MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416730165 · doi:10.1080/02604027.2025.2592182

Parapsychology and Researching the UAP Experience

2025· article· en· W4416730165 on OpenAlex

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

VenueWorld Futures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicParanormal Experiences and Beliefs
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterialismParapsychologyRealmWishful thinkingUnconscious mindParanormalViewpoints

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is illustrating that the present-day regained interest in UFO/UAP is still driven by older materialist assumptions and a wishful quest to prove a putative extraterrestrial explanation for UAPs. It highlights that institutional biases from national security agencies interested in UAP have transited in many of the most common assumptions found in the study of UAP, and how problematic this is. It also situates epistemologically and ontologically the parapsychological approach to the study of UAP by presenting a contrast with materialist approaches and the ones inspired by psychical research. One of the main differences is the notion that experiencers are active participants in UAP experiences, and such experiences are oftentimes meaningful but at the unconscious level, a realm difficult to study in itself and where careful and complex, but never final, interpretations are required.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.397 · 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