Hypnotic hallucinations: towards a biology of epistemology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In a positron emission tomography (PET) study of hypnotic auditory hallucinations (Szechtman, Woody, Bowers and Nahmias, 1998), we found that activation of the right anterior cingulate seems to be critically implicated in the experience of a hallucination. Here we discuss two alternative interpretations of this result, consistent with the known functions of this region. First, hallucinations may occur when affect drives the generation of an internal percept, and then outwardly directed attention leads to the misattribution of this percept to the external world. This interpretation is consistent with the model of hallucinations by Bentall (1990). Alternatively, hallucinations may stem from what we herein term a ‘feeling of knowing’, or conviction that a stimulus is out there, around which the hallucinator constructs and rationalizes a percept. We relate the latter proposal to ideas by Rapoport (1989) and Damasio (1994) concerning the biological underpinnings of the sense of external reality. We also suggest ways that research on the neural bases of hypnosis might offer clues about the neural bases of psychopathologies, such as obsessive‐compulsive disorder and schizophrenia. Copyright © 2000 British Society of Experimental and Clinical Hypnosis
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".