20. Dunne (1927), 3rd Edition, Faber, 1934,
Appendix III: The new experiment.
21. C. D. Broad; "The Philosophical Implications
of Foreknowledge", Proceedings of the
Aristotelian Society, Supplementary
Volumes, Vol. 16, Knowledge and
Foreknowledge (1937), pp. 177–209
22. Anon; "Obituary: Mr. J. W. Dunne,
Philosopher and Airman", The Times,
August 27, 1949, Page 7.
23. Flieger (1997) p.46.
24. Flieger (1997) p.136.
25. Stewart, V.; "J. W. Dunne and literary culture
in the 1930s and 1940s", Literature and
History, Volume 17, Number 2, Autumn
2008, pp. 62–81, Manchester University
Press.
26. Vladimir Nabokov (ed. Gennady Barabtarlo);
Insomniac Dreams: Experiments with Time,
Princeton University Press, 2018.
27. Murray, H. A.; Wheeler, D. R. (1937). "A Note
on the Possible Clairvoyance of Dreams".
Journal of Psychology. 3 (2): 309–313.
doi:10.1080/00223980.1937.9917500 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F00223980.1937.991
7500) .
28. Harold Gulliksen. (1938). Extra-Sensory
Perception: What Is It?. American Journal
of Sociology. Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 623–634.
29. Wynn & Wiggins (2001), p. 156.
30. Hines (2003), pp. 78–81.
31. Colman, Andrew M. (1988). Facts, Fallacies
and Frauds in Psychology. Unwin Hyman.
pp. 175–180. ISBN 978-0-04-445289-8.
32. Hyman (2007).
33. Betty Markwick. (1985). The establishment
of data manipulation in the Soal-Shackleton
experiments. In Paul Kurtz. A Skeptic’s
Handbook of Parapsychology. Prometheus
Books. pp. 287–312. ISBN 0-87975-300-5
34. Odling-Smee, Lucy (March 1, 2007). "The
lab that asked the wrong questions" (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2F446010a) . Nature.
446 (7131): 10–12.
Bibcode:2007Natur.446...10O (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007Natur.446...10
O) . doi:10.1038/446010a (https://doi.org/
10.1038%2F446010a) . PMID 17330012 (ht
tps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1733001
2) .
35. C. E. M. Hansel. (1980). ESP and
Parapsychology: A Critical Re-Evaluation.
Prometheus Books. pp. 222–232. Hansel
found that in the experiments of Schmidt
there was no presence of an observer or
second-experimenter in any of the
experiments, no counterchecking of the
records and no separate machines used for
high and low score attempts.
36. LeGuin, Ursula K. (1984). "Science Fiction
as Prophesy". In Stine, J.C.; Marowski, D.G.
(eds.). Contemporary Literary Criticism.
Vol. 30. Detroit, MI: Gale Research.
37. Kellman, Steven G., ed. (2006). Magill's
Survey of American Literature, Revised
Edition. Salem Press. ISBN 978-
1587652851.
38. "The World Jones Made (195) A Novel by
Philip K Dick" (https://www.fantasticfiction.
com/d/philip-k-dick/world-jones-made.ht
m) . fantasticfiction.com. Retrieved
2019-12-05.
39. Inglis (1986) p.90.
40. Francis Spufford, "I Have Been Here Before
(https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04h
7lr0) ", Sunday Feature, BBC Radio 3, 14
Sep 2014.
41. Inglis (1986), p.85
42. Ryback, David, PhD. "Dreams That Came
True". New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell
Publishing Group, 1988.
43. Bem, DJ (March 2011). "Feeling the future:
experimental evidence for anomalous
retroactive influences on cognition and
affect" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120
103233037/http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.
pdf) (PDF). Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 100 (3): 407–25.
doi:10.1037/a0021524 (https://doi.org/10.
1037%2Fa0021524) . PMID 21280961 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21280961) .
S2CID 1961013 (https://api.semanticschola
r.org/CorpusID:1961013) . Archived from
the original (http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.
pdf) (PDF) on 2012-01-03. Retrieved
2013-09-10.
44. James Alcock, Back from the Future:
Parapsychology and the Bem Affair (http://
www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/back
_from_the_future) Archived (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20111231102646/http://ww
w.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/back_fr
om_the_future) 2011-12-31 at the
Wayback Machine, March/April 2011
Skeptical Inquirer, January 6, 2011.
45. "Room for Debate: When Peer Review
Falters" (https://www.nytimes.com/roomfor
debate/2011/01/06/the-esp-study-when-sci
ence-goes-psychic/when-peer-review-falter
s) . The New York Times. January 7, 2011.
46. Rouder, J.; Morey, R. (2011). "A Bayes factor
meta-analysis of Bem's ESP claim" (https://l
ink.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2F
s13423-011-0088-7.pdf) (PDF).
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 18 (4):
682–689. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0088-7
(https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fs13423-011-00
88-7) . PMID 21573926 (https://pubmed.nc
bi.nlm.nih.gov/21573926) .
S2CID 12355543 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:12355543) .
47. Bem, Daryl (6 January 2011). "Response to
Alcock's "Back from the Future: Comments
on Bem" " (http://www.csicop.org/specialar
ticles/show/response_to_alcocks_back_fro
m_the_future_comments_on_bem) .
Retrieved 31 January 2012.
48. Alcock, James (6 January 2011).
"Response to Bem's Comments" (http://ww
w.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/respons
e_to_bems_comments) . Retrieved
31 January 2012.
49. Galak, J.; LeBoeuf, R. A.; Nelson, L. D.;
Simmons, J. P. (2012). "Correcting the past:
Failures to replicate psi" (https://repository.
upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=107
6&context=oid_papers) . Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 103 (6):
