Personality traits and pattern of beliefs of near-death(-like) experiencers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Little is known about the potential personality and psychological predictors of near-death experiences (NDEs), and fewer yet those of near-death-like experiences (NDEs-like; similar phenomenology reported after a non-life-threatening context). This study investigated whether personality traits (Openness, Extraversion, Pleasantness, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism), dissociative experiences, Fantasy proneness, disposition toward auditory hallucinations, absorption trait, and endorsement of paranormal and spiritual beliefs could be associated with the recall of NDEs(-like). Methods To this aim, we invited four groups of people to retrospectively fill in questionnaires assessing the following factors: NDE experiencers ( n = 63), NDE(-like) experiencers ( n = 31), controls with a life-threatening situation but no NDE(-like) ( n = 43), and controls without a life-threatening situation or an NDE(-like) ( n = 44). We carried out univariate analyses for each factor and then performed a multiple regression analysis and a discriminant analysis. Results The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the endorsement of spiritual beliefs was associated with the recall of NDEs-like while Openness and Fantasy proneness were associated with the recall of NDEs. The discriminant analysis showed that these variables produce 35% of correct classification. Discussion Albeit retrospective, these results pave the way for future research on psychological predictors of NDEs(-like) by highlighting the influence of Spirituality, Openness, and Fantasy proneness on these phenomena.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".