Griffiths’ Dread-Replacement Agenda: Start from Reduced Dread Questions in 11-Factor, then Remove Remaining Dread Questions & the “Dread About Volition Control” Category

Michael Hoffman, December 28, 2022 6:36 pm UTC+0

Contents:

Does Griffiths Comprehend Volition-Control Challenges?
- Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Ego/Control Is a Challenging Experience
- Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Control of the Mind Is a Challenging Experience
Removal of “Dread” Category in Phases
Charles Stang’s Accusation of Ignoring Negative Mystic Effects, and Griffith’s Pointing to CEQ as Defense Claiming that CEQ Covers Negative Mystic Effects
Griffiths’ Dread-Replacement Agenda
Replace Dittrich by Studerus, Replace OAV by 11-Factor
11-Factor Questionnaire Serves as a Deliberate OAV Replacement, Not Supplement
We Are Removing the Dread Questions and Adding the Depression Questions Instead
Griffiths Worked off the 11-Factor Studerus Reduced Dread Category and Didn’t See the 4 Removed Questions

Does Griffiths Comprehend Volition-Control Challenges?

maybe merge w/ my section somewhere that lists evidence that Griffiths does vs. doesn’t understand the existence of Volition-Control challenges – sections:
Spots in CEQ Article Where Griffiths Appears to Comprehend that Volition-Control Effects Are Challenging
Spots in CEQ Article Where Griffiths Apparently Fails to Comprehend that Volition-Control Effects Are Challenging
within page:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/22/ceqs-initial-question-pool-covers-all-challenging-experiences-but-final-ceq-fraudulently-removes-control-problems-reverting-to-a-mere-subset-thus-endangering-people-and-research-while-adding-psychothe/

Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Ego/Control Is a Challenging Experience

“The OAV sub-scale “dread of ego dissolution” (DED) covers a wide range of negative experiences, and is generally considered an overall “bad trip” scale (Studerus et al., 2010).
This meta-scale of possible negative effects covers many (e.g. panic, loss of ego/control, feelings of insanity) but not all (e.g. sadness/ grief/ depression) possible categories of challenging experiences.” – Griffiths 2016 p. 2.

[so, CEQ adds a new Grief category, and puts more questions there than any of our other categories, and omits any Volition-Control-Dread category, and removes 14 of 17 OAV Dread questions (82%), in order to achieve broadened, comprehensive coverage of challenging aspects of psychedelics experiences.

It is bad for safety to omit any challenging experiences — that’s why we omit/ delete/ remove/ nuke 14 out of 17 questions of the standard bad trip scale.

We had to get rid of ambiguous questions and streamline our CEQ, which ends up with 33% dup questions about fear, isolation, etc.]

Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Control of the Mind Is a Challenging Experience

“The subjective experience of one’s own death and loss of control of the mind might somehow allow for the type of unity experience that leads to spiritual and meaningful experiences.” – Griffiths 2016 p. 14.

Removal of “Dread” Category in Phases

Generations of categories of negative psychedelic effects in OAV, 11-Factor, and then CEQ questionnaires:

Phase 1: OAV: Dittrich’s “Dread” Category

Phase 2: 11-Factor: Studerus’ “Impaired Control and Cognition” and “Anxiety” Categories

Phase 3: CEQ: Griffiths’ “Fear, Grief, Insanity, Isolation, Death, Paranoia” Categories

Charles Stang’s Accusation of Ignoring Negative Mystic Effects, and Griffith’s Pointing to CEQ as Defense Claiming that CEQ Covers Negative Mystic Effects

Psychedelics and the Future of Religion/ Transcendence and Transformation Initiative (Stang, Harvard)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/16/psychedelics-and-the-future-of-religion-transcendence-and-transformation-initiative-stang-harvard/

Stang: “Your description of mystic experiencing is incorrect – you omit negative experiences, which doesn’t match the archive of mystics’ reports; your theory fails to match the data.”

Griffiths to Stang: “We have negative mystic effects covered, in our Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ).”

Cybermonk: “That’s my area! I am interested what Griffiths does with Dread effects.”

Griffiths in CEQ article: “We start with the reduced set of 13 out of 17 of Dittrich’s Dread effects that Studerus’ 11-Factor retains, and then we reduce the Dread effects questions to 3 out of 17, and get rid of categories “Dread” and “Volition/Control”.

