PLC EVP Consensus Standard™

Developed and published by the Paranormal Learning Center, the PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ establishes a transparent, bias-aware framework for evaluating Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVP) through blind listening, crowd consensus, and structured analysis.

This standard does not determine what an EVP is.

It measures how consistently independent listeners perceive the same audio content under controlled conditions.

Why the PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ Exists

EVP analysis has historically relied on:

• Individual interpretation

• Leading prompts

• Small sample sizes

• Confirmation bias

• Inconsistent evaluation criteria

The result has been disagreement, skepticism, and a lack of shared standards.

The PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ was created to address this gap by introducing:

• Blind, independent listener evaluation

• Large-sample consensus analysis

• Clearly defined scoring criteria

• Separation of audio quality from interpretation

• Reproducible, reportable outcomes

This standard is designed for investigators, educators, researchers, and teams seeking a responsible, evidence-forward approach to EVP evaluation.

What This Standard Measures — and What It Does Not

The Standard Measures:

• Degree of agreement among independent listeners

• Consistency of perceived phrases or sounds

• Listener confidence and response quality

• Audio legibility and signal clarity

• Integrity of the evaluation protocol

The Standard Does NOT:

• Claim the origin or source of EVP

• Assert objective truth of interpretations

• Attempt to prove or disprove paranormal explanations

• Replace investigator judgment or contextual analysis

This is a perception-consensus standard, not a belief system.

Core Principles of the Standard

The PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ is built on five foundational principles:

1. Blind Listening
   Listeners evaluate audio without prior interpretations, labels, or prompts.

2. Independent Evaluation
   Responses are collected without exposure to other listener feedback.

3. Crowd Consensus Over Authority
   No single interpretation is privileged over collective agreement.

4. Bias Mitigation
   Procedural safeguards reduce suggestion, expectation effects, and group influence.

5. Transparency & Reproducibility
   Scoring logic and methodology are documented and repeatable.

The EVP Consensus Score (ECS™)

At the core of the standard is the EVP Consensus Score (ECS™) — a numerical score from 0 to 100 representing the strength and reliability of listener agreement.

The ECS™ Is Based On Three Pillars:

1. Perceptual Consensus

• Listener agreement on similar interpretations

• Stability of interpretation clusters

• Proportion of listeners reporting anomalous perception

• Sample size reliability

2. Audio Legibility

• Signal-to-noise characteristics

• Speech-band salience

• Distortion and clipping penalties

• Duration suitability

3. Protocol Integrity

• Blindness of the listening process

• Response quality and spam filtering

• Optional control-clip validation

These components are combined into a single standardized score with built-in safeguards against misuse or over-interpretation.

Consensus Confidence Probability (CCP™)

In addition to the ECS™, the standard reports a Consensus Confidence Probability (CCP™).

CCP™ answers one specific, defensible question:

“What is the probability that a new, blinded listener would match the leading interpretation?”

This probability is derived from:

• Top interpretation cluster strength

• Listener sample size reliability

CCP™ does not claim accuracy in an absolute sense — only the likelihood of perceptual agreement.

Interpretation Bands

ECS™ results are reported using standardized interpretation bands:

• 85–100 — Exemplary Consensus EVP

• 70–84 — Strong Consensus EVP

• 55–69 — Moderate / Mixed Interpretation

• 40–54 — Low Consensus / Likely Ambiguous

• 0–39 — Inconclusive

These bands are designed to communicate clarity without exaggeration.

Methodology Transparency

The PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ incorporates:

• Phonetic similarity analysis

• Semantic clustering

• Edit-distance controls

• Confidence-weighted listener input

• Explicit handling of “noise only” responses

All clustering and scoring methods are documented and versioned to ensure transparency, consistency, and ongoing improvement.

Limitations & Responsible Use

The Paranormal Learning Center emphasizes the following limitations:

• Listener consensus does not imply objective truth

• Audio artifacts, pareidolia, and expectation effects remain possible

• Results should be interpreted alongside environmental, historical, and investigative context

• No single EVP should be treated as conclusive evidence

This standard is intended to raise the quality of evaluation, not to settle debates.

Adoption & Use

The PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ is:

• The recommended EVP evaluation methodology of the Paranormal Learning Center

• Incorporated into PLC education and certification programs

• Designed for integration into investigative workflows and software tools

Investigators and teams may reference and apply the standard with attribution.

Governance & Versioning

• Maintained by the Paranormal Learning Center

• Published as a versioned technical standard

• Updated as research, tools, and best practices evolve

Current version: PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ v1.0

Using the Standard in Practice

EVP reports evaluated under this methodology may include the statement:

“This EVP was evaluated using the PLC EVP Consensus Standard™.”

The PLC EVP Consensus Standard™ exists to bring clarity, structure, and credibility to EVP evaluation — without requiring belief, and without dismissing experience.