The study, led by Ronald Fischer of the D’Or Institute for Research and Education in Brazil, addresses a longstanding problem in research on unusual mental experiences: the same event can be understood in radically different ways. Hearing a voice may be viewed as a spiritual communication in one cultural setting, while being interpreted as a possible symptom of psychosis in another. Similarly, a near-death experience may lead one person toward religious belief and another toward a neurological explanation involving altered brain function during extreme physiological stress.

To investigate these differences, the researchers first evaluated and refined the Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences, a questionnaire designed to measure universal, cultural and religious dimensions of unusual experiences. A preliminary group of 160 Brazilian adults assessed whether the questionnaire’s 38 original items, together with nine proposed additions, were clear and understandable. The researchers modified questions that contained ambiguous wording, lacked appropriate response choices or failed to communicate their intended meaning. Each retained item reached an understanding rate of at least 80 percent before being included in the main survey.

The finalized 47-item questionnaire was then administered to 5,117 people from the Brazilian general population. Rather than treating an unusual experience as a simple yes-or-no symptom, the survey examined its circumstances, emotional impact, perceived meaning and longer-term consequences. This distinction is technically important because prevalence alone cannot indicate whether an experience is clinically harmful. A perception resembling a symptom of dissociation or psychosis may occur briefly, without functional impairment, and may be remembered as neutral or beneficial rather than frightening or disruptive.

The results suggest that nonordinary experiences are embedded in ordinary life. Around 39 percent of respondents said they were alone when the experience occurred, while approximately 57 percent reported being awake and alert. Most participants attributed what happened, at least in part, to random chance, and many said they retained some degree of control. These findings challenge the assumption that unusual perceptions are generally associated with confusion, extreme distress or severely altered states of consciousness.

The emotional consequences were mixed but not uniformly negative. About 20 percent of participants reported that their experience had a negative impact, and 25 percent described suffering or discomfort. At the same time, 51 percent said the event generated positive long-term effects. Such effects may include personal insight, a stronger sense of purpose or a revised understanding of one’s relationship with other people and the world. The study does not claim that extraordinary experiences are inherently beneficial, but it shows that distress and personal growth can coexist within the same broad category of events.

The researchers argue that appraisal—the process through which a person explains and evaluates an experience—may be a central factor determining its outcome. In psychological terms, appraisal can influence emotional responses, coping behavior and the likelihood that an event will be integrated into autobiographical memory as threatening, meaningful or irrelevant. A perception interpreted as evidence of danger may reinforce anxiety and avoidance, whereas the same perception understood as temporary, culturally familiar or personally significant may produce curiosity or reflection. The findings therefore have implications for mental-health professionals, who may need to distinguish the experience itself from the interpretation attached to it.

Ronald Fischer and colleagues emphasize that the presence of an unusual experience should not automatically be equated with illness. Most people in the sample who reported such events were not described as unwell, and most characterized them as neutral or positive both when they occurred and when they later reflected on them. The authors say this perspective could help reduce stigma, particularly for people who fear that reporting a vision, sensed presence or out-of-body sensation will immediately lead to a psychiatric label.

The study also contains an important clinical qualification. Nonordinary experiences can become a source of significant concern when they interfere with daily activities, relationships, sleep, safety or the ability to function. In those circumstances, seeking help from a qualified professional or a trusted person remains appropriate. Because the research was observational and relied on participants’ reports, it cannot establish that a particular interpretation causes positive or negative outcomes. Nevertheless, by separating context, perception and meaning-making, the study offers a more nuanced framework for understanding experiences that sit at the boundary of spirituality, culture, psychology and neuroscience.

Subject of Research: People

Article Title: Making sense of the extraordinary – An investigation of the content and prevalence of appraisals of nonordinary experiences

News Publication Date: 5 August 2026

Web References: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353126

References: Fortes P, Tavares L, Granjeiro G, Bortolini G, Maraldi E, Bortolini T, et al. (2026) Making sense of the extraordinary – An investigation of the content and prevalence of appraisals of nonordinary experiences. PLOS One 21(8): e0353126.

Image Credits: blueberrykings111!, Pixabay, CC0

Keywords: nonordinary experiences, unusual perceptions, psychology, mental health, psychosis, dissociation, spirituality, appraisal, personal growth, PLOS One