done some literature search, here are the results:
abstracts from the articles:
*Psychol Rep. 2002 Dec;91(3 Pt 1):899-906.
Hindsight and confirmation biases in an exercise in telepathy.
Rudski JM.Department of Psychology, Muhlenberg College, Allentown, PA 18104-5586, USA.
Belief in the paranormal or claims of paranormal experiences may be, at least in part, associated with systematic cognitive biases. 48undergraduate college students engaged in an exercise in telepathy in which the color of cards was 'sent' to them by the experimenter under two conditions. In a Hindsight-possible condition, participants recorded whether their choice was correct following the revelation of the color. In the Control condition participants committed to a particular response by writing it down before receiving feedback, thus eliminating ability to alter retrospectively what 'was known all along'. Consistent with a hindsight bias, participants performed significantly better under the Hindsight-possible condition. Moreover, a statisically significant correlation was found between paranormal belief assessed on Tobacyk's 1988 Revised Paranormal Belief Scale in the Hindsight-possible but not in the Control condition, suggesting a confirmation bias. Results are discussed in terms of interactions between hindsight and confirmation biases and how they might relate to paranormal beliefs.*
this one is on 'staring':
*Br J Psychol. 2000 Feb;91 ( Pt 1):71-85.
The ability to detect unseen staring: a literature review and empirical tests.
Colwell J, Schroder S, Sladen D.
Psychology Academic Group, School of Social Science, Middlesex University, UK.
There is evidence to suggest that individuals not only believe in their ability to detect an unseen gaze, but may genuinely be able to do so. The present study reviewed past research and sought to determine whether such a phenomenon was empirically demonstrable. In Expt 1, 12 participants responded to 12 sequences (with feedback in the last nine) of 20 trials each, with staring or non-staring episodes based on Sheldrake's random number sequences. No effects were obtained when no feedback was given. With feedback, more accurate than mean chance expectation (MCE) results were obtained on staring, but no difference on non-staring trials. However other 'normal' explanations of ESP phenomena discuss the possibility of matching in bias between experimental sequences and participants' representations of randomness. Tests of the sequences found more alternations than expected, a feature typical of subjective randomness, but the increase in accuracy found on staring trials only was not consistent with this explanation. It was concluded that the improvement in accuracy with feedback is likely to be due to implicit learning, given the structure in non-random sequences. This hypothesis was supported in Expt 2 where 12 participants responded to 12 'genuinely random' sequences, and no differences in accuracy from MCE were obtained.*
....in other words, there doesn't seem to be any suggestion that telepathy or staring-awareness exists.