“We instead add “Grief/Sad/Depress” effects questions and categories.”

Griffiths claims to cover negative mystic effects in CEQ, but actually replaces negative mystic effects (“Dread, Control, Volition”) by stock psychology effects questions about “Sad/ Depress/ Grief”.

CEQ doesn’t “cover” negative mystic psychedelics effects; CEQ covers over negative mystic effects.

Griffiths’ Dread-Replacement Agenda

Griffiths Starts from the Already Reduced Dread Questions in 11-Factor Version of OAV then Removes the Remaining Dread Questions

Start from the already reduced dread questions in 11-Factor’s Replacement of OAV (which is deliberately not framed as “a version of OAV”), and then remove the remaining Dread questions.

This realization is after making the Egodeath Mystery Show: Ep 224: Question 54 recording: I’m so innocent/ naive in the first 2/3 of the Question 54 voice recording – maybe at the end I start to get a clue.

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 224: Question 54 😱
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/27/egodeath-mystery-show-episode-224-question-54/

Griffiths is trying to take down O A V, and is not interested in making sure he starts with all 17 of its Dread questions.

He wants to be ignorant of them and start from the smaller subset of 13 that’s retained in 11-Factor.

Among the 4 pre-removed questions removed by 11-Factor is #54, I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Good luck w trying to obtain Dittrich’s articles, since not even Griffiths had them or wanted to have them, with their excessive Dread category.

Griffiths is not interested in Dittrich’s OAV categories; he’s interested in getting rid of OAV’s Dread questions.

It’s in Griffiths’ interest to ignore OAV (17 Dread effects questions) and wholly replace it by the shrunken set of Dread questions in 11-Factor (13 Dread effects questions) and then go way further than 11-Factor and reduce them to almost no Dread effects (3 Dread effects questions).

Griffiths dislikes OAV with its useless categories Ocean, Dread, Vision.

Griffiths is eager to avoid Dittrich’s OAV scheme articles, and instead replace Dittrich’s OAV-based articles by Studerus’ hostile takeover that replaces OAV.

11-Factor is a wholesale replacement of OAV, already eager to remove 4 out of the 13 challenging effects from the Dittrich’s Angst/Dread category, at the same time as getting rid of the Angst/Dread category by replacing it by categories that we control.

Griffiths is not interested in reading Dittrich, Dittrich’s OAV is the problem. Base CEQ off of the final Studerus 11-Factor, definitely not off Dittrichs’ OAV, which contains a category we don’t like and challenging questions that we don’t like, and that we’re going to take from 17, to 13, to 3, getting rid of nuisance effects like question 54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

Studerus and Griffiths are not interested in Question 54, or Marionette.

They are interested in shifting attention from Question 54 & Marionette to the new categories they define and control – which lacks a Volition-Control category in the inventory of all known challenging effects as you can see in the Initial Item List, look how comprehensive it is.

The final CEQ keeps only 26 of 64 pool questions, and gets rid of Volition-Control category, and gets rid of 14 of 17 volition-control questions, keeping only a token 3 that are poor and dup.

Replace Dittrich by Studerus, Replace OAV by 11-Factor

Fall back to the 11-Factor bastardized and already God-forsaken version of OAV. CEQ IS BEYOND GOD-FORSAKEN, it’s demonic, it’s supershrunk version of a shrunk subset of Dread questions.

It’s 2nd Gen shrunken Dread list to get rid of Dread category and CONVERT TO A NEW CATEGORY SYSTEM while gathering challenging effcts from the three (versions of) questionnaires – for legacy 1975-styled OAV, we’ll REPLACE OAV BY 11-FACTOR. Not supplement; get rid of OAV entirely.

Replace OAV firmly and entirely.

Assure people you can math convert between the bad old OAV concerns and the new good 11-Factor concerns, so it’s safe to abandon and stop using OAV, and wholly replace it by 11-Factor in place of OAV.

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 224: Question 54 😱
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/27/egodeath-mystery-show-episode-224-question-54/

Just one more rev and we can completely write Dread psychedelics effects out of the narrative – while justifying all of this removal as “increasing coverage to be comprehensive” when it does NO SUCH THING.

CEQ does not broaden coverage (it removes the Initial Item Pool of challenging effects down from 64 to 24 = to 38%.

