Keywords
Dissociation, Anomalous information reception
Dissociation, Anomalous information reception
We have improved the manuscript based on feedback from our first reviewer. This version (within the constraints of a 1000 word article) includes clearer language, additional references and context of the larger literature, corrections in statistical reporting, and the addition of a Bonferroni multiple comparisons correction for the significance value cutoff.
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Etzel Cardeña
Dissociation is conceptualized as the disruption to usually integrated functions of consciousness, memory, identity or perception of the environment1. Dissociative Identity Disorder is defined as a personality disorder, when two or more distinct identities or personalities are present, each with its own pattern of perceiving, relating to and thinking about the environment and self. The core clinical symptoms of dissociative disorders include amnesia, depersonalization, derealization, identity confusion and identity alteration. Dissociative states are prevalent in other psychiatric disorders, such as PTSD2, and are more prevalent in younger nonclinical populations3. Dissociative states exist on a continuum4–6, from nonpathological expressions, such as highway hypnosis and day-dreaming, to pathological states of derealization (surrealness), and depersonalization (absence of identity)7. Almost half of United States adults have experienced a dissociative episode in their lives8.
A widespread belief possibly related to dissociative symptoms is the idea that it is possible to communicate with deceased individuals; people who report such experiences are called “mediums”9. A survey of 18,607 people in the United States and thirteen European countries found that 25% reported contact with the dead10. Some empirical literature suggests that in some cases the information obtained is accurate even under double-blind conditions11–14. Claims of such abilities have been considered symptoms of dissociative disorders5,15,16. However, studies have not systematically demonstrated pathological dissociation in people who maintain mediumship claims compared to control groups or the general population17,18. Also, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th edition) requirements for pathological DID now include that “the person must be distressed by the disorder or have trouble functioning in one or more major life areas because of the disorder” and that “the disturbance is not part of normal cultural or religious practices”1.
In an effort to further our understanding on this topic, this study’s aim was to examine the relationship between self-report dissociative symptoms and anomalous information reception (AIR) about deceased humans in a large convenience sample of surveyed adults. We hypothesized that the prevalence of dissociative symptoms in people who claim these purported abilities would be the same as in those who do not maintain such claims.
Analyses were performed on data collected during a larger research study approved by the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) Institutional Review Board (approval number, wahh_2016_01). A survey was administered through SurveyMonkey.com with HIPAA compliant methods. Participants were recruited through the IONS Facebook page, IONS mailing lists, including the IONS membership list, and the IONS community networks.
The survey (Supplementary File 1) began with the study’s purpose and informed consent details. Date and country of birth, race, education, and childhood and current spiritual/religious affiliation were collected. Gender was collected on a subsample of participants. Participants indicated if they had experienced AIR or “mediumship,” defined as the “ability to mediate communication between spirits of the dead and the living or the empathic ability to feel the presence and energies of spirits,” age of onset (if applicable), and family history of AIR.
Participants then completed he Dissociation Experiences Scale Taxon (DES-T)3 that distinguishes pathological dissociation with a cutoff score of 30 with an 87% positive predictive value (Cronbach Alpha of 0.75)19,20. Respondents select a percent frequency for eight dissociative symptoms. The DES-T results in two variables: the mean of the eight items; and a binary variable based on the >30 cutoff score3.
Categorical variable percentages were calculated and presented qualitatively. Means, standard deviations and ranges of continuous variables were calculated. Covariates included gender, age, race, education, income, childhood spirituality and current spirituality, family history, and age of the claimed ability onset. Missing values were randomly distributed except for gender. T-test and chi-square tests evaluated differences between variables by AIR status. Linear and logistic regressions examined the relationship between dissociative symptoms scores and AIR status. A conservative Bonferroni multiple comparison correction was applied to the α significance value designating 0.003 as the cutoff for a significant result (α = 0.05 divided by 19 items analyzed: seven demographic items, eight DES-T items, DES-T total, DES-T cut-off, linear and logistic regression). Statistics were performed with Stata 12.0 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, Texas).
In total, 3984 participants took the survey from May 4, 2016 to June 7, 2017. Participants were not required to complete all fields and thus only data from 3023 participants who answered the “AIR” question (question 49 of the survey) and completed the DES-T (question 75) were included. Most participants were from the United States (62.6%) followed by the United Kingdom (7.7%) and then Canada (6.3%), and the remaining participants represented thirteen other countries. Participants were mostly middle aged (51 years ± 16; range 17–96), female (70%), Caucasian (85%), college educated (88%), had an annual income over $50,000 (55%), were raised Christian (71%), and now affiliated as Spiritual but not Religious (60%; Table 1). Current spiritual/religious affiliation was different by AIR status.
AIR ability was endorsed by 42% of participants, with their first experience starting in childhood (81%), and 53% having family members with similar experiences. The mean DES-T score was 14.4 ± 17.3 (range 0-100) for all participants and was significantly higher for AIR claimants (18.2 ± 19.3) compared to non-claimants (11.8 ± 15.2; t = -10.3, p<0.0005; Table 2). A linear regression model for DES-T total score and AIR status including all covariates found only race and education to be significant (F (3, 2947) = 73.2, p<0.0005). For the DES-T binary cutoff score, 11% of AIR non-endorsers and 22% of AIR endorsers had a cut-off score greater than 30 (X2 = 63.0, p<0.0005). A logistic regression of the DES-T binary cutoff score and AIR status was significant with education(> college) and income (>$50,000) as significant covariates (LR X2 = 99.12, p< 0.0005).
