MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sleep paralysis episode frequency and number, types, and structure of associated hallucinations

2005· article· en· W2028884416 on OpenAlexaff
J. Allan Cheyne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sleep Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySleep paralysisDevelopmental psychologyAudiologyCognitionNeuroscienceSleep disorderMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep paralysis (SP) episodes are often accompanied by vivid hallucinoid experiences that have been found to fall into three major categories thought to be organized according to intrinsic rapid eye movement (REM) processes. Prior research has, however, combined data for individuals with varying degrees of experience with SP episodes, rendering interpretations of the source of this structure ambiguous. The present study of 5799 current SP experients compares the nature and structure of the hallucinations of novice SP experients with those reporting varying numbers of episodes. Both qualitative and quantitative differences were found in reported hallucinations as a function of episode frequency, although the underlying three-factor structure of the hallucinoid experiences was highly similar for all groups. Novice experients' reports were, however, characterized by clearer differentiation of factors, likely because of a tendency of experienced SP experients to conflate experiences across episodes. Age and age of onset of SP episodes were associated with differences in the variety and types of hallucinations but not their underlying structure. Earlier onset of SP episodes was also associated with more frequent episodes. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that the basic form and patterning of hallucinatory experiences is a result of intrinsic processes, independent of prior experience, likely associated with underlying REM neurophysiology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sleep ResearchSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207