Quantum Measurement as Pragmatic Information Transfer

Observer Effects on (S)objective Reality Formation





Pragmatic information, quantum observation, duality, micro-PK, quantum random number generator, intentional creation


Objective. In the research presented here, quantum measurement is conceptualized as pragmatic information transfer when an intentional observer perceives motive-relevant quantum-based outcomes. Owing to the nature of pragmatic information as described in Lucadou’s Model of Pragmatic Information, this information transfer causes an observer-dependent intentional co-formation of reality and can only be scientifically documented under reduced objectivity conditions. The effects thus reflect a “sobjective” reality that occupies the space between subjectivity and objectivity. The present study was designed to find evidence for the existence of this sobjective reality. Method. A pre-registered micro-psychokinesis task involving a quantum random number generator assessed the impact of intentional observation on quantum-based stochastic outcomes under experimental variations of the applied measures’ objectivity. Results. As predicted, an intentionally congruent bias in quantum-based outcomes was observed using subjective memory data from the observations when additional objective computer-stored data were not inspected and finally erased (i.e., objectivity was reduced). Quantum randomness was confirmed in a maximum objective data collection context for both stored and memory data. Conclusion. The results indicate that pragmatic information was transferred during trial observation when scientific objectivity was reduced. The evidence for intentionally based reality formation or quantum-based random reality emergence was thus shown to be a function of the measurements’ objectivity levels. The data suggest the existence of a sobjective reality and that a physicalist/materialist or an intentional creation worldview depends on the presence of an intentional agent and the definition of the measurement process.


Atmanspacher, H., & Fuchs, C. A. (2017). The Pauli-Jung conjecture and its impact today. Imprint Academic.

Becker, A. (2018). What is real? The unfinished quest for the meaning of quantum physics. Basic Books.

Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics Physique Fizika, 1(3), 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195

Bierman, D. J. (2001). On the nature of anomalous phenomena: Another reality between the world of subjective consciousness and the objective world of physics? In P. van Loocke (Ed.), The physical nature of consciousness. Advances in consciousness research (Vol. 29, pp. 269–292). https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.29.12bie DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.29.12bie

Bohm, D., & Fowler, D. R. (1978). The implicate order. Process Studies, 8(2), 73–102. https://doi.org/10.5840/process19788222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/process19788222

Born, M. (1926). Zur Quantenmechanik der Stoßvorgänge [On the quantum mechanics of impact processes]. Zeitschrift Für Physik, 37(12), 836–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397477 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397477

Bösch, H., Steinkamp, F., & Boller, E. (2006). Examining psychokinesis: The interaction of human intention with random number generators--A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(4), 497–523. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.4.497 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.4.497

Chalmers, D. J. (1995). Facing up to the hard problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219. http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311105.003.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311105.003.0001

Dechamps, M. C., Maier, M. A., Pflitsch, M., & Duggan, M. (2021). Observer dependent biases of quantum randomness: Effect stability and replicability. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition, 1(1), 114-155. https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.23205 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.23205

de Leeuw, J. R. (2015). jsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in a Web browser. Behavior Research Methods, 47(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y

Descartes, R. (1641). Meditationes de prima philosophia [Meditations on the first philosophy]. Michael Soli.

d’Espagnat, B. (2006). On physics and philosophy. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691240237 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691240237

Duggan, M., & Tressoldi, P. (2021). Human interaction with random number generators. A review of psychokinesis experiments 2006 - 2020. [Unpublished manuscript].

Heckhausen, H., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Thought contents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind. Motivation and Emotion, 11(2), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992338 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992338

Huang, M. A., Sun, H.-M., Vaina, L. M., Huang, M. A., Sun, H.-M., & Vaina, L. M. (2019). Visual attributes of subliminal priming images impact conscious perception of facial expressions. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 9(3), 108–120. https://doi.org/10.4236/JBBS.2019.93009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/jbbs.2019.93009

Jahn, R. G., Dunne, B., Bradish, G., Dobyns, Y., Lettieri, A., Nelson, R., Mischo, J., Boller, E., Bösch, H., Vaitl, D., Houtkooper, J., & Walter, B. (2000). Mind/machine interaction consortium: PortREG replication experiments. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 14(4), 499–555.

Jahn, R. G., & Dunne, B. J. (1997). Science of the subjective. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11(2), 201–224.

Jahn, R. G., Dunne, B. J., Nelson, R. G., Dobyns, Y. H., & Bradish, G. J. (1997). Correlations of random binary sequences with pre-stated operator intention: A review of a 12-year program. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11(3), 345–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2007.03.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2007.03.009

Jakob, M.-J., Dechamps, M. C., & Maier, M. A. (2020). You attract what you are: The effect of unconscious needs on micro-psychokinesis. Journal of Parapsychology, 84(2). https://doi.org/10.30891/jopar.2020.02.06 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30891/jopar.2020.02.06

Kim, Y. H., Yu, R., Kulik, S. P., & Scully, M. O. (2000). Delayed “choice” quantum eraser. Physical Review Letters, 84(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.1

Kochen, S., & Specker, E. (1967). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Indiana University Mathematics Journal, 17(1), 59–87. https://doi.org/10.1512/iumj.1968.17.17004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1512/iumj.1968.17.17004

Levine, J. (1983). Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64(4), 354–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.x

Lucadou, W. v. (1984). What is wrong with the definition of psi? European Journal of Parapsychology, 5(3), 261–283.

