MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319978150 · doi:10.1080/10508619.2016.1151100

Nirvana Road: Dissociative Experiences Predict “Eastern” Beliefs About Postmortem Existence

2016· article· en· W2319978150 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher T. Burris

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the Psychology of Religion · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicParanormal Experiences and Beliefs
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReincarnationDerealizationDepersonalizationParanormalPsychologyDissociativeBuddhismAtheismConsciousnessPersonal identityIdentity (music)Social psychologyPsychoanalysisSelfPhilosophyReligious studiesTheologyClinical psychologyMedicineAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three studies (N = 338) tested the idea that endorsement of postmortem beliefs most closely associated with Eastern religious traditions (that is, continuation of consciousness and the explicit dissolution of personal identity, possibly via reincarnation) would map onto a history of dissociative experiences. As hypothesized, a history of dissociative (including depersonalization/derealization) experiences, as well as altered experience of body/space/time during a discrete positive episode, predicted endorsement of “Eastern” postmortem beliefs among religiously heterogeneous (non-Buddhist, non-Hindu) participants. This relationship became stronger when dissociative tendencies were heightened following a traumatic loss (i.e., the suicide of a close other within the past year; Study 3). In contrast, dissociative tendencies did not predict belief in either annihilation or postmortem continuation without identity loss, most typically linked to atheism and Western religious traditions, respectively. These results suggest that some metaphysical beliefs may be embraced because they “make sense” in light of personal experience.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for the Psychology of ReligionSame topicParanormal Experiences and BeliefsFrench-language works237,207