CEQ SHIFTS coverage, from Volition-Control challenging effects, to put coverage INSTEAD on Depression.

STOP focusing on V-Ctrl and focus INSTEAD on Depression, don’t even acknowledge any more, the Dread effects, which was the biggest category such that we had to in 1994 pad out and inflate the O and V categories to try to keep up with the way more populated A category.

O, A, V: That stands for unicorns & rainbows, mystical b/c positive experiences.

Sad unicorns with rainbows is the ailment we’re looking for, not marionettes whose fear is of catastrophic loss of control!!

We’ll take the sad unicorn with rainbows instead pls.

It’s better for Big Pharma business.

Never mind tour “attend where needed” argument – attend where WE need to as professional couch psychotherapists, that’s our bed that we will fit you into, so these are the questions we will inquire into.

🛏🛠

We’ll keep 3 token Dread questions out of the 17 (18%).

We’ll keep 3 of the 13 of the 17 of the Dread effects which Dittrich found.

We’ll put maximum focus on Depression/ Sadness/ Grief through this instrument, the Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ).

☹️🦄💨🌈

That’s our kinda tripper!

We’ll center our challenging effects around Sad/ Grief/ Depress, we need to get rid of this Dread category: REPLACE DREAD, don’t supplement the 3 dimensions by adding 11; we need to GET RID OF DITTRICH‘s DREAD Dimension. And get rid of Oceanic and Visionary – these overwhelming broad lofty categories.

First, replace Dread category by ICC “Impaired control” and ANX “Anxiety” categories – they sound better for PR than Dread – we have got to move away from this DED acronym and the word Dread.

We can profit by recasting ABANDONING “OCEAN” & “ANGST/DREAD” & “VISIONARY”, replaced by psychologized categories.

We get more control of framing by stopping used “Ocean/ Dread/ Visionary”, instead use our psych-speak categories that we can control and frame and fit into our couch psychotherapy framework.

Angst is ok but “impaired control” and “anxiety” are professional psych-speak, not like Dread and DED and marionette and panic. We need better negative psychedelic effects that fit into our PROCRUSTEAN COUCH.

🛏🛠

We will fit psychedelics including challenging effects into our couch psychotherapy frame.

11-Factor Questionnaire Serves as a Deliberate OAV Replacement, Not Supplement

I wondered why Studerus didn’t say “We are adding an additional layer of categories to add subdivisions of Ocean, Angst, and Vision categories” even though that’s what Studerus does.

Ocean is simply divided in 4, Angst in 2, Vision into 5 more-granular categories WITHIN the O A V broad categories but Studerus wants the O A V categories gone!

Molding psychedelics effects into our ordinary-state based psychology framework merely requires:

Getting rid of Dittrich’s Dread category of psychedelic effects, and
Getting rid of 14 out of the 17 (remove 82%, keep 18%) challenging effects questions in the Dread category, and
Re-asssigning those effects into our new psychologized categories that replace Dittrich’s un-advantageous categories: Ocean, Dread, Vision.

Definitely DO NOT USE DITTRICH’S OAV; avoid his categories.

Make Dittrich’s categories obsolete, so we can get rid of them, they are not advantageous to our frame.

Use Studerus’ 11-Factor OAV replacement that helps get rid of Dittrich’s O A V Ocean, Angst/Dread, Vision categories.

Therefore Griffiths has EVERY REASON TO IGNORE DITTRICH’S OAV-BASED ARTICLES AND SPECS, AND EVERY REASON TO BUILD FROM 11-FACTOR WHICH REPLACES OAV and its non-advantageous Ocean/ Angst/ Vision categories.

We need categories of negative effects that are handleable, tractable, placed into useful categories.

No Dread, or Volition, or Control challenges please (we like Fear and Anxiety though).

We claim in CEQ to give complete coverage, unlike Dread, while we, under that claim, remove 14 of 17 Dread effects questions, and remove categories named Dread or Control or Volition, and move Dread effects questions into our tractible replacement categories.

We’ll frame the challenging psychedelics effects of interest into categories:
Fear, Grief, Sadness, Depression

Not:
Volition, Control, Dread, Angst, Dissolution

We Are Removing the Dread Questions and Adding the Depression Questions Instead

The Dread category got totally corrupted in Griffiths’ Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ).

