On
the Edge of the Anomalous Experience: out of Body Experiences, Transliminality
and Thin Boundaries
Alejandro Parra, PhD
Alejandro Parra, Instituto de
Psicologa Paranormal, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Correspondence to: Alejandro Parra, Instituto de
Psicologa Paranormal, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Email: rapp@fibertel.com.ar
Telephone: +54-11-43056724
Received: December 20,
2015
Revised: January 16, 2015
Accepted: January 22, 2014
Published online: February 2, 2015
ABSTRACT
An out-of-body
experience (OBE) is an experience in which the self, or center of awareness,
seems to the person having the OBE to temporarily occupy a position spatially
remote from the body. Another drawback of assessing perceptual anomalies by
extrapolating exclusively from the context of clinical psychiatry is the overreliance
on hallucinatory phenomena. Transliminality hypothesis suggests that the
immediate source of our perceptions is not our eyes or our ears, but rather the
subliminal consciousness: percepts are first processed at an unconscious level
and then, usually speedily, they are presented across the threshold to
consciousness. The boundary construct is highly valuable in terms of
understanding the factors which underpin the varieties of exceptional
experiences, such as out of body experiences. Three specific hypotheses are
tested here: People who report OBEs (experients) have a higher capacity for
cognitive anomalous experiences (2) higher transliminality, (3) and thinner
boundaries who score differently than control (non-experients). Participants
who experienced OBEs (n=100, 47%) were matched with participants who do
not report OBEs (non experient, n=111, 53%), ages ranged from 18 to 83
years old (M=44.92; SD=13.29). OBErs scored higher on anomalous experiences,
higher on thin boundaries, high transliminality than for non OBErs, which
supported the three hypothesis. People who scored thinner boundaries also
tended to score higher on spirituality, Emotional impact, transliminality, and
anomalous experiences. The paper discuss OBE phenomena as an experient's sensitivity
due to permeable ego boundaries. This sensitivity, may be related to some
physiological differences in perceptual processing may also underly it.
© 2015 ACT. All
rights reserved.
Key words: Out-of-body experience; Perceptual anomalies; Hallucination;
Transliminality; Thinner boundaries
Parra A. On the Edge of
the Anomalous Experience: out of Body Experiences, Transliminality and Thin
Boundaries. International Journal of Neurology Research 2015; 1(1): 8-13 Available from: URL:
http://www.ghrnet.org/index.php/ijnr/article/view/934
INTRODUCTION
Irwin (1985) has defined This topic has received a great deal of
attention in recent years[1-4]. A surprisingly large percentage of
the population appears to have experienced at least one OBE: several surveys
have yielded positive response rates in the neighborhood of 15%[4-6],
and the corresponding ate in student samples is 25%[3,7] Some
studies have shown a strong relationship between the incidence of OBEs and
psychological variables[3], especially schizotypy[8],
self-efficacy, self-control[9], the personality dimensions of the
five-factor model (such as NEO-PI-R)[10], absorption[11,12],
and dissociative experiences[13,14].
Some
experients report that the exteriorized self has a definite form, called the
parasomatic body or the astral body. Estimates of the incidence of the
parasomatic body vary widely, from 15 to 84% of OBEs[3]. Over 90% of
OBEs are visual[15, pp. 67-68], often exclusively so. Some
experients claim that they can control the content of their OBEs. In one
survey, Irwin[3] found that nearly half of the experients reported
this effect. Such control seems strictly cognitive; that is, the OBE content
can be manipulated by directing attention to the desired outcome. There has
been some research into the vividness of OBEers visual imagery, but the issue
is by no means resolved. It might be expected that if the OBE were simply an
imaginal experience, some dexterity in imagery processes would be required in
order to conjure up a vivid image of one's own body and of the immediate
surroundings as they would appear if observed from a point near the ceiling.
Irwin[16]
has also studied the OBE in relation to Tellegen's concept of absorption, which
is described as a capacity for episodes of absorbed and self-altering
attention that are sustained by imaginative representations[17].
During such episodes, individuals become totally absorbed in their experience,
with a full commitment of available perceptual, motoric, imaginative, and
ideational resources to a unified representation of the attentional object[17,
p. 269]. Irwin[16] has claimed support for his hypothesis that
individuals reporting out-of-body experiences would score high on absorption[17],
that is, persons with high absorption scores were more susceptible to an
experimental OBE induction technique than those with low scores. The positive
relationship consistently found between OBEs and absorption experiences is the
first formal link to be established between OBEs and dissociation[2,3].
