Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul 26;18(7):e0287780.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287780. eCollection 2023.

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

Ann Taves  1 , Elliott Ihm  2 , Melissa Wolf  3 , Michael Barlev  2   4 , Michael Kinsella  1 , Maharshi Vyas  1
Affiliations

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

Ann Taves et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Constant A, Badcock P, Friston K, Kirmayer LJ. Integrating evolutionary, cultural, and computational psychiatry: A multilevel systemic approach. Front Psychiatry. 2022. Apr 4;13:763380. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.763380 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kirmayer LJ, Worthman CM, Kitayama S, Lemelson R, Cummings CA, editors. Culture, mind, and brain: Emerging concepts, models, and applications. Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2020. 534 p. (Current perspectives in social and behavioral sciences).
    1. Veissière SPL, Constant A, Ramstead MJD, Friston KJ, Kirmayer LJ. Thinking through other minds: A variational approach to cognition and culture. Behav Brain Sci. 2019. May 30;1–97. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X19001213 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Facco E. Consciousness and the mind-brain-body-world relationship: Towards a transdisciplinary and transcultural approach. Adv Soc Sci Res J [Internet]. 2023. Jan 31 [cited 2023 May 31];10(1). Available from: https://journals.scholarpublishing.org/index.php/ASSRJ/article/view/13896
    1. Bader C, Froese P, Johnson B, Mencken F, Stark R. Baylor Religion Survey, Wave II (2007) [Internet]. The ARDA. Open Science Framework; 2019. [cited 2022 Sep 2]. Available from: https://www.thearda.com/MAWizard/Concepts/MW_17_cc.asp?SAM=-1&GEO=-1&MO=...

Publication types

Grants and funding

This research was supported by John Templeton Foundation (URL: www.templeton.org) grant #61187 (AT). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.