Pull to refresh
Logo
Out-of-body study misses target hits, but two participants accurately describe concealed researchers

Out-of-body study misses target hits, but two participants accurately describe concealed researchers

New Capabilities

UVA-led Brazil trial failed its object-identification measure; two unprompted descriptions of activities behind closed doors were later confirmed

Today: Explore publishes trial; incidental observations reported

Overview

Updated 1 hour ago

A test of out-of-body perception failed its main measure: none of 21 participants identified a hidden on-screen object better than chance. But two participants, unprompted, described where researchers were seated and what they were doing in a separate room behind closed doors. Trial records confirmed both accounts were accurate at the time.

The observations can't count as evidence, since they weren't part of the predefined outcome measures, UVA Health investigators say. The finding has changed how the team thinks about designing OBE tests: moving beyond static objects toward verifiable incidental details that participants might notice during the experience.

Why it matters

Two participants accurately described concealed events they couldn't have seen; future trials will test whether the phenomenon holds.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

21
Total study participants
Volunteers in the two-week trial conducted in Brazil.
13
Participants giving target descriptions
Included people who reported a mental image rather than a full OBE.
10
Participants reporting an out-of-body experience
Self-reported leaving their bodies during the trial.
2
Accurate incidental observations
Unprompted descriptions of researchers behind closed doors, verified by trial records.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.

Play

Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.

Most of these play right now — no account needed. Sign up to save scores, keep a streak, and unlock Debate and Predict. Log in Sign Up
Predict 3 ways this could play out. Back the one you believe — contrarian picks score more when a scenario has a resolution date. Log in to play

People Involved

Organizations Involved

Timeline

1966 September 2026

6 events Latest: Today
Tap a bar to jump to that date
  1. Explore publishes trial; incidental observations reported

    Today Publication

    Peer-reviewed paper reports no better-than-chance target identification and two verified observations of researchers behind closed doors.

  2. WVIR reports on Weiler's OBE study

    News

    Local Virginia outlet covers the trial and Weiler's surprise at the incidental observations.

  3. Tart's Robert Monroe study misses target, verifies incidental detail

    Research

    Monroe missed a five-digit target but accurately described a technician's unscheduled visitor in another room, later verified.

  4. Alvarado reviews experimental ESP evidence during OBEs

    Research

    Published review in the Journal of Parapsychology on experimental evidence for extrasensory perception during out-of-body experiences.

  5. Tart runs Miss Z sleep-laboratory experiment

    Research

    Five-digit target placed on a high shelf; subject reported viewing it during an out-of-body experience.

  6. Maimonides pilot study tests ESP and OBEs

    Research

    Four-night pilot at the Maimonides Medical Center Dream Laboratory studied a subject reporting frequent out-of-body experiences.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

1968

Miss Z Experiment (1968)

Psychologist Charles Tart placed a five-digit number on a high shelf in his sleep laboratory and asked subject Miss Z, who reported out-of-body experiences, to read and recall it. She reported viewing it from above.

Then

Her reports were suggestive but imperfect; the setup became the standard target-identification format.

Now

Established the experimental template for OBE testing that Weiler's trial later repeated.

Why this matters now

Shows the target-identification paradigm Weiler used and its enduring limitations.

1991

Pam Reynolds Case (1991)

During cardiac surgery, with her brain flatlined and blood drained from her head, Reynolds reported watching the operation from above and described instruments and procedures she had not been briefed on.

Then

Her detailed account became a widely cited near-death experience case.

Now

Remains debated; skeptics note she may have had partially intact hearing during surgery.

Why this matters now

Shows the veridical-perception claims that continue to motivate OBE and near-death research designs.

1998

Robert Monroe Study (1998)

In eight laboratory sessions, Robert Monroe missed a five-digit target placed on a high shelf. During one session he described the technician interacting with a man in another room, an unscheduled visit by the technician's husband, unknown to anyone at the time.

Then

The account was later verified by the researcher team.

Now

Led Tart to argue that fixed, passive targets may not align with the attentional dynamics of the OBE state.

Why this matters now

The closest precedent for Weiler's incidental observations: a missed target paired with accurate, verifiable off-target detail.

Sources

(7)