Why am I doing this?

The start of another week, and the doubts are getting stronger. I keep asking myself why am I doing this? Why did I give up a perfectly good academic post (I was an Associate Professor, don't you know!) in order to learn to become a psychic? I'm putting it down to a mid-life crisis. It seems to be the only reasonable explanation.

I actually have two main reasons for pursuing this project. (Yes, if I call it a 'project' it doesn't sound so crazy...). My first focuses around my life-long fascination (well, since my early teens) with the 'paranormal', especially psychic phenomena. Around the same time, I was developing a keen interest in magic (as in conjuring, not the occult). I was equally fascinated with the possiblity that people who claimed to be psychic might actually be using techniques to make it look like they were psychic even if they weren't. I say equally fascinated, but if the truth be told, I found the idea that some people might be able to do it for real to be more captivating!

I went on to study for a degree in psychology, and was then fortunate enough to land a job with Dr Richard Wiseman. He has since become a Professor, and a best-selling author, and a world-renowned skeptic regarding claims of the paranormal, but back then he was newly doctored (as it were), and had just taken up a lectureship at the University of Hertfordshire. During the fours years that I worked with Richard, I got involved in a range of unusual and exciting research projects such as reconstructing dark-room seances, experiments designed to investigate the feeling of being stared at, and testing a psychic dog (we concluded he wasn't psychic). During this time I even studied for a PhD on the psychology of luck, of all things. (But that's a different story!)

Working with Richard I became more and more convinced that many psychic claims could be explained by conventional psychology, with people misinterpreting experiences (or even experimental data) as suggesting something psychic going on. But there was still a part of me that couldn't dismiss genuine psychic phenomena completely. This project represents an attempt to allow this part of me to explore first hand the possibility than psychic phenomena just might be for real.

But all that explains just one of the reasons I'm giving this a go. And it's quite personal to me. But my other reason is one that would apply equally to anyone reading this now. It has something to do with the feeling that there has to be more to this life than getting a job, a house, a car, and all the rest and passing the time until the day comes when you drop down dead. That surely isn't what it is all about. Is it? At least I hope not.

This project represents an opportunity to do things differently. To discover what else might be out there. Or in here. Of course, there may be nothing, but at least I will have looked. I will be able to put my hand on my heart and say I tried. For me it happens to be about discovering any hidden psychic abilities I may have. More generally, it's about discovering whatever it is that may be hidden inside you.

Or it's just a mid-life crisis.

The Pursuit of Happyness

The Pursuit of Happyness was on TV tonight. A very inspiring film based on the memoirs of self-made millionaire Chris Gardner. The movie follows the story of Gardner during a period of homelessness with his young son. A key scene in the film is when Gardner impresses a guy from the stockbroker firm at which he's hoping to get an internship by solving the Rubik's Cube during a cab ride:



As a fan of the ol' Rubik's Cube, I'd love that scene to be based on true events. On a separate note, watching that film reminds me that my old friend and PhD supervisor Richard Wiseman took part in an advert for Volvo with Chris Gardner some years ago as part of their 'Life on Board' project. Turns out an extended version of the film is on Vimeo:


VOLVO V70 from Lance Bangs on Vimeo.

The best music video

Saw this on Richard Wiseman's blog this morning. It is so good I just had to re-post it here. It looks like it is all done in one take, but even if it isn't it is the result of a lot of hard work and creative genius. Sit back and enjoy:

59 seconds later...

I've said before I'm a slow reader. I've only just got round to finishing Richard Wiseman's latest book 59 Seconds. I enjoyed it. It's Richard's take on the whole self-help industry in which he corrects some of the myths about self-help psychology. He also uncovers surprising snippets of useful information about techniques that are supported by scientific research. These range from how putting a pot plant in your office can increase your creativity to how a picture of a baby in your wallet can increase the chances of being returned if you lose it!

In light of my upcoming attempt to give readings at a psychic fair (less than two weeks away!) it was some of the stuff towards the end of the book that especially caught my attention. The final chapter focuses on personality, and draws attention to a number of things that can reveal something about our pesonality. Of particular interest to me was how much can be determined about our personality just from our hands. First, did you know that the ratio of the length of your index finger to your ring finger is related to your tendency towards typically 'masculine' personality traits? And did you know the way you clasp your hands can also reveal your tendency towards typically 'left-brain' or 'right-brain' ways of thinking?

Perhaps if I don't get the hang of the tarot cards I could always do a scientifically supported version of palm reading?

Happy memories

Some initial results from Prof Wiseman's happiness experiment were announced yesterday. It seems that on average we, as a nation, were about 7% more cheerful at the end of last week compared to the beginning of the week. So there. This was determined by way of a couple of polls undertaken at the start and end of the week. Of course, it's not possible to determine how much, if any, of this increase in the nation's happiness might be attributed to the science of happiness experiment.