933–948. doi:10.1037/a0029709 (https://d
oi.org/10.1037%2Fa0029709) .
PMID 22924750 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/22924750) .
50. Frazier, Kendrick (2013). "Failure to
Replicate Results of Bem Parapsychology
Experiments Published by Same Journal" (h
ttps://web.archive.org/web/201712230800
39/https://www.csicop.org/si/show/failure
_to_replicate_results_of_bem_parapsycholo
gy_experiments_published_by) . csicop.org.
Archived from the original (http://www.csic
op.org/si/show/failure_to_replicate_results
_of_bem_parapsychology_experiments_pub
lished_by) on 23 December 2017.
Retrieved 7 August 2013.
51. Franklin, Michael S; Baumgart, Stephen L;
Schooler, Jonathon W (2014). "Future
dirctions in precognition research: more
research can bridge the gap between
skeptics and proponents" (https://www.ncb
i.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4141237) .
Frontiers in Psychology. 5. Frontiers Media
SA: 907. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00907 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffpsyg.2014.0090
7) . PMC 4141237 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4141237) .
PMID 25202289 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/25202289) .
52. Kim, Alexander B. "Psychologists confront
impossible finding, triggering a revolution in
the field" (https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/
psychologists-confront-impossible-finding-t
riggering-a-revolution-in-the-field-1.534446
7) . www.cbc.ca. CBC. Retrieved
20 February 2022.
53. Hyman (2007), page217.
54. Zusne, Leonard; Jones, Warren H. (1989).
Anomalistic Psychology: A Study of
Magical Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-805-
80507-9
55. Ciccarelli, Saundra E; Meyer, Glenn E.
Psychology. (2007). Prentice Hall Higher
Education. p. 118. ISBN 978-0136030638
"Precognition is the supposed ability to
know something in advance of its
occurrence or to predict a future event."
56. Bunge, Mario. (1983). Treatise on Basic
Philosophy: Volume 6: Epistemology &
Methodology II: Understanding the World.
Springer. pp. 225–226. ISBN 978-
9027716347
57. Schwarzkopf, Samuel (2014). "We Should
Have Seen This Coming" (https://www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4034337) .
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 8: 332.
doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00332 (https://do
i.org/10.3389%2Ffnhum.2014.00332) .
PMC 4034337 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC4034337) .
PMID 24904372 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/24904372) .
58. Fiedler (26 April 2013). "Afterthoughts on
precognition: No cogent evidence for
anomalous influences of consequent
events on preceding cognition" (https://jour
nals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09593543
13485504?icid=int.sj-full-text.citing-articles.
3) . Theory & Psychology. 23 (3): 323–333.
doi:10.1177/0959354313485504 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F0959354313485504) .
S2CID 145690989 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:145690989) . Retrieved
19 October 2021.
59. Ritchie (14 March 2012). "Failing the Future:
Three Unsuccessful Attempts to Replicate
Bem's 'Retroactive Facilitation of Recall'
Effect" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC3303812) . PLOS ONE. 7 (3):
e33423. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...733423R (ht
tps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012PLoS
O...733423R) .
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033423 (https://
doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.003342
3) . PMC 3303812 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3303812) .
PMID 22432019 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/22432019) .
60. Wiseman, Richard. (2011). Paranormality:
Why We See What Isn't There. Macmillan.
pp. 163-167. ISBN 978-0-230-75298-6
61. Sutherland, Stuart. (1994). Irrationality: The
Enemy Within. pp. 312–313. Penguin
Books. ISBN 0-14-016726-9
62. Nickell, Joe (2019). "Premonition!
Foreseeing what cannot be seen". Skeptical
Inquirer. 43 (4): 17–20.
63. Hines (2003).
64. Alcock, James E. (1981). Parapsychology:
Science or Magic?: a psychological
perspective. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
ISBN 978-0-08-025773-0. via Hines (2003).
65. "paramnesia and confabulation (https://ww
w.britannica.com/science/memory-abnorm
ality/Paramnesia-and-confabulation) ",
Britannica (retrieved 14 February 2022).
66. Herman N. Sno (1991); "The deja vu
experience: Remembrance of things past?
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
20910707_The_deja_vu_experience_Reme
mbrance_of_things_past) ", American
Journal of Psychiatry 147(12):1587-95.
DOI:10.1176/ajp.147.12.1587
67. Greenaway, Katharine H.; Louis, Winnifred
R.; Hornsey, Matthew J. (7 August 2013).
Krueger, Frank (ed.). "Loss of Control
Increases Belief in Precognition and Belief
in Precognition Increases Control" (https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3
737190) . PLOS ONE. 8 (8). Public Library
of Science (PLoS): e71327.
Bibcode:2013PLoSO...871327G (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PLoSO...8713
27G) . doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071327
(https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0
071327) . ISSN 1932-6203 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/issn/1932-6203) .
PMC 3737190 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC3737190) .
 PMID 23951136 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/23951136) .

