This is a video of medium John Edward doing a reading on audience members. He is asking a lot of vague, open-ended questions and getting a lot of answers wrong. Edwards relies on the audience members to fill in the blanks and guide the story.

 

Connection:

This video connects to emotional connections and shows that Edwards is able to capitalize on emotion in order to make audience members believe by blurring rational thought and overlooking the fact that his guesses are often incorrect. The pseudoscience red flags are red herring and confirmation bias. Edwards uses red herring by asking a ton of questions and using the information to distract from his wrong guesses. He also uses confirmation bias because he asks a lot of probing questions and by playing on the target’s emotion and grief, even if only a few of his questions are correct that individual will only remember the correct guesses and legitimize him as a medium. The pseudoscience watchlist is that results cannot be reproduced or verified. When he chooses to speak to people that have passed, there is no evidence that this phenomenon is possible and there is no way to verify the accuracy of the info he asks his audience members. Applying the critical thinking process and skepticism to his readings would be useful in evaluating his readings and recognizing emotional biases where people tend to believe his readings because they are overcome with emotion and grief. A limitation of this video is that it only shows a small portion and does not give us the entirety of his readings – it only shows his mishaps and incorrect guesses. A flaw is that there is no scientific method to his questions. 

This is a video clip from the Dr. Oz Show where Dr. Oz, a TV reality show doctor, sharing stories from viewers and audience members who claim they have gotten messages from their late loved ones. One of the audience members lost her son and claims her and her husband, a skeptic, received a flower made of shells right before their wedding as a sign from him. Dr. Oz then brings in a medium to explain how messages from the dead work, who mentions light and energy when describing how messages are sent from the afterlife. 

 

Connection:

This video connects to emotional connections and simplicity. Through emotional connections we see that people will believe that the signs they receive are genuine. The husband in the video who received the flower claimed to have been a skeptic but said the flower as a sign from his late son allowed him to believe in mediums and messages from the afterlife. Emotions can blur reason and the grief from losing your child can make you want to believe in things such as communicating with the dead. Simplicity also takes part because scientific answers can sometimes be hard to understand, and people choose to believe things without taking into account coincidences and the law of large numbers. A flower made out of shells right before their wedding day is likely a coincidence, but in an emotional state of grief it is easy to mistake coincidence for reality. The pseudoscience red flag is appeal to authority. Dr. Oz is an influential doctor with a large following, but he is turning away from science and legitimizing the practice of mediums on national television. He is using his authoritative imagery as a credible doctor and legitimizing psychic mediums. The pseudoscience watchlist is the use of scientific-sounding language that is meaningless. The medium in this clip uses words such as “light” and “energy” to describe how mediums gain intel from the afterlife. Applying the critical thinking process and skepticism is important to evaluate the validity of the sources on Dr. Oz and to recognize emotional bias that leads skeptics to believe in unexplainable things such as connecting to the afterlife. A flaw is that Dr. Oz is a doctor and yet he is indulging in phenomenon that go against science and medicine. A limitation is that there is no way to validate his claims or the claims of those who say they have gotten signs. 

On the Drew Barrymore Show, medium Anna Raimondi communicates with Barrymore’s ex-husband's grandmother who was special to her. Barrymore is a self-proclaimed skeptic but is quickly brought to tears when Raimondi communicates with her ex-husband’s grandmother who claims to love Barrymore regardless of whether her and her grandson are together. 

 

Connection: 

This video connects to emotional connections, where Barrymore (a skeptic) is quick to believe the medium because her words resonate with her. The emotions she feels makes her want to believe that someone who she was close to is communicating with her and it blurs rationality. The red flag is confirmation bias, because the medium asks dozens of questions and, although some were not relevant, Barrymore is overcome with emotions and only remembers the correct questions. Appeal to authority is another red flag because Barrymore, a celebrity, is endorsing mediums and having one on her show where she is brought to emotion lends the appearance of credibility of psychic mediums. The pseudoscience watch list is that results cannot be verified. There is no saying whether the medium could actually communicate with the afterlife, and it is very possible that the medium searched up aspects of Drew Barrymore’s life to ask probing questions that seemed accurate to her. The medium also appeals to emotion and uses Barrymore’s emotional cues to guide her line of questioning and probing. The critical thinking process and skepticism is important to recognize when guiding questions are being asked and how the reactions and emotions can be used by mediums to make assumptions about someone’s life. A limitation is that there is no way to verify whether the medium looked up Barrymore’s past on the internet and a flaw is that there is that the emotions can impact a skeptic’s assumption about mediums and believe things that can be untrue. 

This website looks into celebrity mediums and follow the actions of online vigilantes who have the mission to debunk mediums by going to their shows and wreaking havoc by giving fake information about dead relatives then publicly saying that they were lying in order to delegitimize them. Many of these “vigilantes” made fake facebook accounts to communicate false information with the mediums to see whether the mediums would capitalize on those private conversations and family details at their shows. 