Absorption is generally considered to be the most common of all dissociative
experiences[17].
Furthermore,
there is evidence that persons who have reported spontaneous OBEs tend to have
a higher level of imaginative/fantasy activity, or fantasy proneness than
non-OBEers, which is consistent with Wilson and Barber's[18]
characterization of the fantasy-prone personality and may support suggestions
by Blackmore[5] and by Siegel[19] that OBEs could be
hallucinatory fantasies, which would be especially easy for fantasy-prone
persons to produce. It is also consistent with the finding that people who are
more attentive to their mental processes may be more open to experiencing OBEs[16]
and also to recalling childhood fantasies.
Compared to
non-OBEers, OBEers have been found to be substantially superior in their
capacity for absorbed mentation[11,20,7]. Further, there are
indications that OBEers with high absorption capacity are more likely to report
a parasomatic form of OBE, as well as sensations at its termination[3].
The association with absorption capacity is compatible with observations that
OBEers tend to practice meditation[4], and have lucid dreams[3].
In addition to their high absorption capacity, OBEers also show a substantial
need for absorbing experiences. In a clinical sense, clients who are fantasy
prone, become deeply absorbed in events, and have an internalized, curious,
intellectual, and stable personality are the most likely to report OBEs[3].
Fantasy
proneness appears to be higher among OBEers than non-OBEers[7,21].
Stanford[22] has suggested that certain types of fantasy during
childhood may correlate differentially with the circumstances of an OBE's
occurrence. Alvarado and Zingrone[23] found marginally significant evidence
for a positive association between the OBE and scores on the Dissociative
Experiences Scale (DES), a widely used measure of dissociation in daily life.
Using the same scale, Richards[24] found significant positive
correlations between dissociative experiences and both spontaneous and
volitional OBEs. One of the items of the DES asks about the experience of
standing next to yourself or watching yourself as if you were standing next to
your body.
Another
drawback of assessing perceptual anomalies by extrapolating exclusively from
the context of clinical psychiatry is the overreliance on hallucinatory
phenomena. Likewise, alterations in sensory intensity, rather than the
experience of discrete perceptual phenomena, are not normally covered by existing
scales. Another legacy of clinical psychiatry is the lack of coverage of
perceptual anomalies associated with temporal lobe disturbance, to paranormal
beliefs and experiences, as well as to anomalous perceptual phenomena in
nonclinical participants[25]. Thus, there is a need for a
comprehensive scale capable of measuring a range of sensory experience,
covering both clinical and nonclinical populations.
Bell, Halligan
and Ellis[26] designed the Cardiff Anomalous Perceptions
Scale (CAPS) to measure perceptual anomalies. Critically, it is not
dependent on the clinical psychiatric context and considers subjective
experiences from a range of different perspectives of insight awareness
(including knowing that the percept is not really there, the percept seeming
strange or unusual, or the percept being a nonshared sensory experience).
Moreover, CAPS includes items pertaining to distortions in perceptual
intensity, to experiences in all appropriate sensory modalities, and to sensory
experiences traditionally associated with temporal lobe disturbances. Following
the usefulness of their inclusion in the PDI[27,28] we also included
dimensional ratings to measure associated distress, intrusiveness, and
frequency for each experience endorsed.
Thin
boundaries refer to a relative connectedness of psychological processes, which
is reflected in a thinking style of shades of grey. Transliminality variable
reflects the hypothesised tendency for psychological material to cross
thresholds into or out of consciousness[29, p. 861]. The
transliminality construct is comprised of absorption, fantasy proneness,
magical ideation, paranormal belief, mystical experience, hyperaesthesia, (a
hypersensitivity to environmental stimulation[30, p. 403]).
