Trickster-Like Experiences While Documenting the Paranormal: Rasch Analysis of an Initial Survey
James Houran, Rense Lange, Brandon Massullo, Ciarán O’keeffe, David Schumacher
Journal of Scientific Exploration March 26, 2026 DOI: 10.31275/20263837 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Cross-sectional survey Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 167 |
| Population | Credentialed frontier scientists and amateur paranormal investigators |
| Keywords | Paranormal Narrative Helpfulness Rasch model Suggestibility Autobiographical memory Think aloud protocol Transpersonal Framing construction Cognitive psychology Parapsychology Construal level theory Recall Creativity Cognition Construals Consistency knowledge bases Protocol analysis Amateur Psychological science |
| Key findings | Subjective anomalous experiences were endorsed 1.6 times more often than objective events, and the 14-item Trickster-Like Experiences Inventory showed strong unidimensionality and internal consistency, suggesting a coherent construct linked to psychological and epistemological vulnerabilities in paranormal-themed writing. |
Abstract
This online study explored anomalous, trickster-like events reported by researchers while writing about ghostly episodes. A convenience sample of 167 participants (seven credentialed frontier scientists and 160 amateur paranormal investigators) retrospectively endorsed 15 items spanning both subjective experiences (e.g., unusual dreams, emotional shifts) and objective events (e.g., missing files, device malfunctions). Subjective experiences occurred 1.6 times more often than objective events, with endorsement rates ranging from 7% to 30%. Rasch analysis revealed a unidimensional hierarchy of 14 coherent items with strong internal consistency (KR-20 = .87) and minimal gender-related response bias. The reported anomalies could largely reflect psychological mechanisms such as memory reconstruction, source-monitoring errors, or cognitive load, but their clustering and symbolic framing suggest deeper epistemological vulnerabilities—what we call a “trickster chain”—when preparing paranormal themed works. These findings may generalize to other emotionally charged or liminal writing contexts where narrative coherence is vulnerable to psychological or transpersonal disruptions, offering a novel lens on how altered states, symbolic processes, and creativity intersect in scholarly work. Our novel “Trickster-Like Experiences Inventory” therefore offers a promising tool for metascientific inquiry and invites further research into both conventional and parapsychological interpretations of anomalies or disruptions in academic contexts.