CEQ keeps only 3 of Dittrich’s 17 Angst/ Dread questions.

Griffiths kept 3 of the 13 that he was aware of.

Studerus kept those 13 out of Dittrich’s official 17 Dread effects questions, then Griffiths kept only 3 out of Studerus’ 13.

3/17 = Griffiths kept only 18% of the standard Dread dimension questions in CEQ, and CEQ is all about being comprehensive view of negative, Dread effects and also Depression.

GRIFFITHS COMPLETELY REMOVED COVERAGE OF THE ICC AND ANX FACTORS AND DREAD DIMENSION, WHILE ADDING PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOTHERAPY CATEGORIES FEAR, GRIEF, DEPRESSION.

We’re not interested in Dread questions, so we kept only 3 out of the 17 standard Dread dimension category of psychedelic effects questions.

Griffiths Worked off the 11-Factor Studerus Reduced Dread Category and Didn’t See the 4 Removed Questions

Griffiths didn’t see them unless saw Studerus’ separate document, Figure S1 “Hierarchy Tree”.

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 224: Question 54 😱
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/27/egodeath-mystery-show-episode-224-question-54/

That recording is by nature, lining up the questions. I subsequently, after making that recording, I answer those raised questions in the text posts.

Griffiths was evidently working NOT off Dittrich 1994 or 2006 / 2010 unobtainium mythological articles.

Griffiths shows all signs of working off of the 11-Factor Studerus shinkage of the Dread category from Dittrich’s 17 bad trip questions to just 13 of them, 24% removed from the Dread category, including because of fake math voodoo and gut bias hunch, we removed mostly effects questions from the Dread category.

4 of 7 removed items were in the 2 of 11 factor category.

Griffiths didn’t see Dittrich’s 17 questions unless he viewed the separate doc for Figure S1 which is the only place any human has ever seen all 17 of Dittrich’s Dread questions admitted and permitted for The Public to view.

These are copyrighted questions behind a secret paywall, and Griffith’s didn’t have Dittrich’s questionnaire spec’ns.

Griffiths worked off 11-Factor OAV, which removed 4 of Dittrich’s official 17 Angst/Dread effects (removing 24% of the Dread questions).

The Dittrich/ Studerus/ Griffiths Scheme to Progressively Get Rid of Negative Psychedelics Effects and Replace Them by Stock Psychotherapy Ailments

Michael Hoffman, December 28, 2022 9:21 am UTC+0

_{Site Map}

Contents:

Update Jan. 2: Initial Item Pool Reduced from 64 to 24 Because CEQ Must Have Fewer Negative Effects than MEQ’s 30 Positive Effects
Update Dec. 30: Studerus Didn’t Delete Questions
Phase 1: Dittrich’s 1994/2006 List of 21 Angst/Dread Dimension Effects
Phase 2: Studerus’ 2010 List of 13 Impaired Control and Cognition (ICC) & Anxiety (ANX) Effects
Phase 3: Griffiths’ 2016 List of 3 Effects from Studerus’ ICC+ANX Categories
Why Griffiths Needed the Final CEQ to Have Greater than 21 and Fewer than 30 Negative/ Non-mystical Psychedelic Effects
The Progressive Story of Inflating the Positive Effects and Removing Negative Effects
Selling Covering a Superset, But Delivering Merely a Shift of Which Subset Is Covered
Not Believable that Griffiths Started from Dittrich’s Full Angst/ Dread Dimension’s 21 Questions
References

Update Jan. 2: Initial Item Pool Reduced from 64 to 24 Because CEQ Must Have Fewer Negative Effects than MEQ’s 30 Positive Effects

CEQ is the repressed counterpart and complement of the positive MEQ. We were un-strategic in the MEQ/SOCQ lineage when we reduced 43 positive therefore Mystical effects to just 30, what were we thinking?! We should have done like in the APZ lineage: at every step, in each version of the linege, we must increase the counts of positive (therefore Mystical) psychedelic effects (at every level), and reduce the counts of negative (therefore non-Mystical) psychedelics effects (as counted at every level).

In each version of the lineage, we must come up with counts of negative psychedelics effects or effects categories that are lower than the counts of positive psychedelics effects or effects categories.

I must go back to

Professor Dittrich on October 26, 1985 finds that the 158-item APZ contains positive effects in Oceanic & Visionary categories and negative effects in the Angst/ Dread category.

