Not quite psycho but close
The term psycho babble was coined in the 1960's. As the word babble suggests, it is a derogatory term.
But today, psychology is a highly respected social science. It is taught at every major university and its theories are generally accepted as valid and scientific.
But what about psychic babble? When will supernatural concepts and esoteric theories from the psychic realm be accepted by society?
For clues, I looked at Wikipedia's definition of psycho babble, and was (not really) surprised to see that the same definition can be applied to psychic babble almost verbatim.
Here it is, edited [by me] to make it fit psychic rather than psychological concepts:
[Psychic babble] is a term that serves to dismiss [psychic theory] as a non-science, both in a specific instance of an argument based upon the current principles of [psychic theory], and in general as a science that can derive a factual prediction [!!!] of real-world behavior. The underlying basis for this dismissal is the argument that [psychic theory] has been characterized by cycles of fad and fashion, followed by discard and disenchantment, rather than by evolving theory and scientific methodology. [...]
On a different scale, the term [psychic babble] may also disparagingly refer to grandiloquent but allegedly empty jargon or buzzwords with a [psychic] tinge. This is a use of the term that is internal; that is, those who [use psychic powers] of one form or another are typically those who would use it in this fashion.
As with any self-respecting jargon, practitioners find these shorthand usages normal and useful, referring to valid concepts; thus they are very likely to reject the label of "[psychic babble]." But the vagueness inherent in many [psychic] concepts also permits the use of "real" terminology in ways that may seem inappropriate to others. Some who are accused of [psychic babble] suspect that this may be because certain [psychic] concepts [...] themselves so lack precision as to become meaningless, and that true believers only frown upon [psychic babble] because it represents use by non-practitioners. This is one of the key points of the argument that [psychic theory] is not a science. Science demands that ideas be testable, that experimental results be repeatable, that ideas that fail this regime be discarded. The very phrase "certain [psychic] concepts [...] themselves so lack precision" is manifestly un-scientific.
Users of [psychic] jargon have argued that critics have invented the term as a defense against the critics' own deep, repressed fears and traumas. By attacking and undermining the whole language of personal exploration, the critics attempt to ensure that the time when they may have to acknowledge these parts of their psyches gets pushed into the distant future. Critics would probably reject this argument -- because to them, it is [psychic babble].
Sources that are often suggested to be using [psychic babble] include the phraseology of New Agers [!!!], self-help groups, personal development coaching and LGATs (Large Group Awareness Training).
I think that in the present, this definition fits psychic babble even better than psycho babble because psychology has gained so much in reputation. And if psychology is any indication, then psychic theory will be taught in major universities and psychic treatment will be prescribed by physicians within about ten years.