if you don't mind me asking, were these unbiased studies? Sometimes people/groups/media will conduct studies for the sole purpose of proving something false and also twisting results to fit the end conclusion they had in mind before going into the study.
Who are the orginators of these studies you have read?
That's a very good point, and it is a very relevant question/criticism of studies, especially those dealing with religion.
The studies are a variety, most of which were conducted on glossolalia, which catches more attention than being 'slain in the Spirit.'
Check out these resources:
Author:
Kildahl, John P. Title: The psychology of speaking in tongues, by John P. Kildahl. Edition: [1st ed.] Publisher: New York, Harper & Row [1972] Description: Book
xii, 110 p. 22 cm.
Author:
Goodman, Felicitas D. Title: Speaking in tongues; a cross-cultural study of glossolalia [by] Felicitas D. Goodman. Publisher: Chicago, University of Chicago Press [1972] Description: Book
xxii, 175 p. 22 cm.
There are also numerous websites which will speak of case studies, but they are not guaranteed reliable of course, since it is, after all, the internet. However, find an internet article referencing a study that is listed from a respected journal or book.
Many of these individuals who conduct these studies want the results to reveal something supernatural, while others specifically desire to 'reveal them' as psychological only.
My interest, however, is not in their interpretation of the results, but in the results alone. If over 50% of the unbelieving, non-religious population can realistically produce 'speaking in tongues' on command to such a degree as to fool a believer in 'speaking in tongues,' what does that say about the gift? It says it probably isn't miraculous, because virtually anyone can do it.
It's also significant that there are numerous other religious groups, completely non-Christian, who produce glossolalia. There are also groups that do similar things as falling down, laughing hysterically, barking, twitching/shaking, etc., as part of their own religious experience, but they are NOT Christian.
These groups also have similar success/failure with their own attempts to 'prophesy' (often referred to in English translation of their activities as 'asking the oracles'). Like the Christian groups that practice the same, these groups have a high level of unreliability in their oracles/prophecies. If they ever do come true, it is often because the prophecy was either extremely obvious or simple, or it comes true only partially and contains many errors. They justify these errors by claiming that the 'connection' to the oracle is limited, or because the oracle will intentionally fool them, or because they misunderstood the oracle.
The success rate of modern day 'prophets' is a complete failure of the rule of a prophet given to us in Deuteronomy 18:22. If you read this section of Scripture, it give us confidence that we need not fear such a prophet; this gave me great Biblical comfort during a difficult time when I was being greatly pressured and even verbally 'attacked' by individuals from the church I mentioned in my previous post.
I hope I have clarified the studies. I would also encourage you to search for the studies for the success/failure rates of worldly psychics. I'm not sure what you know about it, but you might be surprised how the success/failure rate is similar: mostly failures, but if anything comes true, it often contains very simplistic description that could easily come true, or it is very partially true, containing numerous errors or key missing components.