 

Connection:

This website connects to emotional connections because in the article the author refers to mediums as “grief vampires” because they use emotions and grief to profit through the illusion of summoning the dead and connecting with the afterlife. The red herring mentioned in this is confirmation bias, where the medium will use body language, physical clues and emotions to make vague guesses about the individual’s life and family. While some of the probing guesses may be inaccurate and only few are correct, the individual will still remember the questions that coincide with their beliefs. The pseudoscience watchlist is convinces by faith and belief in spite of evidence. The article found that many are convinced in their belief of mediums and the existence of spiritual beings despite of mounting evidence that debunks their existence. The critical thinking process and skepticism is important to recognize that many profit on people’s belief of spiritualism and addressing emotional biases and evaluating evidence is important to determine whether the source is credible. The flaw is that many celebrity mediums such as Theresa Caputo and Tyler Henry profit off vulnerable people experiencing grief. A limitation within the website is that it is exposing mediums to have profited billions of dollars off cold and hot readings yet many remain unsuspecting and continue to put their money and belief into them. 

This article on the website run by Gweneth Paltrow explores the work of mediums and gets their resource from the Windbridge Research Centre, a centre that certifies and studies mediums. This article references doctors such as Julie Beischel who does extensive research on mediums and how mediums are able to connect to the other side to provide us with both information about our late loved ones and comfort. 

 

Connection:

This website connects to agenticity, where scientific answers are hard to understand so people naturally assign meaning to “agents.” In the article, there is mention that science has been gathering evidence for spirits and otherworldly beings for decades, but people refuse to accept it because people fear change and “shaking up the status quo is difficult.” They are assigning meaning to “invisible beings” and using science to back their argument up. A red flag is that they are appealing to authority by using doctors and celebrities to make the subject appear credible. Using Julie Beischel and stating that she has a doctorate degree is associating doctors and science with mediums and pseudoscience, two things that contradict each other. Gweneth Paltrow is also a popular celebrity and her website gathers large audiences, thus her endorsement of this article further acts to legitimize mediums and psychiatry. The pseudoscience watch list is that they are using scientific-sounding language to appear legitimate – this article uses words such as “consciousness,” “energy” and “materialism.” The limitation of this website is that there is no known evidence of the afterlife and the ability to communicate with people who have passed other than through mediums who claim can do it. A flaw is using emotional biases and stating that people refuse to believe in the afterlife and the power of mediums because they are afraid of change, rather than using rationale. 

 

Connection:

This website connects to emotional connections and calls out Tyler Henry for being an “emotional vampire” and using people’s immeasurable grief against them and make them falsely believe that he can communicate with the dead. The red flag is confirmation bias, where Henry will ask a number of vague questions until he gets them right and asks the sitter to “fill in the blanks,” thus allowing the sitter to confirm their own story. The pseudoscience watchlist is that Henry appeals to emotion. He walks vulnerable and grieving people through emotional connections to get them to believe in the legitimacy of mediums. Applying the critical thinking process and skepticism is important to evaluate the evidence, recognize the guiding questions that Henry asks to gather information and recognize emotions and biases that have the potential to impact the result of the reading and legitimize the cold-reading tactics that mediums use. A flaw is that a lot of people will blindly follow mediums because of celebrity status and clout and legitimize their work despite lack of evidence. A limitation is that there is no way to validate the claims made by Tyler Henry about individuals, especially on his TV show that is heavily edited and probably scripted and there is no scientific evidence.

This image shows a young girl writing messages from spirits using a planchette, a small board used for automatic writing and used as a form of ouija board in the 19th century.

 

Connection:

This image connects to unexplained, where scientific answers are hard to explain so we try to explain it ourselves. In the 19^th century, the rise of mediums and the belief of spirituality was very prevalent. They did not have the scientific knowledge we have today, and they often misidentified external forces as something other worldly. A red flag is ancient wisdom, as they use the planchette to confirm the idea of spiritualism and ghosts regardless of the fact that many science-forward individuals such as Darwin during that time largely went against the idea of supernatural phenomenon. A pseudoscience watchlist is that results cannot be reproduced of verified, and the operator of the planchette boards can determine what appears on them and there is no way to verify if they purposely wrote that message or if it truly came from the other side. 

The critical thinking process is applied, is the planchette is valuable resource to prove that spirits exist? If skeptics use the planchette, would they believe they communicated with the other world and believe messages could be received thorough an object. A limitation is that they did not have the same technology and knowledge we have now and it was easy to assign meaning to things that do not have meaning but just because something is unexplained, it does not mean that it is not explainable. A flaw is that planchette boards could only be controlled by the operator, and mediums would often appeal to emotion and biases to get their audience to believe the unbelievable. 

This image depicts Tyler Henry with tarot cards behind him, the galaxy (or universe), some hands and the eye of providence or the “all seeing eye” that many mediums and psychics use as a sign of spiritual illumination and revelation.