APZ has 158 items. Source: Studerus 2010 p. 2 left.

But there’s a problem revealed in 1985, than we need to engineer a solution for: unfortunately, we’ve determined that in the 1975 APZ set of 158 effects questions, there are too few positive effects (O & V), and too many negative effects (A).

So remedy and cure that ailment in the APZ instrument by padding out the O and V categories and reducing the A items, forming the 1994 new technology: OAV questionnaire: psychedelics have now been re-engineered with more positive effects and fewer negative effects! 🎉

There are 158 APZ questions: Source: Studerus 2010 p. 2 left. https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/5d-asc-five-dimensional-altered-states-of-consciousness-questionnaire/#APZ-History

Over in Griffiths’ MEQ lineage (MEQ43, SOCQ, MEQ30), they went in the wrong direction: they reduced the number of positive/mystical effects from 43 to 30.

We’ll remedy our MEQ/SOCQ lineage by patching up a negative/non-mystical effects CEQ that’s marketed as casting a broad net (look at the broadest version of the APZ lineage: point to “5DASC”, which has 1 negative dimension and 4 positive dimensions), but that actually – in the end – casts a narrowing net on the negative/non-mystical experiences (only pay attention to the ICC and ANX mid-level categories, conflate 11-Factors’ mid-level categories with the entirety of 5D).

Start with the already attenuated subset of only 13 of the 21 of Dread effects (by playing into Studerus’ focus magic trick of pointing to the mid-level factor buckets and ignoring their high-level full-sized Unpleasant bucket).

We’ll aim to make the final number of negative/non-mystical effects 29 max – we have to make there be fewer negative/non-mystical effects questions than the 30 MEQ30 positive/mystical effects questions.

We’ll pretend to start with a fully wide Initial Item Pool (accidentally omitting 8 Dread questions though), and then for our final set of negative/non-mystical, CEQ questions, we’ll aim for 24, to be fewer than the 30 positive/mystical effects inventoried in our MEQ30.

We need to construct a set of negative/non-mystical effects that fits our psychedelic psychotherapy marketing plan.

Create a new Grief category. Make it bigger than other categories.

Make other conventional ordinary-state categories that fit and filter to our paradigm, such as Isolation.

Accept the Isolation question of the ICC category, to reify our Isolation category, as a token Dread item, and delete all other ICC questions that we made a temporary show of adding to give the impression of casting a wide, comprehensive net for our Initial Item Pool of the entire “5DASC” giant set of all effects.

For coverage of allegedly “5DASC”, Griffiths focuses on the mid-level 11-Factors categories instead of high-level indicates wilful incomprehension that’s advantageous to narrow the Dread effects.

Now that we’ve picked a subset of the subset of the full complete wide 5D, next we need to get rid of all Dread items.

Especially we can get rid of all ICC (Impaired Control) questions – they don’t fit our needs, we need categories like Fear, Grift- I mean Grief, and Isolation – not “Control” challenges.

We’ve got to get a set of 29 or fewer effects, and which effects should we, which undesirable, negative/non-mystical effects do we want to delete to achieve our goal of producing a set of psychotherapy categories?

We can lose all the Control / ICC questions – just keep Isolation, because we need to pad out our fabricated Isolation category by listing a single effect, the same identical Isolation question from all 3 questionnaires (“5DASC” – by which we mean only ICC+ANX – and SOCQ and HRS).

CEQ Misspells “5D-ASC”

Griffiths keeps making a typo, misspelling 5D-ASC: this indicates incomprehension.

count of “5DASC”: 30
count of “5-DASC”: 6
count of “5D-ASC”: 2

2 times out of 38 (5%), the Griffiths CEQ article correctly spells “5D-ASC”.

36 times out of 38 (95%), the Griffiths CEQ article misspells “5D-ASC” as “5DASC” or, sometimes, “5-DASC”.

Griffiths is constantly using scope-shifting tricks. Don’t say “OAV” even though that’s what Studerus says, change that to “5DASC” to give the impression of full, broader coverage than 5D-ASC – while actually only picking a tiny subset of 5D-ASC for the Initial Item Pool (not the 21 Dread items, but only the mid-level 11-Factors categories ICC and ANX but don’t point that out, and then only end up with 3 out of the 94 (3%) of the 5D-ASC items in the final CEQ.

