It is well known to date that the experimenters’ hypotheses or expectations  would unintentionally influence the results of their research [1]. Introducing experimental errors in a similar fashion appears to be quite a common practice in psychological studies [2] as well as in other fields of science [3] to the extent that reproducibility is dramatically hindered. -21- [1] Rosenthal R. Experimenter expectancy effect.  SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Eds. Michael       S. Lewis-Beck & Alan Bryman & Tim Futing Liao, 2004. [2] Aarts A. A. et al (2015). Estimating reproducibility of psychological science. Open Science Collaboration. Science.2015; 349:       aac4716. DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716. [3] Ioannidis J. P. A., Allison D. B., Ball C. A., Coulibaly I., Cui X., Culhane A. C., Falchi M., Furlanello C., Game L., Jurman G., Mangion J.,       Mehta T., Nitzberg M., Page G. P., Petretto E., Noort V. v. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses, Nature Genet.       2009; 41:149–155. Interpreting the curious MicroPK mechanism Foundations of Quantum Theory and Consciousness