Transliminality hypothesis suggests that the immediate source of our
perceptions is not our eyes or our ears, but rather the subliminal
consciousness: percepts are first processed at an unconscious level (and
sometimes processed extensively), and then, usually speedily, they are presented
'across the threshold' to consciousness[31]. Overall scoring is
higher among those who consider themselves to be psychic and those who are
working as shamans or psychics[32]. Sherwood and Milner[33]
also found support for the idea that the tendency to report psychic
experiences might also be a key component of boundary structure (p. 376). The
boundary construct is highly valuable in terms of understanding the factors
which underpin the varieties of exceptional experiences, such as out of body
experiences. With regard to anomalous experiences, Thalbourne[34]
has noted that "schizotypy represents what is probably the closest
conceptually and empirically to transliminality (p. 20). Hartmanns[35]
construct of psychological boundaries refers to a continuum of boundary
thinness in the mind and brain.
The novel
features of the present study are to compare OBE group to a control group on
three psychological questionnaires. I think hat the study of individual
differences in OBE experients is important if for no other reason than that it
relates a phenomenon traditionally enshrouded in the mystery of occult
traditions to more familiar forms of psychological functioning. Three specific
hypotheses are tested: People who report OBEs (experients) have a higher
capacity for (1) cognitive anomalous experiences (measured by Bell's CAPS);
(2) higher transliminality; (3) and thinner boundaries (lower scores) who score
differently than control (non-experients).
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 211 participants (159 females 52 males), who
were all well-educated and believed in psi, recruited through media our
e-mailing list and interested/students of paranormal and new age topics. The
ages ranged from 18 to 83 (M=44.92; SD=13.29). Participants who answered yes
(one time, sometimes, or frequently) were grouped as OBE experients (n=100,
47%) and participants who answered no were grouped as non-OBE experients (n=
111, 53%).
Personal
experiences suggestive of paranormal experiences were reported by the majority
of the participants, such as having experienced prefeelings (58%), dream recall
(50.8%), seeing aura (34.7%), and other paranormal experiences (38.3%).
Participation was voluntary and the they received no pay. An announcement was
also placed on a web page (www.alipsi.com.ar). The announcement provided a
brief explanation of the test procedure and encouraged people to have an interview
with us in order to obtain more information.
Design and
Materials
The Cardiff Anomalous Perception Scale (CAPS;[26]) consists
of 32 self-report items designed to assess perceptual anomalies such as changes
in levels of sensory intensity, distortion of the external world, sensory
flooding and hallucinations. Participants were asked to rate each item using a
no (0) and yes (1) format. A higher score indicates a higher number of
perceptual anomalies, scores range from 0 (low) to 32 (high). The internal
reliability of the CAPS is good, with a Cronbachs alpha coefficient of 0.87.
Test-retest reliability has also been found to be acceptable[26].
The Revised
Transliminality Scale presents 29 true/false items to the participant, just
29 of which are scored in a raw-score to Rasch-score transformation[30].
Transliminality has most recently been defined as a hypersensitivity to
psychological material originating in (a) the unconscious, and/or (b) the
external environment. Psychological material is taken to cover ideation,
imagery, affect and perception, and thus is a rather broad concept. High
transliminality tends to imply (alleged) paranormal experience, mystical
experience, creative personality, fleeting manic experience, magical ideation,
high absorption, fantasy-proneness, hypersensitivity to sensory stimulation,
and positive attitude towards dream interpretation[34]. The
Transliminality Scale in one or other of several forms has been administered to
a large number of people in a variety of contexts, so that we now have
correlations some of which are weak, others moderate, and others strong. In the
strong category are three distinct variables: high transliminality is strongly
correlated with thin boundaries, as measured by Hartmann[36].
The Boundary
Questionnaire (BQ) is a 138-item questionnaire including items about many
different aspects of boundaries[36-39], which is divided into 12
categories: Type of boundary, Sleep/wake/dream, Unusual experiences,
Thoughts-feelings-moods, Childhood-adolescent-adulthood, Interpersonal,
Opinions about organizations Sensitivity, Neat-exact-precise,
Edges-lines-clothing, Opinions about children and others, Opinions about
people-nations-groups, and Opinions about beauty and truth. The response format
for each question runs from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much so).
Approximately two thirds of the items are phrased so that full endorsement
(very much so) indicates a thin boundary, and the remaining items are phrased
so that very much so indicates a thick boundary. The BQ has good test-retest
reliability over six months (rs of about .77 in two samples[40,41].