The Carbonaro article bizarrely refrains from admitting/specifying which 11-Factor categories they picked.

They don’t seem to want to be forthright and come clean.

Griffiths & Carbonaro are cagey. They are posturing. They are doing spin.

Why does Griffiths CEQ article keep picking a couple 11-Factors categories, yet describe/ frame/ position/ sell themselves in terms of “5DASC”?

Because they want to give the impression of casting a broader net than 5D-ASC, not admit that they are leveraging and abusing 11-Factors by pretending that 11-Factors’ ICC+ANX factors (only 13 items) is the same complete scope as 5D-ASC (94 items) or Dread (21 items) or 11-Factors’ high-level category “Unpleasant Experiences” (same 21 items as Dread).

From CEQ article page 4: “The 5DASC[sic] consists of 94 items”

Update Dec. 30: Studerus Didn’t Delete Questions

Update, December 30, 2022:

Griffiths’ CEQ’s Mistakes, Not Studerus’ 11-Factors’ Mistakes, Omitting Most Challenging Experiences from Psychedelics Effects Questionnaire
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/30/griffiths-ceqs-mistakes-not-studerus-11-factors-mistakes-omitting-most-challenging-experiences-from-psychedelic-effects-questionnaire/

Studerus tries to not draw attention to their Unpleasant high-level category. They want people to notice only their subset, their 11 mid-level factors/categories (ignoring the 8 direct members of Unpleasant high-level category).

Griffiths is eager to oblige: look only at the mid-level factors’ items, ignore the non-factor-members, ignore the high-level categories (“Unpleasant Experiences” & “Pleasant Experiences”).

That gets rid of 8/21 = 38% of negative psychedelic effects right off the bat! It’s like a Magic party!

🎩🪄 🎉

Then to get rid of the rest of the negative psychedelic effects, aim for fewer negative/ non-mystical effects items than MEQ30’s positive/ mystical effects questions.

In the final culling to remove negative psychedelic effects to be fewer than the 30 MEQ positive/mystical psychedelic effects, only keep the challenging effects items that fit into our ordinary-state psychotherapy categories – especially our new Grief pet category we’re promoting.

Oh, turns out all the Control-challenges psychedelics effects got deleted 🤷‍♂️, well, good riddance, we didn’t need those excess negative effects for our psychedelic psychotherapy marketing plan anyway.

😱🐉🚪💎🏆 ➡️ 🗑

54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

We kept a single, token ICC (Impaired Control) item: “I felt isolated”, since it fits our marketing plan’s Isolation category.

Phase 1: Dittrich’s 1994/2006 List of 21 Angst/Dread Dimension Effects

Update Dec. 30, 2022: This section should list all 21 Unpleasant aka Dread questions.

62. Everything around me was happening so fast that I could no longer follow what was going on.
41. My body seemed to me numb, dead and weird.
5. I felt like a marionette.
16. I had difficulty making even the smallest decision.
24. I had difficulty in distinguishing important from unimportant things.
33. I felt as though I were paralyzed.
44. I felt isolated from everything and everyone.
45. I was not able to complete a thought, my thought repeatedly became disconnected.
53. I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.
12. I felt tormented.
19. I was afraid that the state I was in would last forever.
29. I was afraid without being able to say exactly why.
30. I experienced everything terrifyingly distorted.
32. I experienced my surroundings as strange and weird.
38. I felt threatened.
63. I had the feeling something horrible would happen.

+ 4 more questions

Phase 2: Studerus’ 2010 List of 13 Impaired Control and Cognition (ICC) & Anxiety (ANX) Effects

Update Dec. 30, 2022: This section should list all 21 Unpleasant aka Dread questions.

Update: Studerus didn’t delete any of the 21 questions from the Unpleasant aka Dread category. They merely dropped questions from their ANX & ICC subcategories of Unpleasant effects – but kept them in the Unpleasant high-level category.

~~62. Everything around me was happening so fast that I could no longer follow what was going on.~~
~~41. My body seemed to me numb, dead and weird.~~
5. I felt like a marionette.
16. I had difficulty making even the smallest decision.
24. I had difficulty in distinguishing important from unimportant things.
33. I felt as though I were paralyzed.
44. I felt isolated from everything and everyone.
45. I was not able to complete a thought, my thought repeatedly became disconnected.
53. I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
~~54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.~~
~~12. I felt tormented.~~
19. I was afraid that the state I was in would last forever.
29. I was afraid without being able to say exactly why.
30. I experienced everything terrifyingly distorted.
32. I experienced my surroundings as strange and weird.
38. I felt threatened.
63. I had the feeling something horrible would happen.