Lucadou, W. v. (1987). A multivariate PK experiment. Part III. Is PK a real force? The results and their interpretation. European Journal of Parapsychology, 6(4), 369–428.

Lucadou, W. v. (1995). The model of pragmatic information (MPI). European Journal of Parapsychology, 11, 58–75.

Lucadou, W. v. (1998). The exo-endo-perspective of non-locality in psycho-physical systems. International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems, 2, 169–185.

Lucadou, W. v. (2001). Hans in luck: The currency of evidence in parapsychology. Journal of Parapsychology, 65(1), 3–16.

Lucadou, W. v. W. (2015). The correlation-matrix method (CMM) - A new light upon the repeatability problem of parapsychology. Journal of Parapsychology, 49(2), 145–146.

Lucadou, W. v. W., Römer, H., & Walach, H. (2007). Synchronistic phenomena as entanglement correlations in generalized quantum theory. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(4), 50–74.

Lucadou, W. v., & Zahradnik, F. (2004). Predictions of the model of pragmatic information about RSPK. The Parapsychological Association Convention, 99–112.

Maier, M. A., & Dechamps, M. C. (2018). Observer effects on quantum randomness: testing micro-psychokinetic effects of smokers on addiction-related stimuli. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 32(2), 265–297. https://doi.org/10.31275/2018.1250 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31275/2018.1250

Maier, M. A., Dechamps, M. C., & Pflitsch, M. (2018). Intentional observer effects on quantum randomness: A Bayesian analysis reveals evidence against micro-psychokinesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 379. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00379 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00379

Maier, M. A., Dechamps, M. C., & Schiepek, G. K. (2021). Reply to Grote H. (2018). Commentary: Intentional observer effects on quantum randomness: A Bayesian analysis reveals evidence against micro-psychokinesis. Frontiers in Psychology 9:1350. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01350. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 35(2), 383–388. https://doi.org/10.31275/20211535 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31275/20211535

May, E. C., Spottiswoode, S. J. P., Utts, J. M., & James, C. L. (1995). Applications of Decision Augmentation Theory. Journal of Parapsychology, 59, 221-250.

Milikowski, M., & Elshout, J. J. (1995). What makes a number easy to remember? British Journal of Psychology, 86(4), 537–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02571.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02571.x

Mossbridge, J., & Radin, D. (2021). Psi performance as a function of demographic and

personality factors in smartphone-based tests: Using a “SEARCH” approach. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition, 1(1-2). https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.23419 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.23419

Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4). https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914

Pauli, W., Jung, C. G., Meier, C. A., & Périgaut, F. (2000). Correspondance: 1932-1958 [Correspondence 1932-1958]. Albin Michel.

Radin, D. I., & Nelson, R. D. (1989). Evidence for consciousness-related anomalies in random physical systems. Foundations of Physics, 19(12), 1499–1514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00732509 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00732509

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. In Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806

Schmidt, H. (1970). A PK test with electronic equipment. Journal of Parapsychology, 34(3), 175–181.

Schmidt, H. (1974). Comparison of PK action on two different random number generators. Journal of Parapsychology, 38(1), 47–55.

Schrödinger E. (1935). Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik [The present situation in quantum mechanics]. Naturwissenschaften, 23(49), 823–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01491914 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01491914

Schrödinger, E. (1958). Mind and matter. Cambridge University Press.

Shariff, A. F., Schooler, J., & Vohs, K. D. (2008). The hazards of claiming to have solved the hard problem of free will. In J. Baer, J. C. Kaufman, & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Are we free? Psychology and free will (pp. 181–204). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189636.003.0009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189636.003.0009

Turiel, T. P. (2007). Quantum random bit generators. American Statistician, 61(3), 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1198/000313007X223225 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/000313007X223225

Varvoglis, M., & Bancel, P. A. (2015). Micro-psychokinesis. In E. Cardeña, J. Palmer, & D. Marcusson-Clavertz (Eds.), Parapsychology: A handbook for the 21st century (pp. 266–281). McFarland.

von Weizsäcker, E. U. (1974). Erstmaligkeit und Bestätigung als Komponenten der pragmatischen Information [Novelty and Confirmation as components of pragmatic information]. In E. U. von Weizsäcker (Ed.), Offene Systeme I (pp. 82–113). Klett.

Wiseman, R. (2010). Heads I win, tails you lose: How parapsychologists nullify null results. Skeptical Inquirer, 34(1), 36–39.




How to Cite

Maier, M. A., Dechamps, M. C., & Rabeyron, T. (2022). Quantum Measurement as Pragmatic Information Transfer: Observer Effects on (S)objective Reality Formation. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition, 2(1), 16–48. https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.23535



Research articles