Participants in the study were assigned to one of five conditions. Four of these groups were asked to spend a few moments each day engaged in an exercise that previous research had indicated might influence feelings of happiness. One group was asked to use those moments to focus on expressing gratitude for one thing in their lives (this is the group I was assigned to) while a second group spent the time simply smiling. A third group was asked to carry out an act of kindness and the fourth group was instructed to recall a pleasant event from the day before. The remaining participants were in a 'control' group in which they were asked to just think about the previous day's events.

More than 26,000 people took part and it would seem that reported levels of happiness in all groups, including the control group, increased over the course of the week. So everyone's a winner! The biggest increase was seen in the group asked to recall a pleasant event from the day before. They showed a 15% rise in reported happiness over and above the folks in the control condition.

The difficulty is that even if these kinds of exercises do have an impact upon perceived happiness, and the initial results from this study seem to suggest they do, then the effects are likely to be rather transient and so many other things will have a far greater impact on our how we feel on a particular day. And are we dealing with underlying 'happiness' or whether we're in a good mood?

Still hats off to Richard for attempting such an ambitious project!

Happy now?

Compared to this time last week, are you more or less happy than you were? It's hard to tell isn't it? Unless, of course, you've taken part in a scientific experiment to measure just how happy you are. Well, I have. And I'm, er, still not sure if I'm any happier or not. I may have a better idea on Wednesday when some initial results from the study are to be announced.

Did you take part? Do you feel any happier?

The study was being conducted by Professor Richard Wiseman, Professor of the Public Understanding of Psychology at the University of Hertfordshire. I know Richard well having worked as his Research Assistant a little over ten years ago and I have always been amazed at the way his research captures the public's imagination. This particular project is linked to his latest book 59 Seconds, which is "a triumph of scientifically proven advice over misleading myths of self-help" (not my words, the words of Derren Brown).

My copy of the book arrived from Amazon this morning. I'll let you know if it's as good as Derren thinks it is.

Joy to the World

How are you feeling this Monday morning? However you're feeling, my old friend Prof Richard Wiseman is up to his old tricks again and conducting an experiment for us all to take part in. This time he's trying to make the world a happier place. No he's not campaigning for all tapes of The Vicar of Dibley to be burned (though there's an idea...). He is simply wanting as many people as possible to take part in a week long happiness project at www.scienceofhappiness.co.uk.

It will take less than a minute a day to take part and, who knows, this time next week you may be as happy as, or even happier than, Larry.

All done by mirrors (or is it?)

My mistake. The camera trick linked to in the previous blog was more than likely inspired by this Dr Wiseman trick (not the colour changing card trick):

Camera trick

I came across this today quite by accident and just love it:



I actually discovered it when I stumbled upon a blog that linked to it. The blogger even made reference to the fact that it reminded her of a Dr Wiseman trick (don't worry Richard, I'm sure she meant to say Professor Wiseman). She was no doubt referring to his superb colour-changing card trick. Remember the effect is achieved with no editting. Have a think about how it might have been done before you watch the clip below that reveals the wonderful secret:



Great piece of marketing.. who knows I might even consider buying a Samsung if I didn't already have my eye on an iPhone.

(Just for now, I have stretched the template for the blog so that the full screens from the YouTube clips above are shown. The usual template rather annoyingly cuts off the right hand side of the clips.)

Colour changing card trick

I have been meaning to link to this clip from YouTube for a while, and what with the recent references to Professor Wiseman and his blog, I thought it was now time...



Richard uploaded this short film to YouTube in April 2007. Since then clip has been viewed a staggering 2.9 million times (2,909,647 times at the time of writing to be precise)! In addition to it being a dramatic example of change blindness, the clip's remarkable success on YouTube also demonstrates how sometimes when you do something you can't always predict what will come from it. The last time Richard and I met, he told me that one consequence of him making this film and posting it on YouTube was that world-famous magic double-act Penn & Teller had seen it and it had inspired them to devise a whole new routine for their Las Vegas show!

Luck is no accident

A book arrived from Amazon this morning as a consequence of having looked at Richard Wiseman’s blog last week. One of his recent posts mentioned that the current issue of Newsweek included an article that featured his research on luck. The article was actually adapted from a new book written by Ben Sherwood called The Survivors Club: The Secrets and Science That Could Save Your Life (Grand Central Publishing, 2009). Ben had been the guy who had interviewed me about luck last year for an article for O, The Oprah magazine (I wonder if that is published yet?).