There, we’ve done our part to get rid of (move attention off of) 4 out of 21 = 19% of negative psychedelic effects, in the course of innocently breaking up the 2 positive dimensions into 9 factors instead, and breaking up the 1 negative dimension into just 2 factors – thus reducing from 1/3 = 33% negative categories, to only 2/9 = 18% negative categories of psychedelic effects.

Phase 3: Griffiths’ 2016 List of 3 Effects from Studerus’ ICC+ANX Categories

Result: Removed 18 of 21 the Dread/ Unpleasant effects questions; 86%

Update Dec. 30, 2022: This section should list all 21 Unpleasant aka Dread questions.

~~62. Everything around me was happening so fast that I could no longer follow what was going on.~~
~~41. My body seemed to me numb, dead and weird.~~
~~5. I felt like a marionette.~~
~~16. I had difficulty making even the smallest decision.~~
~~24. I had difficulty in distinguishing important from unimportant things.~~
~~33. I felt as though I were paralyzed.~~
44. I felt isolated from everything and everyone. 👍
~~45. I was not able to complete a thought, my thought repeatedly became disconnected.~~
~~53. I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.~~
~~54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.~~
~~12. I felt tormented.~~
19. I was afraid that the state I was in would last forever. 👍
~~29. I was afraid without being able to say exactly why.~~
~~30. I experienced everything terrifyingly distorted.~~
~~32. I experienced my surroundings as strange and weird.~~
~~38. I felt threatened.~~
63. I had the feeling something horrible would happen. 👍

That’s more like it! We kept only 3/21 = 14% of the original negative psychedelic effects. We can sell this move as only getting rid of 3/13 = 23% of the original effects – compared to the (pre-shrunk) 11-factor scheme.

Now there’s room to add our preferred negative effects: Grief/ Sad/ Depressed, to sell our couch psychotherapy paradigm repair services, instead of the actual, problematic-for-us negative psychedelic effects — marionettes & suchlike that we can’t deal with.

Attach the standard blob of psychometrics math to our radical aggressive removal of all the major negative effects, and no one will be able to object to our unscientific, seat-of-the-pants, biased, gut judgment.

Draw attention to our many pages of listing our Initial Item Pool, before we deleted from 64 negative psychedelic effects down to just 24 (and then reluctantly re-added 2 back in, seeing as we can’t get away with removing the Paranoia effect).

The important thing is not actually to deliver a superset of Dread effects like our page 1 marketing spin says, but rather, to deliver a smaller set of negative/non-mystical psychedelic effects than the 30 positive/mystical psychedelic effects in our streamlined MEQ30. eg fake everyone out by starting with 64 items including “all” the Dread effects (actually 13 of 21 of them), then plunge that number down to 24, which is well less than MEQ’s 30 desirable effects.

Why Griffiths Needed the Final CEQ to Have Greater than 21 and Fewer than 30 Negative/ Non-mystical Psychedelic Effects

Update Jan. 2, 2022

Don’t do like Cybermonk and add 7 Control effects to the final CEQ, or else CEQ would have more effects than MEQ (10% more: 26+7 = 33 instead of MEQ’s 30 desirable effects).

We want broader coverage of negative effects than Dread’s 21 — but not as many as the positive 30 effects that we placed in MEQ30.

That’s why we need to aim for a number greater than 21 but less than 30.

Let’s aim for 24 – then bump up to 26. 26 is exactly between our lower excess bound (21) and our higher excess bound (30).

(21 + 30 ) / 2 = 26 negative psychedelic effects is the perfect count that we need in the final CEQ.

The Progressive Story of Inflating the Positive Effects and Removing Negative Effects

Dittrich 1975

Includes 158 non-categorized psychedelic effects in the APZ questionnaire.

Source: Studerus 2010 p 2 left.

Dittrich 1985

Identifies 3 dimensions, OAV, + General, in those APZ questions.

Dittrich 1994

Judges there are too many Angst (Dread) questions and too few Oceanic & Visionary psychedelic effects.