For out of
body experiences, the question was: Have you ever had an experience in which
you felt that you were located outside of or away from your physical
body; that is, the feeling that your consciousness, mind, or awareness was at a
different place than your physical body? (If in doubt, please answer no). It
was inspired by the English version of the Anomalous/Paranormal Experiences
Inventory[42], and Palmers[4] survey of students in
Charlottesville, VA. The question tapped two dimensions of experience:
frequency (never, once, sometimes, or frequently) and positive or negative
(emotional) impact (1-7 scale for some impact, 7 being the highest). Two
additional items were gender, age and grade of spirituality (0= I am not
spiritual; 5= I am very spiritual).
Procedure
The three questionnaires were given upon the pseudo-title Questionnaire
of Psychological Experiences, in a counterbalanced order to encourage unbiased
responding. They were given in a single envelope to each participant. Each
pariticpant received information about the study and was invited to complete
the scales voluntarily and anonymously.
Results
First, two-sample KS tests was used for comparing experients and
non-experients as it is sensitive to differences in both location and shape of
the empirical cumulative distribution functions of the two samples. The
Mann-Whitney U test was used to test the hypotheses, since the scores were
not normally distributed. The resulting U statistic was transformed into
a z-score for the purposes of assigning probability values. All comparision are
one-tailed.
Hypothesis 1
was that experients would score higher on anomalous experiences (measured by
Bell´s CAPS), which was supported: the mean for experients was significantly
higher than for non experients (Table 2). Experients also scored higher on
Sensory intensity, Nonshared sensory experience, Distorted Sensory Experience,
Sensory experience from an unexplained source, Distortion of form of own body
and of external world, Verbal hallucinations, Sensory flooding, and Temporal
lobe subescales.
Hypothesis 2
was that experients would score higher on Boundaries, which was supported: the
mean for experients was significantly lower (toward thinner) than for non
experients (Table 2). Experients also scored higher on Unusual experiences,
Thoughts-feelings-moods, Childhood-adolescent-adulthood, and Paranormal
experiences subscales.
Hypothesis 3
was that experients would score high transliminality, which was supported: the
mean for experients was significantly higher than for non experients (Table 2).
As a final
post hoc analysis, a number of correlations explored relationship between Transliminality,
Anomalous experiences, Boundaries, and also Spirituality and Emotional impact
to OBE. I found 8 (80%) out 10 correlations. People who scored thinner
boundaries tended to score higher on spirituality (Rho=0.22), Emotional
impact (Rho=0.31), Transliminality (Rho=0.67), and Anomalous
experiences (Rho=0.56). People who scored Anomalous experiences tended
to score higher on Transliminality (Rho=0.27). People who scored higher
Transliminality tended to score slighly lower on Spirituality (Rho=0.19),
and Emotional Impact (Rho=0.25) (Table 3).
Binary
logistic regression was used to evaluate what is the best predictor for Out of
body experience. Enter method was applied. For the sample of 211, the results
of the best model found that the Anomalous Experiences was the best predictor
for OBErs and non OBErs (=0.056; df =1; p=0.05; R2=0.13),
but only to a weak degree. The rest of the variables contributed nothing
further to the prediction. Analyses of the psychological measure frequencies
for (positive) emotional impact (Mean=2.44; SD=1.47) was overall
non-significant. Just if Anomalous Experiences (CAPS) is excluded out the
regression, Transliminality was the best predictor (=0.11, Wald=6.83; df =1; p=0.009)
with a higher . This suggests that Transliminality may underlie the
differentiation of the two groups of subjects.
DISCUSSION
The present study examined the differences between persons who do and
do not report out of body experiences on anomalous experiences, transliminality
and boundaries measures. The main analyses confirmed the three hypotheses. The
results showed a higher level of anomalous experiences, transliminality and
thinner boundaries than in non-experients. Much recent research should be
considered in relation to other variables in order to ascertain the way in
which boundaries are thin and that moderating factors on boundary thinness
should be considered in terms of better understanding their relationship with
out of body experiences and other exceptional experiences.
People who
reported OBE experienced higher on sensory experience from an unexplained
source (e.g. strange feelings in the body, distorted sounds or unusual ways),
nonshared sensory experience (e.g. see things that other people cannot),
Distortion of form of own body and of external world (e.g. the sensation that
your limbs might not be your own or might not be properly connected to your
body), Distorted Sensory Experience (e.g. unusual burning sensations or other
strange feelings in or on your body?), temporal lobe experiences (e.g. time
changes, the feeling or being uplifted), verbal hallucinations (e.g. voices
saying words or sentences), and sensory flooding (e.g. difficult to distinguish
one sensation from another).