However, the book that arrived this morning isn’t the one by Ben Sherwood (though perhaps I should order that one too!). No, it’s actually a book I discovered by following the link Richard had included to another website, called Get Rich Slowly, that also referred to the Newsweek article but focused more on Richard's work. It was this website that linked to an earlier article (are you following this?) that reviewed a book called Luck is No Accident: Making the Most of Happenstance in Your Life and Career by John Krumboltz and Al Levin (Impact Publishers, 2004). It was this book that I ordered from Amazon and which arrived this morning. The message of the book is very similar to that of Richard’s book The Luck Factor (2004, Arrow Books), although the focus here is on making the most of unplanned events.

A wise man?

The final card of my reading spoke of advice from some kind of 'authority figure' and indicated that I could be about to embark on a new course of learning:

The Hierophant: It is time to take sound advice from someone you trust. The Hierophant often reveals an authority figure, such as a father, teacher, or other mentor. He symbolizes practical wisdom, so his influence can help you resolve a challenge. This card also denotes a spiritual dimension, so it can indicate that you are about to embark on a new course of learning that will bring you closer to your soul's purpose.

One of the original reasons we had arranged to go down to Rachel's parents this weekend was because there was a possibility that we might attend a Beginners' Psychic Development Workshop down that way today (well, if I'm gonna learn tarot I should also try and develop my psychic awareness, don't you think?). If that had worked out, that could have been a been a nice hit for the tarot. But. alas, it didn't happen: There were no spaces. You thought I was going to say it was cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances didn't you? Now come on, you know me better than that.

As it turned out we didn't really do much (didn't dare walk the dogs!), other than eat lots of lovely food expertly cooked by Rachel's dad before driving back home in time to watch Lost. In an idle moment on the internet I did have a read of Richard Wiseman's blog, and I would regard Richard as one of my mentors what with him being my PhD supervisor an' all. Richard has only just taken to blogging this month but a few days ago his blog was apparently already in the top 50 on Wordpress! Bloody smartarse. Or is there a lesson to be learnt here?

Can dogs tell the time?

Dogs are remarkable creatures. To realise this, you only have to watch one cleaning his own... well, you know what I'm talking about. But can dogs tell the time?

The reason I ask relates to a rather long story surrounding a small dog, called Jaytee, who was apparently able to reliably predict when his owner would return home by going to wait for her by the window in his flat (well, it wasn't "his" flat, it was the flat of his owner's parents). The seemingly impressive thing about it was that the moment he went to go and wait by the window coincided with the moment that his owner, Pam, began to return home. Pam might have been at work or shopping in town several miles away, but as soon as she headed for home Jaytee would go to the window to wait for her to return home. Jaytee's amazing "psychic" ability was even caught on camera by an Austrian television crew. They filmed what Jaytee was doing at home at the same time as filming his owner Pam in the town centre a few miles away. A split screen showed Pam and Jaytee side by side. About six seconds after the TV presenter (or researcher/producer type person) tells Pam that they are about to head home, Jaytee gets up from where he was lying (by the feet of Pam's mum who was sat on the sofa) and meanders over to the window! I think the Austrian TV clip dates from around 1994, and in the mid-late 1990's it was shown a fair old bit on various TV programmes. When it was shown on The Paranormal World of Paul McKenna, we were told "he does it every time Pam goes out!". So maybe Jaytee really was psychic! Maybe all dogs, indeed all animals, are psychic?

One of the problems with jumping to such conclusions from just one short film clip is that there could be other explanations for what we saw. Most notably, we were only shown what Jaytee was doing at the moment that Pam begins to return home. What was he doing during all the other time that his owner was out? Does he spend all the time up to that point snuggled up to Pam's mum's feet? Once he has gone to the window to begin waiting for Pam, does he stay there until she arrives home? Both of these things are kind of implied by the short clip, but we would need to see a record of his behaviour for the entire time that Pam is out to come to this conclusion. I'm not sure if anyone has ever actually looked at the rest of the Austrian film to discover what Jaytee is doing at these other times.

That aside, the researcher who did most of the research with Jaytee is Dr Rupert Sheldrake, a biologist by training. In his book Seven Experiments That Could Change The World, Rupert suggested that dog-owners could quite easily test the notion that dogs (or at least their dogs) are able to reliably predict when their owners are to return home (something that many dog-owners report to be the case) by conducting simple experiments. For example, the owner could vary the times and means by which they would return home to determine whether this influenced their dog's ability to predict their homecoming. One person to have a go at doing this was Pam Smart, a woman living in Ramsbottom in Lancashire, with her pet terrier Jaytee. Her parents (with whom she typically left Jaytee when she went out) had noticed for some time that Jaytee appeared to reliably predict when Pam would arrive home by going to wait for her by the porch window of their ground floor flat (next door to Pam's own flat). After seeing an article about Sheldrake's research and his interest in dog's who seem to know when their owners are returning home, Pam conducted a few of her own experiments by returning home at different times and by different means. Jaytee seemed to still know when Pam was heading home by taking up his place by the window at the appropriate time. Rupert Sheldrake went on to conduct his own experiments with Jaytee and, as we have seen, eventually the folks at an Austrian television company showed up and recorded Jaytee's uncanny abilities.

