22 October issue presents the wildly improbable coincidence of containing both a letter about parapsychology and spontaneous cases (p. 436) and a spontaneous case. For on page 463, as part of my comments on the 1965 Nobel Laureates in Medicine or Physiology, there appears the phrase The operator ‘loses’. . ., though what I had actually written was The operator ‘closes’.... Now since I happen to have some doubts about the validity of the operator concept, doubts that I certainly would not consciously have wished to introduce on this happy occasion [though I did voice them earlier in Science 144, 816 (1964)], this strange error can be explained only as a Freudian slip by a member of the editorial staff of Science acting under the telekinetic influence of an author9s psyche.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gunther S. Stent (1964) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: