ПСИХОЛОГІЧНІ МЕТОДИКИ ДОСЛІДЖЕННЯ МІСТИЧНОГО ДОСВІДУ ТА ПІЗНАННЯ ІНШОМІРНОСТІ
Наукові записки Вінницького державного педагогічного університету імені Михайла Коцюбинського. Серія: Педагогіка і психологія September 30, 2026 DOI: 10.31652/2415-7872-2026-88-204-209 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Longitudinal Qualitative Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Measures | R. Hood's Mysticism Scale, Mystical Experience Questionnaire MEQ30, 5D-ASC questionnaire, Ego-Dissolution Inventory EDI |
| Key points | Argues that the ineffability, radical subjectivity, transiency, and transformativity of mystical experience preclude direct transfer of standard psychodiagnostic procedures and require an integrative mixed-methods strategy with methodological triangulation. Systematizes four method groups—psychometric, qualitative-phenomenological, psychophysiological/neuroscientific, and experimental-induction—and identifies the "paradox of measuring the ineffable," the validity of subjective reports, and the perennialism–constructivism dilemma as fundamental problems. |
Abstract
The rapid growth of empirical research on altered states of consciousness, the psychology of meditation and, over the last decade, psychedelic science has turned reliable measures of mystical experience into a key research instrument, whereas Ukrainian psychology still lacks both a systematic review of this toolkit and Ukrainian-language adaptations of the leading instruments. The aim of the article is to systematize and critically analyse psychological methods for researching mystical experience as a mode of cognizing otherness and to substantiate an integrative research strategy. Methods: theoretical analysis, comparison, classification and systematization of psychodiagnostic instruments and research paradigms. Results. The specificity of the subject matter (ineffability, radical subjectivity, transiency and transformativity) is shown to impose special requirements on the methods and to preclude the direct transfer of standard psychodiagnostic procedures. Four groups of methods are systematized: psychometric (R. Hood’s Mysticism Scale, the Mystical Experience Questionnaire MEQ30, the 5D-ASC questionnaire, the Ego-Dissolution Inventory EDI); qualitative-phenomenological (A. Giorgi’s descriptive phenomenological method, interpretative phenomenological analysis, the micro-phenomenological explicitation interview); psychophysiological and neuroscientific (EEG, functional neuroimaging, neurofeedback, F. Varela’s neurophenomenology); and experimental-induction paradigms (W. Pahnke’s Good Friday paradigm, psychedelically occasioned experience, meditation protocols). The fundamental methodological problems of the field are analysed: the «paradox of measuring the ineffable», the validity of subjective reports and the perennialism–constructivism dilemma. The necessity of an integrative mixed-methods strategy and methodological triangulation is substantiated, exemplified by an extended neurophenomenological cycle combining a standardized measure, a micro-phenomenological interview, neural registration and longitudinal follow-up. Prospects for further research involve the Ukrainian-language adaptation and validation of the leading instruments.