All this led to sceptical psychologist Richard Wiseman carrying out his own investigation of Jaytee. And this is where I come in. At the time, I was working as Richard's research assistant while I was studying for my PhD. Rupert visited us at the University of Hertfordshire to look at our experimental set up to investigate the feeling of being stared at (another one of Rupert's seven potentially world-changing experiments). I remember saying to Richard, "Just don't let's get involved with the psychic dog!".

Next thing I know we're driving up to Ramsbottom to conduct our own experiments with Pam and Jaytee. Good to know that my opinion counts for something!

And who says science can't be glamorous?

The Luck Doctors

It may come as a surprise to some of you to learn that I actually have a PhD ("oooh... get him!" I hear you cry). Believe me, it sometimes still surprises me. But 10 years ago I was awarded a PhD by the University of Hertfordshire, thereby becoming a "Dr". Perhaps even more surprising was the topic of my PhD... luck! The full title was Perceptions of One's Own Luck: The Formation, Maintenance and Consequences of Perceived Luckiness. A bit of a mouthful, I know, but PhD titles are supposed to sound clever and obscure, aren't they?

It was a study of the 'psychology of luck', and examined people's beliefs about luck and explored the psychological differences between 'lucky' and 'unlucky' people. Lucky people were those people who felt that seemingly chance events tended to work out in their favour, whilst unlucky people were those who felt they tended to work out against them. The aim of the project was to discover why some people believe themselves to be lucky whilst others believe themselves to be unlucky. Do these people really lead very different lives? And if so, is there any psychological reasons why this might be the case? Or do 'lucky' and 'unlucky' people actually lead rather similar lives but differ in the ways in which they make sense of the events that happen to them?

The research was the brainchild of Dr (now Professor!) Richard Wiseman who, in collaboration with Dr Peter Harris, had obtained a research grant from the Leverhulme Trust, a charitable organisation that supports research in a variety of areas. I was employed as the Research Assistant working on the project, and took the opportunity to register for a PhD at the same time with Richard and Peter as my supervisors. Together, we interviewed and collected other psychological data from self-perceived lucky and unlucky people for over three years.

The picture that emerged was quite remarkable. Lucky and unlucky people, on the whole, were very different from each other. For example, while lucky people tended to be far more optimistic, and more extraverted individuals, unlucky people were more likely to be anxious and experience depressed mood states. Moreover lucky and unlucky people differed in the extent to which they remembered the positive and negative events in their lives, and also in the way they interpreted events. Lucky people found it easier to remember events they considered lucky than unlucky events, and were more likely to label events as lucky in the first place. This latter point is nicely illustrated by following little experiment:

Imagine you are waiting to be served in a bank when an armed robber enters and fires a shot. The bullet hits you in the arm.

How lucky or unlucky would you regard this event? We asked people to rate the event (along with other events) on a scale from -3 (very unlucky) to +3 (very lucky), and found that there was a wide range of opinions regarding the luckiness of events such as this. While some people consider this event to be unlucky, others consider it to be actually rather lucky. In both cases, the judgement of how lucky or unlucky the event is made by imagining how the event might have been different from what happened. For example, those who consider the event to be unlucky can easily imagine a scenario where the bullet might have missed you altogether and so see it as being rather unlucky to have been hit by the bullet. Meanwhile, people who see the event as lucky are imagining a situation where the bullet might have hit you in the chest causing much more damage, perhaps even killing you. By comparison, a bullet in the arm is actually quite lucky. This just goes to show that an event is not necessarily lucky or unlucky in itself, it becomes perceived as such by the person making the observation. What was particularly interesting was that lucky people were more likely to rate the event as lucky while unlucky people were more likely to rate it as unlucky.

As I say, it is now 10 years since I was awarded a PhD for my contribution to this project on the psychology of luck. In the years since then my interest in this topic faded somewhat as I pursued other lines of research. In the meantime, my PhD supervisor, and the instigator of the 'luck project', Richard Wiseman, went on to conduct a whole lot more research on the psychology of luck which culminated in a best-selling book called The Luck Factor (Arrow Books, 2004) in which Richard identified four main principles that could "change your luck - and your life"!

The funny thing was that by the time this book was published I had developed a healthy lack of interest in whole 'luck' research. If anything, I was probably one of the most cynical about the ideas presented in this book. It was one thing to identify the various differences between self-perceived lucky and unlucky people, but another thing to suggest that you could change your luck by changing the way you think!

What is perhaps even funnier is that, not only am I now finding myself being drawn back to the ideas talked about by Richard in The Luck Factor, but I am also becoming convinced that Richard has barely scraped the surface. I've got a feeling that there could well be plenty more to discover about the psychology of luck, fate and destiny!