The results
suggest that persons who report OBEs are likely to have significantly higher on
schizotypy and synesthesia than non-experients[11,3]. The
neuropsychology of OBE reports should also receive attention. One possibly
fruitful line of research to follow is that of Persinger[25], who has
explored the relationship between temporal lobe signs and claims of psychic
phenomena. Sensory intensity (sounds are much louder than they normally would
be), nonshared sensory experiences (e.g. hear voices, smells or odors, and see
things that other people cannot) also scored higher in out of body experients.
Transliminality variable reflects the tendency for psychological
material to cross thresholds into or out of consciousness[29, p. 861].
The transliminal construct is comprised of absorption, fantasy proneness,
magical ideation, paranormal belief, mystical experience, hyperaesthesia, (a
hypersensitivity to environmental stimulation[30, p. 403]). Those
whose subliminal consciousness is in ferment are likely to experience sensory
images faster and more intensely than other people. People who reported to had
out of body experiences scored higher on Unusual experiences (e.g. dj vu
experiences), Thoughts, feelings, moods (e.g. I dont know whether I am
thinking or feeling), Childhood feelings, and other paranormal experiences.
Transliminality, Anomalous experiences, Boundaries, and also Spirituality and
Emotional impact also highly intercorrelated, for example, people who have
thinner boundaries tend to be more spiritual, transliminal. Other studies
confirmed that: Transliminality correlates positively with boundary thinness[34],
schizotypy[30, 43] and temporal lobe lability[44]. In
addition, Simmonds-Moore[45] found common variance between
schizotypy, transliminality, Hartmanns boundary questionnaire and temporal
lobe lability.
There is
empirical support for the role of synesthesia in the etiology of the OBE[46],
apparitional experiences[47] and the perception of auras[48].
In general, there is evidence that thinner systems are more prone toward
experiencing unusual phenomena, such as OBE, and that some forms of boundary
thinness are more associated with specific forms anomalous experiences. The
fact of OBE experients showed higher anomalous experiences, transliminality and
thinner boundaires is also in conceptual agreement with studies that have
found that measures of fantasy-proneness seem to be successful predictors of
psychic phenomena[7,21]. The regression used to discriminate between
experients and non-experients showed that transliminality may underlie the
differentiation of the two groups. For example, Thalbourne[31]
suggested that hypnosis researchers should examine the correlation between
transliminality and hypnotisability, expecting it to be positive and
significant. Healy[49] discussed OBE phenomena as an experient's
sensitivity due to permeable ego boundaries. This sensitivity, may be related
to some physiological differences in perceptual processing may also underly it.
Some studies
also suggest that OBE would be related to cognitive processes involving visual
and tactile hallucination and fantasy prone[23,21,4,50]. For these
reasons, I argue that OBE reports are part of human experience and as such
deserve and require study in and of themselves, with and without efforts to
relate the out of body experiences to possible paranormal components. Irwin[51,
p. 10] says that human experience includes a wide range of different
dimensions and there are many more aspects of anomalous experiences to be
studied other than ostensible paranormality. This is associated with a
collection of experiences occurring internally; i.e., not perceived in a
persons external reality.
I might draw
from knowledge contributed from all of these (and other) approaches in further
understanding the full range of human experiences. More work is needed in
understanding how and why such experiences are experienced differently, for
example, what factors cause the experience of another personality as opposed to
another self and which factors cause the experience of another personality as
present inside the body as opposed to externally, as an colour lights
surrounding the body.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The Author has no conflicts of interest to declare.
REFERENCES
1
Alvarado, C. S. (1986). ESP during
spontaneous out-of-body experiences: A research and methodological note.
Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 53, 393-397.
2
Alvarado, C. S., & Zingrone, N.
(1997). Out-of-body experiences and dissociation. In R. Wiseman (Ed.),
Parapsychological Association 40th Annual Convention: Proceedings of presented
papers, 11-25.
3
Irwin, H. J. (1985). Flight of mind: A
psychological study of the out-of-body experience. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow
Press.
