The Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences (INOE): Evidence of validity in the United States and India.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 27 02 2023
accepted: 09 06 2023
medline: 28 7 2023
pubmed: 26 7 2023
entrez: 26 7 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Researchers increasingly recognize that the mind and culture interact at many levels to constitute our lived experience, yet we know relatively little about the extent to which culture shapes the way people appraise their experiences and the likelihood that a given experience will be reported. Experiences that involve claims regarding deities, extraordinary abilities, and/or psychopathology offer an important site for investigating the interplay of mind and culture at the population level. However, the difficulties inherent in comparing culture-laden experiences, exacerbated by the siloing of research on experiences based on discipline-specific theoretical constructs, have limited our ability to do so. We introduce the Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences (INOE), which allows researchers to compare experiences by separating the phenomenological features from how they are appraised and asking about both. It thereby offers a new means of investigating the potentially universal (etic) and culture-specific (emic) aspects of lived experiences. To ensure that the INOE survey items are understood as intended by English speakers in the US and Hindi speakers in India, and thus can serve as a basis for cross-cultural comparison, we used the Response Process Evaluation (RPE) method to collect evidence of item-level validity. Our inability to validate some items drawn from other surveys suggests that they are capturing a wider range of experiences than researchers intend. Wider use of the RPE method would increase the likelihood that survey results are due to the differences that researchers intend to measure.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37494339
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287780
pii: PONE-D-23-05816
pmc: PMC10370766
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0287780

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2023 Taves et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

Am Psychol. 2018 Jan;73(1):1-2
pubmed: 29345483
Psychol Med. 2012 Nov;42(11):2313-23
pubmed: 22444873
Front Psychiatry. 2022 Apr 04;13:763380
pubmed: 35444580
Child Dev. 2012 May-Jun;83(3):779-93
pubmed: 22417318
Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Jun 14;10:269
pubmed: 27378878
J Trauma Dissociation. 2020 Jan-Feb;21(1):87-102
pubmed: 31592713
Front Hum Neurosci. 2017 May 23;11:245
pubmed: 28588463
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1966 Sep;15(3):225-34
pubmed: 5330058
Cortex. 2014 Apr;53:107-19
pubmed: 24632378
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Jun;47(2):519-28
pubmed: 24907001
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Nov 7;:17456916221120027
pubmed: 36343213
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2020 May;15(3):669-690
pubmed: 32053465
Am Psychol. 2018 Jan;73(1):26-46
pubmed: 29345485
Psychol Assess. 2016 Jun;28(6):684-91
pubmed: 26302105
Am Psychol. 2011 Oct;66(7):593-603
pubmed: 21261408
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 14;18(3):e0279720
pubmed: 36917576
Psicothema. 2014;26(1):136-44
pubmed: 24444741
Assessment. 2019 Jul;26(5):759-766
pubmed: 29490470
J Nerv Ment Dis. 1983 Jun;171(6):369-75
pubmed: 6854303
Schizophr Res. 2006 Feb 28;82(2-3):203-11
pubmed: 16417985
Behav Brain Sci. 2019 May 30;43:e90
pubmed: 31142395
Front Psychol. 2017 Aug 08;8:1359
pubmed: 28848474
Front Psychol. 2013 Feb 18;4:65
pubmed: 23423775
Acta Paediatr. 2007 Mar;96(3):338-41
pubmed: 17407452
Am Psychol. 2023 Jan;78(1):50-61
pubmed: 35201784
J Sci Study Relig. 2012 Dec;51(4):721-737
pubmed: 23316089
Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 2007 Dec;51:s23-30
pubmed: 18055934
Ann Behav Med. 2002 Winter;24(1):22-33
pubmed: 12008791
Front Psychol. 2018 Sep 04;9:1475
pubmed: 30245648

Auteurs

Ann Taves (A)

Department of Religious Studies, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Elliott Ihm (E)

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Melissa Wolf (M)

Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Michael Barlev (M)

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.

Michael Kinsella (M)

Department of Religious Studies, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Maharshi Vyas (M)

Department of Religious Studies, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH