Trait phenomenological control in top-down and bottom-up effects: ASMR, Visually Evoked Auditory Response and the Müller-Lyer illusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the degree to which experiences in three experimental paradigms may arise from phenomenological control, i.e. from the way people can control their experience to meet expectancies and goals. In the experimental situation, expectancies and goals arise from demand characteristics (cues which communicate beliefs about experimental aims to participants). Trait phenomenological control has been shown to substantially predict experimental measures of changes in embodiment experience in which demand characteristics are not controlled (e.g., mirror touch and pain, and experiences of ownership of a fake hand). Here we report substantial relationships between scores on the Phenomenological Control Scale (PCS; a test of direct imaginative suggestion) and vEAR scores (reports of auditory experience for silent videos), ASMR scores but not the Müller-Lyer illusion. These findings indicate that vEAR and ASMR experiences may be implicit imaginative suggestion effects, but the Müller-Lyer illusion is unrelated to phenomenological control. This study demonstrates that relationships of trait phenomenological control with subjective reports about experience are not limited to embodiment and may confound a wide range of (but not all) measures in psychological science.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 teacher head, 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".