4
Palmer, J. (1979). A community mail
survey of psychic experiences. Journal of the American Society for Psychical
Research, 73, 221-251.
5
Blackmore, S. (1978). Parapsychology and
out-of-the-body experiences. London: Transpersonal Books / Society for
Psychical Research.
6
Blackmore, S. J. (1984a). A postal
survey of OBEs and other experiences. Journal of the Society for Psychical
Research, 52, 225-244.
7
Myers, S. A., Austrin, H. R., Grisso, J.
T., & Nickeson, R. C. (1983). Personality characteristics as related to the
out-of-body experience. Journal of Parapsychology, 47, 131-144.
8
McCreery, C., & Claridge, G. (1995).
Out-of-the body experiences and personality. Journal of the Society for
Psychical Research, 60, 129-148.
9
Tobacyk, J. J., Wells, D. H., &
Miller, M. M. (1998). Out-of-body experiences and personality functioning.
Psychological Reports, 82, 481-482.
10
Alvarado, C. S., Zingrone, N. L., &
Dalton, K. (1996). Out-of-body experiences, psi experiences, and the big five:
Relating the NEO¬PI-R to the experience claims of experimental participants.
Parapsychological Association 39th Annual Convention: Proceedings of presented
papers.
11
Glicksohn, J. (1990). Belief in the
paranormal and subjective paranormal experience. Personality and Individual
Differences, 11, 675-683.
12
Irwin, H. J. (1980). Out of the body
down under: Some cognitive characteristics of Australian students reporting
OOBEs. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 50, 448-459.
13
Martnez-Taboas, A.
(2001). Dissociative experiences and disorders: A review. International Journal
of Parapsychology, 12, 131-162.
14
Nadon, R., & Kihlstrom, J. F.
(1987). Hypnosis, psi, and the psychology of anomalous experience. Behavioral
and Brain Sciences, 10, 597-599.
15
Green, C. E. (1968). Out-of-the-body
experiences. London: Hamish Hamilton.
16
Irwin, H. J. (1981). Some psychological
dimensions of the out-of-body experience. Parapsychology Review, 12(4), 1-6.
17
Tellegen, A., & Atkinson, G. (1974).
Openness to absorbing and self altering experiences (absorption), a trait
related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83,
268-277.
18
Wilson, S.C., & Barber T.X. (1982).
The fantasy-prone personality: Implications for understanding imagery,
hypnosis, and parapsychological phenomena. In A.A. Sheikh (Ed.) Imagery:
Current theory, research, and application. New York: John Wiley.
19
Siegel, R. K. (1980). The psychology of
life after death. American Psychologist, 35, 911-931.
20
Parra, A. (2010a) Out-of-body
experiences and hallucinatory experiences: A psychological approach.
Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 29(3), 211-224.
21
Wilson, S. C., & Barber T. X.
(1982). The fantasy-prone personality: Implications for understanding imagery,
hypnosis, and parapsychological phenomena. In A. A. Sheikh (Ed.), Imagery:
Current theory, research, and application. New York: John Wiley.
22
Stanford, R. G. (1987). The out-of-body
experience as an imaginal journey: The developmental perspective. Journal of
Parapsychology, 51, 137-155.
23
Alvarado, C. S., & Zingrone, N. L.
(1999). Out-of-body experiences among readers of a Spanish New Age magazine.
Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 63, 65-85.
24
Richards, D. G. (1991). A study of the
correlation between subjective psychic experience and dissociative experiences.
Dissociation, 4, 83-91.
25
Persinger, M.A. & Makarec, K.
(1987). Temporal lobe epileptic signs and correlative behaviors displayed by
normal populations. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 114, 179-195.
26
Bell, V, Halligan, P.W., & Ellis,
H.D. (2006). The Cardiff Anomalous Perceptions Scale (CAPS): A New Validated
Measure of Anomalous Perceptual Experience. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 32,
366-377.
27
Peters, E.R., Joseph, S, Day, S, &
Garety, P. (2005). Measuring delusional ideation: the 21-item Peters et al.
Delusions Inventory (PDI) Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 1005-1016.
28
Peters, E.R., Joseph, S.A., &
Garety, P.A. (1999). Measurement of delusional ideation in the normal
population: introducing the PDI (Peters Delusions Inventory) Schizophrenia
Bulletin, 25, 553-576.