Bibliography

Dunne, J. W. (1927). An Experiment With

Time. A. C. Black.
Flieger, Verlyn; A Question of Time: JRR
Tolkien's Road to Faërie, Kent State
University Press, 1997.
Hines, Terence (2003). Pseudoscience
and the Paranormal. Prometheus Books.
ISBN 978-1-57392-979-0.
Hyman, Ray (2007). "Evaluating
Parapsychological Claims". In Robert J.
Sternberg; Henry L. Roediger; Diane F.
Halpern (eds.). Critical Thinking in
Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
pp. 219–223. ISBN 978-0-521-60834-3.
Inglis, Brian. (1986). The Paranormal: An
Encyclopedia of Psychic Phenomena.
Paladin (Grafton) 1986. (1st Edition
Granada 1985)
Priestley, J.B. Man and Time. Aldus
1964, 2nd Edition Bloomsbury 1989.
Wynn, Charles M., and Wiggins, Arthur
W. (2001). Quantum Leaps in the Wrong
Direction: Where Real Science Ends...and
Pseudoscience Begins. Joseph Henry
Press. ISBN 978-0-309-07309-7
Further reading

Chris French. (2012). Wikisou

rce has
"Precognition Studies
the text
and the Curse of the of the
1911
Failed Replications" (htt
Encyclo
ps://www.theguardian. pædia
Britanni
com/science/2012/ma
ca
r/15/precognition-studi article
"Premo
es-curse-failed-replicati
nition".
ons) . The Guardian.
David Marks. (2000). The Psychology of
the Psychic (2nd Edition). Prometheus
Books. ISBN 1-57392-798-8
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Precognition&oldid=1212729722"

This page was last edited on 9 March 2024, at

09:11 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.