What ability is a psychic claiming if she asserts knowledge about a kidnapper's location without any physical evidence?

The choice of clairvoyance is appropriate in this context because it refers to the claimed ability to gain information about an object, person, or event through means that are not accessible through normal sensory channels. When a psychic asserts knowledge about a kidnapper's location without physical evidence, they are suggesting an ability to perceive or "see" things beyond the normal scope of human perception, which is the essence of clairvoyance.

In this scenario, the psychic is not predicting future events (which would be precognition), nor is she reading the thoughts of others (which would be telepathy). Additionally, psychokinesis involves the ability to manipulate physical objects with the mind, which does not apply to the assertion of knowledge about someone's location. Therefore, clairvoyance is indeed the correct choice as it directly aligns with the described ability to acquire knowledge without any physical evidence.