While mediumship and trance channeling are both practices in which individuals report receiving information from nonphysical sources, there are some differences in how this information is received and provided. With mediumship, reports typically involve communication with deceased individuals. Trance channeling, on the other hand, describes experiences where a person serves as the vehicle for a nonphysical being or entity to communicate directly through speech, writing, or movement. Although the practices have distinct definitions, the terms are often used interchangeably and they are understood to be related forms of communication.
Despite ongoing public interest in these practices, there is no consistent standard governing how practitioners are trained, evaluated, and prepared to work with people seeking their services. This is particularly important because individuals may turn to mediums during periods of grief or emotional vulnerability, making ethical conduct and appropriate boundaries essential. Additionally, the consequences of inadequate oversight and standardization in practitioner certification can extend beyond the credibility of individual practitioners. For example, in the Maria Duval mail fraud scheme, more than 1.3 million people were defrauded of more than $175 million through claims involving psychic services. Although certification may not necessarily have prevented the fraud, it still illustrates the importance of consumer protection in a field where people may be especially vulnerable to misleading claims. Establishing clearer expectations for skills assessment and ethics education, including working with grieving individuals, could help the public better understand the qualifications of mediumship and trance channeling practitioners.
In our recent study, Evaluation of English-speaking Medium and Trance Channeler Certifications published in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, lead author Juliette Gallo, along with Helané Wahbeh, Siri Zemel, and Leo Ruickbie, examined certification programs for English-speaking mediums and trance channelers. The study was focused on identifying available programs, assessing their requirements, and evaluating how consistently they addressed practitioner competence and public safety.
How we found and evaluated medium and trance channeler certification programs
Researchers identified medium and trance channeling programs by searching online for the programs explicitly describing their offerings as a form of certification. Three independent reviewers then assessed eligible programs using a structured and weighted scoring system that was developed for the study. The scoring system covered areas such as how practical skills were assessed, whether evaluation procedures were publicly documented, and whether programs addressed grief, ethics, and practitioner suitability through training or personal interviews. Medium and trance channeling programs were not included in the study if they were no longer accepting candidates, if they lacked an assessment or evidence-based testing process, or if they granted certification solely by a practitioner registering or paying some fee for the certification.
Additionally, the three reviewers documented practical details of each program such as certification costs, testing arrangements, training requirements, and the organizational structure of the certifying body. Altogether the data collected provided a way to compare programs that might otherwise use the same certification label while following very different processes.
Study results on mediumship and trance channeling certification programs
Our researchers in this novel study identified 35 potential certification programs, 32 for mediumship and three for trance channeling. Of these, six met the study’s eligibility criteria: five based in the United States and one in the United Kingdom. All six were mediumship programs. None of the three trance channeling programs met the criteria, because they offered training without testing. The results of the independent review of each program revealed considerable variation in how these organizations evaluated practitioners. Using the study’s scoring system, the Spiritualists’ National Union received the highest overall score, followed by the Forever Family Foundation.
Mediumship training and certification protocols
Five of the eligible certification programs reviewed used specific testing procedures, and five made their certification protocols publicly available. However, only two of the programs required training as part of the certification process. Regarding mediumship work with people experiencing grief, none of the programs included grief training as part of certification. Four confirmed they did not, and two did not provide this information. However, two of the six organizations explicitly addressed the importance of working appropriately and ethically with bereaved clients. None of the programs required formal ethics training, although two organizations described ethics education or evaluation through their course materials, application process, or interviews. Separately, three of the organizations required a personal interview before practitioners took their certification assessment, two did not, and one did not respond.
The methods used to evaluate candidates varied as well. Half of the organizations assessed mediums remotely, while two offered both in-person and remote options. Among the four organizations that disclosed their pass rates, the reported figures ranged widely, from about 10% at the most selective program to 80% or higher at others.
Organizational values and potential impact on mediumship certification
The organizations also differed in their underlying approaches to training. Religious organizations incorporated theological education and denominational practices, while secular organizations placed greater emphasis on assessing practical skills and public service. These differences reflect the distinct goals and values that can shape certification, but they also make direct comparisons between programs a bit more complicated.
Considering the role of costs in mediumship certification programs
There were also differences regarding the costs of certification programs. While half of the organizations evaluated offered free certification, one had an annual directory listing fee ranging from $299 to $2,500, and two charged fees covering certification-related expenses such as course registration, testing, and, for one program, annual renewal. The two organizations with paid certification, which were also the only two that required coursework, reported higher pass rates than the two free programs that shared them. Structured training may simply prepare candidates better, and with only four programs, this finding does not establish a relationship between cost and practitioner competence. Future research could explore whether financial structure is associated with differences in assessment standards, candidate preparation, or certification outcomes.
Improving public trust and mediumship and trance channeling practitioner accountability
This recent study on how English-speaking mediumship and trance channeling certification programs approach practitioner evaluation and public protection revealed several differences among programs, highlighting the need for clearer expectations around training, assessment, and ethical responsibility. Although certification alone cannot establish the validity of mediumistic or trance channeling reports nor guarantee appropriate practitioner conduct, transparent requirements and meaningful evaluation can help consumers make informed decisions and encourage responsible practice.
Future research on certification programs could expand the search to include programs that use other terms to describe their evaluation processes beyond “certification” (for example, instead using “accreditation” or “registration”). We could perhaps examine how consumers interpret certification and whether these credentials actually provide meaningful information to them about practitioner qualifications. Further studies could also explore whether requirements such as practical skills testing, ethics education, grief training, and interviews are associated with better preparation for practice.
Ultimately, clear medium and trance channeling practitioner certification standards should focus on relevant skills, ethical practice, and the ability to work responsibly with clients. Ongoing research can help clarify how these standards can better support practitioners and protect the people who seek their services.
Read the publication this blog is based on.
