DISSOCIATIVE-TYPE IDENTITY DISTURBANCES IN UNDERCOVER AGENTS: SOCIO-COGNITIVE FACTORS BEHIND FALSE-IDENTITY APPEARANCES AND REENACTMENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The uncontrolled dissociative-type reappearance of a fabricated false identity in undercover agents was investigated in 48 federal police officers undergoing 3 weeks of undercover field exercises in two separate classes. Half of the officers received passive and covert identity dissimulation training as coverpersons and half received training in active identity dissimulation methods as operators. One class received hypnotic induction procedures to visualize an alter self and the second class was exposed to false-identity constructions under imagination conditions. Participants reported on the appearance of their false identity outside operational contexts and on the reenactment of a false identity in other police officers. Self-reported identity reappearances were more likely to be found among persons scoring higher on the Dissociative Experiences Scale and by persons who altered their physical appearance. Despite expectations to the contrary operators were not more likely than coverpersons to report uncontrolled reappearances of their false identity. Observer-reported false identity reenactments were correlated with self-reports of identity reappearances outside operational contexts. Coverpersons who were more frequently observed to reenact their undercover persona also reported the strongest tendency to reexperience their false-identity. The visualization of an undercover self through imagination exercises and the tendency to use these methods for dissimulations in the field was associated with greater false identity manifestations as reported by observers. Cognitive factors and possibly strain from status inconsistencies appear to underlie these identity disturbances.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".