Skip to content
← Research library

Research source

But in a modified form of the experiment, introduced by Professor Richet, the percipients, two or three in…

Date of account
Published 1894
Source
Apparitions and thought-transference: an examination of the evidence for telepathy
Reference
Apparitions and thought-transference: an examination of the evidence for telepathy · selected passage 63
Rights
public_domain
Language
English
Record updated
2026-08-24

View the original source ↗

Record summary

But in a modified form of the experiment, introduced by Professor Richet, the percipients, two or three in number, were seated at one table and a printed alphabet was placed on another table behind the percipients and out of their range of vision

Published source text

Read the available text below. Archive transcriptions may contain OCR errors; later context is labelled separately. A recorded claim is not a finding that it happened.

Source passage

Source text · mention only

But in a modified form of the experiment, introduced by Professor Richet, the percipients, two or three in number, were seated at one table and a printed alphabet was placed on another table behind the percipients and out of their range of vision. When the first table tilted,[52] under the automatic movements of the hands resting on it, it caused a bell to ring. M. Richet or some other experimenter sat at the second table and drew a pen slowly backwards and forwards over the printed alphabet. The letters to which the pen was pointing when the bell rang were noted, and it was found that they made up intelligible words and sentences, provided that in some cases the next letter or the next but one were substituted for that actually given.[53] All necessary precautions were taken that the alphabet should be out of sight of the "mediums," who were in most cases personal friends of M. Richet, and whose good faith was, he believes, in all cases unimpeachable. Subjoined is an account of the results obtained on one evening. M.

Historical context

Contextual commentary · mention only

This comes from historical psychical research. Methods, witness handling and standards of evidence differ from present-day research and should be assessed from the cited passage and edition.

Modern context

Contextual commentary · mention only

The passage can support a history of claims and recurring descriptions. It does not establish a paranormal mechanism, and competing psychological, social and physical explanations remain relevant.

Investigate related details with Anomaly Graph’s account-based search, or read how matching and provenance work.