29
Thalbourne, M.A., & Houran, J.
(2000). Transliminality, the mental experience inventory and tolerance of
ambiguity. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 853-863.
30
Thalbourne, M.A. (1998). Transliminality:
Further correlates and a short measure. Journal of the American Society for
Psychical Research, 92, 402-419.
31
Thalbourne, M.A. (1999).
Transliminality: A review. International Journal of Parapsychology, 11(2),
1-34.
32
Krippner, S., Wickramasekera, I., &
Tartz, R. (2002). Scoring thick and scoring thin: The boundaries of psychic
claimants. Journal of Subtle Energy, 11(1), 43-61.
33
Sherwood, S.J. & Milner, M.
(2004-2005). The relationship between transliminality and boundary structure
subscales. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 24(4), 369-378.
34
Houran, J. Thalbourne, M. &
Hartmann, E. (2003). Comparison of two alternative measures
of the boundary construct. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 311-323.
35
Hartmann, E., Harrison, R., &
Zborowski, M. (2001).Boundaries in the Mind: Past Research and Future
Directions. North American Journal of Psychology. 3, 347-368.
36
Hartmann, E. (1991). Boundaries in the
Mind. New York: Basic Books.
37
Hartmann, E. (1989). Boundaries of
dreams, boundaries of dreamers: thin & thick boundaries as a new
personality dimension. Psychiaric Journal of the University of Ottawa, 14,
557-560.
38
Barbuto, J., & Plummer, B. (1998).
Mental boundaries as a new dimension of personality: a comparison of Hartmanns
boundaries in the mind and Jungs psychological types. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality, 13, 421-436.
39
Barbuto, J. & Plummer, B. (2000).
Mental boundaries and Jungs psychological types: A profile analysis. Journal
of Psychological Type, 54, 17-21.
40
Kunzendorf, R., & Maurer, J.
(1988-89). Hypnotic attenutation of the boundaries between emotional, visual,
& auditory sensations. Imagination, Cognition & Personality, 8(3),
225-234.
41
Funkhauser, A, Wrmle, O., Cornu, C.,
& Bahro, M. (2001). Dream life & intrapsychic boundaries in the
elderly. Dreaming, 11, 83-88.
42
Pekala, R., Kumar, V.K. & Cummings,
J. (1992). Types of high hypnotically susceptible individuals and reported
attitudes and experiences of the paranormal and the anomalous. Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research, 86, 135 150.
43
Thalbourne, M. A., Keogh, E., &
Witt, G. (2005). Transliminality
and the Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences. Psychological Reports, 96, 579-585.
44
Thalbourne, M. A., Crawley, S. E., &
Houran, J. (2003). Temporal lobe
lability in the highly transliminal mind.
Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1965-1974.
45
Simmonds-Moore, C.A. (2009-2010). Sleep
patterns, personality, and subjective anomalous experiences. Imagination, Cognition
and Personality, 29(1), 71-86.
46
Terhune, D. (2009). The incidence and
determinants of visual phenomenology during out-of-body experiences. Cortex,
45, 236-242.
47
Houran, J., Wiseman, R., &
Thalbourne, M. A. (2002). Perceptual-personality characteristics associated
with naturalistic haunt experiences. European Journal of Parapsychology, 17,
17-44.
48
Zingrone, N. L., Alvarado, C. S., and
Agee, N. (2009). Psychological correlates of aura vision: Psychic experiences,
dissociation, absorption, and synaesthesia-like experiences. Australian Journal
of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 131-168.
49
Healy, J. (1984). The happy princess:
Psychological profile of a psychic. Journal of the Society for Psychical
Research, 52, 289 296
50
Parra, A. (2010b). Aura vision as a
hallucinatory experience: Its relation to fantasy proneness, absorption, and
other perceptual maladjustments Journal of Mental Imagery, 34(3&4), 49-64.
51
Irwin, H.J. (2004). An introduction to
Parapsychology, Fourth Edition. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Peer reviewers: Ryuichi Morishita, 2-2 Yamada-oka,Suita City,
Osaka, 565-0871, Japan; Chunlei Shan, Rehabilitation Medicine Department of
Jiangsu Province Hospital, Guangzhou Road 300, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.