 

Connection:

This image connects with agenticity, where meaning and invisible beings are assigned to agents. The red flag is confirmation bias. You can see tarot cards in the image behind Tyler Henry, and those who partake in tarot readings are usually looking for confirming evidence and ignore evidence that doesn't coincide with their beliefs. The pseudoscience watchlist is appeals to emotion, where vulnerable people speaking to mediums unconsciously influence the medium’s line of questioning by the information they provide them with through body language, and emotion ultimately trumps rational thinking. Applying the critical thinking process and skepticism is important to evaluate the evidence because there is no current evidence that can describe how we generate conscious experience, and thorough research and fact checks enriches our understanding of consciousness and mediums. A flaw is the lack of scientific method, and the questions asked that do not correlate with anything but are asked based on the responses, emotion and body language of the individual. A limitation with mediums is the bias during the cold reading. Mediums will often use body language to find the answers they are looking for and will ask vague and general questions to arrive to those conclusions. 

This image shows a medium performing a cold reading and asking the subject “are you sure that doesn’t mean anything to you?”

 

Connection:

This image connects with emotional connections, where emotions can make us believe what we want to believe regardless of reasoning and rational thought. The medium doing the cold reading will often ask questions aimed to evoke emotion. The red flag is confirmation bias. The medium will ask questions like “are you sure this doesn’t mean anything to you?” and try to guide answers out of the individuals to get confirming evidence. By asking ambiguous questions, it allows the individual to navigate the conversation without consciously realizing that they are giving the medium the answers. The pseudoscience watchlist is that results can’t be verified, so there is no way to verify the accuracy of the information given by the medium and whether they truly communicate with the dead or make coincidentally close assumptions by using vague questions. Applying the critical thinking process and skepticism is important to evaluate the evidence, recognize emotional biases, and consider alternative explanations as to why the medium is asking questions that seem coincidentally accurate (such as asking if they passed away from cancer or cardiovascular disease which are both common causes of death) A flaw is lack of scientific method of the questions being asked and whether they are accurate because of knowledge or pure luck and generalization. A limitation is the lack of scientific evidence proving that cold readings are accurate. 

2. This topic is interesting to me because when someone close to me in my family passed away, I was desperate for some kind of a sign to tell me that they were okay or that they were watching over me. If the light in my house would flicker or I’d suddenly feel cold, I was hoping it would be a sign but was always skeptical of pseudoscience and never believed in otherworldly phenomena. In my grief and emotional state, even as a skeptic, I was willing to believe anything. If a medium told me my loved one was speaking to me – would I have believed them? Today I’d say of course not, but in that state of despair and sadness would I have? While before I would have said that mediums are not harmful and can be therapeutic if you know that they are not legit and cannot provide any scientific explanation to their reasoning, seeing how much harm they also cause is infuriating. So many vulnerable people are taken advantage of, and it is interesting how many people continue to believe in their spiritual powers despite any concrete evidence and how profitable the psychic and medium industry is. 

3. I think it is interesting the tactics that mediums use to convince people of their legitimacy. While I was always skeptical about mediums, I never truly understood how they perform. I’ve seen many clips of Tyler Henry and Theresa Caputo performing readings or “connecting” with the afterlife, and I was left shocked at the seemingly accurate descriptions they gave. This assignment was interesting because it helped me dive deeper into the world of mediums and taught me a lot of the tactics that they use, such as general and ambiguous questions, leading the individual to answer or fill in the blanks for them, using general clues that can apply to many people, for example using common names to make guesses like “I see a John or Jack.” These are both common names and it is allowing the individual to confirm their loved ones' names and, through body language and emotional cues, give the medium ammunition to make accurate guesses.  

4. I am most likely to remember to be skeptical about everything and deploy my critical analysis skills when confronted with something I am unsure is true or not. This research further solidified my understanding of red flags in pseudoscience and how to critically process phenomena that seem too good to be true. By looking at the flaws and limitations of each source, I am able to find the most accurate result. I will also remember that mediums are often just really great actors that play on emotions and physical cues to make educated guesses. Mediums make for compelling TV, and being able to look past their illusion and recognize their techniques is something I will remember from this research as well. 

5. I think that mediums and psychics are the most harmful because they often take advantage of grieving individuals for monetary purposes and fame. While some may think that it is a means to give people hope and comfort, we’ve seen it backfire on more than one occasion, and the consequences are detrimental. When someone experiences a tragedy that has a lot of unanswered questions marring it, many will seek the help of a medium to bring closure to the family and help them find the answers they desperately crave. Most people grieving a loss are extremely vulnerable, and mediums take advantage of their vulnerability. Take for example the Amanda Berry case where her mother died never knowing that her daughter was still alive. Sylvia Browne told Amanda Berry’s mom that her daughter was dead and her mother believed the psychic so strongly that she stopped pursuing her daughter’s case and did not continue searching for her as strongly as she did before. She not only causes her mother immeasurable pain but also halted her mother’s efforts in attempting to find her because her mother believed she had died and passed away before finding out the truth. The least harmful would be ghosts and ghost sightings. Ghosts have been a subject of discussion for many years and many cultures believe in their existence, even though many believe, it is not as harmful as capitalizing on somebody’s grief for money.  

6. I would emphasize the importance of the critical thinking process and skepticism. Fact-check your sources, check recourses, and do research before coming to a conclusion. We are often guided by our emotions or we try to explain what is unexplainable, but gathering information to support the claim, evaluating evidence to ensure that the source is credible and the scientific method has been followed, and recognizing assumptions, emotions and biases can help us make informed choices, even for the unexplainable.