Spatial characteristics of hallucinations associated with sleep paralysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Spatial properties of hallucinations have received relatively little systematic investigation. We present evidence from a web-based study of the spatial properties of a broad array of hallucinations associated with sleep paralysis. Predictions regarding spatial characteristics of hallucinations were based on proposed neurophysiological mechanisms underlying different types of hallucinations. METHOD: Distributions in three dimensions as well as distance and dispersion measures were assessed for 279 experient for two general categories of hallucinations: Intruder hallucinations--including presence, visual, and auditory hallucinations; and Vestibular-Motor (V-M) hallucinations--including floating, flying, illusory motor movements, out-of-body experiences (OBEs), and autoscopy. RESULTS: For all spatial measures, Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed that Intruder and V-M hallucinations constituted distinctive factors. In addition, Intruder hallucinations were experienced as occurring close to, usually within a meter of, the experient, whereas V-M hallucinations involved excursions of considerable distance, often beyond the immediate environment. V-M hallucination distance was positively associated with vividness of V-M hallucinations, whereas Intruder hallucination distance was negatively correlated with theoretically related contact hallucinations (pressure, obstructed breathing, pain, choking, and touch). CONCLUSION: The differences in the spatial characteristics of Intruder and V-M hallucinations largely corroborated predictions based on the respective hypothesised neural substrates of a threat activated vigilance system and a bodily-self neuromatrix.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".