I am posting this topic, so I can inform people about my accumulated data and also for your comments/criticism my meta-study.

Anyway, in this meta-study, I conducted (and still on-going) a Retropsychokinesis meta-study from the website, "http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/" to see whether or not my mind can mentally influence the outcomes from a Random Number Generator. In addition, I used my own two-tailed, statistical analysis to analyze the overall results of these studies (a.k.a. meta-analysis) simply because I didn't trust the statistical analyses in the website.

Meta-Study since 10/11/2011 (Today):

Total Studies: 141

N=144,384

Hits: 72,423 (50% hit rate, exactly what would be expected by chance)

stouffer-z=1.21

P=0.22 (1 in 4)

Evidence of PK in Random Number Generators: None

--------------------------------

Addressing the file-drawer problem

Unfortunately, one of the most prevalent flaws meta-analyses suffer is the file-drawer problem or publication bias in other words. The file-drawer problem profoundly inflates the overall estimate of the effect in the basis of a meta-analyses, which can easily convince researchers the effect is there when it is in fact a false-positive.

The possibility of the file-drawer problem in this meta-analysis has been eliminated since my meta-study automatically records and publishes all the studies I conducted into my Experimental Log.

Heterogeniety

Another problem meta-analyses suffer from is heterogeniety, which is a meta-analysis that combines completely different studies with different criteria as if they are one large study.

The possiblity of heterogeniety in this meta-analysis has also been eliminated since all my studies are always done on the same standard criteria (i.e. same type of experiments, same # of trials, same time and same everything)

Sampling Bias

It is important to make sure your sampling method is truly randomized; otherwise, it will easily bias your study. For instance, suppose you have a deck of ESP cards and the cards weren't really shuffled very well. Now, let's say you test a test-subject with those ESP cards. With enough feedback, the test-subject might be able to notice that there is a pattern of these ESP cards, which can profoundly inflate the hit rate 25% in the long run....

The possibility of sampling bias in this meta-study is highly unlikely since the P-Value of this study failed to reach the P<0.05 level, so there is no evidence that the sampling method in this meta-study is biased or unrandom in other words...

-----------

Conclusion

So far out of 141 studies, I have found no evidence of psychokinesis in random number generators, but I will still conduct further PK in Random Number Generator studies and I will publish the meta-analyses here every Friday. Hey, maybe if I keep on practicing I might get somewhere interesting .....

I would definately appreciate to hear your comments or criticism regarding my PK Research in Random Number Generators and I would be glad to address it by the way.....

Best wishes

-Ice