# Intention Awareness (Telepathy?): A Proposed Test **Status:** Exploratory protocol concept v0.1. No study has been run, no participants have been tested, and no experimental results are reported. This document is not a preregistration. **Question:** Can a receiver identify another person's assigned intended action when ordinary communication is blocked? ## Spiritual perspective and measurable prediction Within a nondual spiritual interpretation, a feeling of connection may be understood as shared awareness. This is a philosophical interpretation. The proposed experiment measures target matching; it does not measure a shared field of consciousness, extra dimensions, or direct access to another person's subjective awareness. The prediction is that receivers will match an intended action more often than the 25% chance expectation and more often in sending trials than in no-sending trials. Both criteria, their statistical tests and the error-control procedure must be specified before data collection. A few correct guesses, a vivid impression, or a score merely greater than 25% would not establish the prediction. ## Four targets On each trial a computer independently selects one of four intended token movements with equal probability: up, down, left or right. The sender is asked to prepare the assigned movement without making it until after the receiver's response has been locked. This is a deliberately narrow operational definition of intention, not a measure of every form of interpersonal attunement. ## Two randomly interleaved conditions - **Sending:** Only the sender sees the target and prepares the specified action. - **No-sending control:** The target is generated and sealed, but displayed to nobody. The sender sees a neutral prompt. Timing and the receiver's experience are otherwise the same. The receiver and anyone interacting with the receiver remain blind to both the target and the condition. The sender necessarily knows whether a target was displayed, so this should not be described as blinding every participant. ## Prevent ordinary information transfer Use separate locations and fixed trial timing. Eliminate shared audio, video, messaging, reflections, visible movement and target-dependent timing cues. The receiver's interface must never receive target values or condition labels. Audit the randomisation, access controls and logs independently. The sender records compliance with the task; handling of noncompliance is specified in advance and must not depend on whether a guess was correct. ## Record before reveal The receiver selects exactly one of the four options and records confidence. Responses are timestamped and locked before targets are revealed. No correctness feedback is given until the prespecified run is complete. Keep every scheduled trial in the audit record, including misses, missing responses, exclusions and deviations. Free-text impressions, if collected, are secondary exploratory observations and are not retroactively substituted for exact-match scoring. ## Pre-register and analyse Before recruiting, specify the smallest effect of interest, sample size and number of trials through power analysis, session length, target and condition randomisation, inclusion and exclusion rules, missing-data handling, stopping rule, and primary analysis. Define how the two prediction criteria and any additional comparisons will be handled. Account for repeated trials within participants, pairs and sessions rather than treating all pooled observations as independent by default. Compare sending accuracy with chance and with the no-sending condition using the preregistered analysis. Report effect sizes and uncertainty, all planned analyses, protocol deviations and null findings. Do not stop because an appealing score appears. A confirmatory replication should be independently run with a separately registered plan. ## Interpretation - **No clear effect:** The experiment provides no support under the tested conditions. Its confidence intervals determine which effect sizes remain plausible. - **Both conditions unusually accurate:** Investigate leakage, randomisation, software and analysis before attributing anything to the sender. - **Sending exceeds chance and the control:** A well-controlled, statistically robust result warrants independent replication and further tests of alternative explanations. It does not by itself establish telepathy or a metadimensional mechanism. Ordinary intention perception, the felt experience of connection and claims of information transfer are distinct questions. Research on animals responding to human behaviour does not automatically establish a common mechanism across species. ## Sources 1. Cavallo A. et al. (2016), *Decoding intentions from movement kinematics*. Scientific Reports 6, 37036. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37036. This study concerns information in visible movement, not cue-free telepathy. 2. Open Science Framework, *Registrations & Preregistrations*. https://help.osf.io/article/330-welcome-to-registrations. 3. NIST/SEMATECH, *Binomial Distribution*. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/eda/section3/eda366i.htm. A reference chance model for independent forced-choice trials; the final study analysis must reflect its actual design. ## Related exploration Animal-Human Connection: https://akashicnet.org/animal-human-connection ## Provenance The user's question motivated the exploration. The operational design and explanatory graphics were developed with AI assistance. No empirical support for telepathic ability is inferred from creating or publishing this record.