MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397021577 · doi:10.1007/s12671-024-02356-z

Altered States of Consciousness are Prevalent and Insufficiently Supported Clinically: A Population Survey

2024· article· en· W4397021577 on OpenAlex
Malcolm Wright, Julieta Galante, Jessica Sophie Corneille, Andrea Grabovac, Daniel M. Ingram, Matthew D. Sacchet

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMindfulness · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMassey University
KeywordsPublic healthConsciousnessPsychologyMindfulnessPopulationPsychiatryPsychotherapistClinical psychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthNeurosciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives Adoption of potentially consciousness-altering practices may be leading to a rise in emergent phenomena (EP): sudden unusual mental or somatic experiences often interpreted as spiritual, mystical, energetic, or magical in nature. It is unclear how frequently these altered states of consciousness occur and what the clinical implications may be. Anecdotal accounts and prior literature suggest that EP may be common, under-reported, and followed by either positive or negative changes to well-being. We sought to supplement prior evidence on the prevalence and effects of EP among general populations with large-scale quantitative measurements. Method We measured the prevalence of EP, while not on mind-altering substances, through completion of online surveys by representative samples from three international communities ( n = 3135). The communities sampled were UK Qualtrics online panelists, US-based MTurk workers, and the readers of a popular rationalist blog. Samples were broadly representative of underlying populations. Results Forty-five percent of participants reported experiencing non-pharmacologically induced EP at least once in their lives, including derealization (17%), unitive experiences (15%), ecstatic thrills (15%), vivid perceptions (11%), changes in perceived size (10%), bodily heat or electricity (9%), out-of-body experiences (8%), and perception of non-physical lights (5%). Respondents reported a mix of positive and negative well-being outcomes following EP, with 13% claiming moderate or greater suffering and 1.1% claiming life-threatening suffering. Of those who experienced suffering, 63% did not seek help. Conclusions EP are widespread among the studied populations with potential for both positive and negative outcomes, the latter of which do not appear to be adequately addressed through recourse to clinical practice.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.318 · 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