Mean, ± - standard deviation, t - Student’s two-sample t-test statistic, X2 – chi-square statistic, p – probability. * = significant at Bonferroni corrected α = 0.003.
Anomalous Information Reception | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yes N - 1,257 | No N - 1,766 | N | t/X2 | p | |
Age | 51.7 ± 14.3 | 51.4 ± 16.4 | 2751 | −0.4 | 0.68 |
Range (17–96) | Range (17–89) | ||||
Gender (% Female) | 80.0% | 67.2% | 519 | 5.99 | 0.01 |
Race (% Caucasian) | 86.5% | 83.6% | 2970 | 4.76 | 0.03 |
Education (% ≥ some college) | 87.3% | 88.9% | 2977 | 1.66 | 0.20 |
Income (% ≥ $50,000 annual income) | 38.6% | 35.7% | 2768 | 2.32 | 0.13 |
Childhood Spiritual/Religious Affiliation (% Christian) | 71.7% | 70.6% | 2986 | 0.44 | 0.51 |
Current Spiritual/Religious Affiliation (% Spiritual but not religious) | 65.9% | 56.1% | 2991 | 29.6 | <0.0005* |
* = significant at Bonferroni corrected α = 0.003.
DES-T Item | Yes (n=1257) | No (n=1766) | Mean Difference | t | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
5. Some people sometimes have the experience of feeling that other people, objects, and the world around them are not real. | 25.8 ± 32.0 | 17.5 ± 26.7 | 8.3 | -7.7 | <0.0005* |
8. Some people sometimes find that they hear voices inside their head which tell them to do things or comment on things that they are doing. | 25.5 ± 33.5 | 13.7 ± 25.7 | 11.8 | -11.0 | <0.0005* |
3. Some people sometimes have the experience of feeling as though they are standing next to themselves or watching themselves do something and they actually see themselves as though they were looking at another person. | 22.2 ± 29.8 | 12.9 ± 22.9 | 9.3 | -9.7 | <0.0005* |
7. Some people find that in one situation they may act so differently compared to another situation that they feel almost as if they were two different people. | 21.5 ± 30.6 | 17.6 ± 28.2 | 3.9 | -3.6 | <0.0005* |
6. Some people sometimes have the experience of feeling that their body does not seem to belong to them. | 20.6 ± 30.0 | 13.4 ± 24.5 | 7.2 | -7.2 | <0.0005* |
1. Some people have the experience of finding themselves in a place and having no idea how they got there. | 13 ± 23.3 | 7.8 ± 17.2 | 5.2 | -7.06 | <0.0005** |
2. Some people have the experience of finding new things among their belongings that they do not remember buying. | 10.4 ± 21.5 | 6.9 ± 17.4 | 3.5 | -4.95 | <0.0005 |
4. Some people are told that they sometimes do not recognize friends or family members. | 6.6 ± 17.7 | 4.3 ± 14.3 | 2.3 | -4.0 | .0001* |
Total | 18.2 ± 19.3 | 11.8 ± 15.2 | 6.4 | 10.3 | <0.0005* |
In total, 42% of participants endorsed the “ability to mediate communication between spirits of the dead and the living or the empathic ability to feel the presence and energies of spirits” in this convenience sample. The prevalence of “contact with the dead” in other studies is variable: 10%21, 25–30%10, 29%22, and 42%23. The overall mean dissociation experience score for AIR claimants fell below the clinical cutoff for pathological dissociation despite being higher than and different to non-claimants scores. Much debate exists for the use of cutoff scores3,24. Notably, the top five endorsed DES-T items were consistent with an AIR experience. Also, our total samples grand mean DES-T score was higher than observed in random general population samples19. This likely reflects the convenience sampling method for this survey, which reduces the generalizability of these findings. This outcome also does not clarify if AIR endorsers with high DES-T scores have the five core clinical symptoms of dissociation1. Future studies comparing AIR claimants and non-claimants may benefit from the using a more comprehensive measure of dissociative symptoms. In addition, evaluating participant’s functional impairment would help discern the pathological versus non-pathological nature of purported AIR experiences.
Dataset 1: Dissociation symptoms for those with and without self-report anomalous information reception. DT# are the Dissociation Experience Scale Taxon items. doi, 10.5256/f1000research.12019.d17135225
This work was supported by FUNDAÇÃO BIAL (grant number No. 257/14).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
The authors would like to thank Amira Sagher, Leena Michel and the Institute of Noetic Sciences.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
Partly
References
1. Watson D: Dissociations of the night: individual differences in sleep-related experiences and their relation to dissociation and schizotypy.J Abnorm Psychol. 2001; 110 (4): 526-35 PubMed AbstractCompeting Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
Yes
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Dissociative disorders, psychological trauma
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
No
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
No
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
No
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
No
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | |||
---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | |
Version 3 (revision) 04 Jan 18 |
read | ||
Version 2 (revision) 23 Oct 17 |
read | read | |
Version 1 10 Aug 17 |
read |
Click here to access the data.
Spreadsheet data files may not format correctly if your computer is using different default delimiters (symbols used to separate values into separate cells) - a spreadsheet created in one region is sometimes misinterpreted by computers in other regions. You can change the regional settings on your computer so that the spreadsheet can be interpreted correctly.
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)