So he publishes his new OAV questionnaire, which adds more Ocean & Visionary effects. See Studerus’ 2010 discussion of this.

Dittrich 2006

1/3 of the Dimensions are negative.

Fix this, reduce the percentage of negative psychedelic effects, by watering down, by adding two irrelevant dimensions that no one wants or asked for: Auditory, and Reduction of Vigilance.

Now, only 1/5 of the dimensions are negative: 1 out of 5 instead of 1 out of 3.

Studerus 2010

1/3 of the OAV dimensions are negative. Ocean/ Angst/ Visionary.

We need a greater number of smaller factor categories instead, in the positive categories, to overwhelm the negative category count.

So, replace the 3 OAV dimensions by 11 factors, unfairly dividing Angst into just 2 factors, but dividing Ocean into 4 and Visionary into 5 factor categories.

Now we’ve magically reduced negative psychedelic effects from 1/3 = 33% to 2/11 = 18%. 🎉.

Also, along the way, we removed 4 out of the 21 Angst/Dread psychedelic effects, though we forgot to list 61 & 62 in our list of 7 effects that we removed from the OAV categories.

Out of the 7 questions we removed, 4 of them were in the Angst/Dread dimension, and only 3 of them were from the other two OAV dimensions.

Griffiths 2016

“We took ALL 13 of the 5D-ASC questions which were in the ICC + ANX categories (never mind that the Dread dimension had 21, not 13) for our Initial Item Pool of negative psychedelic effects.”

“For our final pool, we kept some of all those 13 items.”

True: They kept some; specifically they kept 3 out of those 13 … out of Dittrich’s original 21 negative psychedelic effects questions in the Angst/Dread dimension.

Griffiths knows he has a problem going against this scheming to reduce the negative psychedelic effects and puff up and inflate the number of positive effects – and his mission is to add conventional couch-psychotherapy paradigm ailments: Grief/ Sadness/ Depression.

Because Griffiths wants to sell negative-ailment services, but doesn’t want to bloat the negative effects categories, he feels pressured to continue the Dittrich/ Studerus project of pressing on the scales to shift the ratio for more positive vs. negative psychedelic effects.

So Griffiths is under heavy pressure to delete and omit and drop other negative effects while adding his pet effects he’s pushing (Grief/ Sad/ Depress).

So he reduces 64 to 24 negative effects to form his final CEQ questionnaire, but relents and due to gut emotional judgment (not math), he restores paranoia questions (but not Volition-Control challenging effects questions).

Selling Covering a Superset, But Delivering Merely a Shift of Which Subset Is Covered

Griffiths’ CEQ article advertises adding Depression to the catalog of negative psychedelics effects – but his final CEQ also removes Volition-Control negative effects, contradicting his claim that a superset is needed and CEQ delivers a superset.

The final CEQ actually delivers merely a partial overlap (while claiming to deliver a superset), leaving Volition-Control as completely un-covered as Depression effects had been.

Not Believable that Griffiths Started from Dittrich’s Full Angst/ Dread Dimension’s 21 Questions

Griffiths (p. 4 right) says we started from all 13 of the ICC ANX questions – he always mentions “5D-ASC” (not “OAV” like Studerus), but specifies 11-Factors’ mid-level ICC & ANX categories, “all 13” – so he cannot mean OAV’s or 5D-ASC’s Angst/Dread category of 21 items, or 11-Factors’ “Unpleasant Experiences” high-level category containing those same 21 items.

If your goal is to minimize the negative questions from Dittrich (so that you can add your own, preferred ailments for which to sell your psychotherapy services – Dread/ Grief/ Sad), naturally you should start with Studerus’ already 24% reduced set of 13, not the original full set of 21 negative effects questions (Dittrich’s Dread dimension).

There is no way Griffiths had Figure S1 from Studerus or had Dittrich’s questionnaire spec, or he certainly would have selected Dread question 54, for the initial item pool, “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

— Cybermonk, December 27, 2022

References

Dittrich 1975 APZ

Dittrich A (1975)
Zusammenstellung eines fragebogens (APZ) zur erfassung abnormer psychischer zustände
[Construction of a questionnaire (APZ) for assessing abnormal mental states]
Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother 23: 12–20.

Dittrich 1985: OAV dimensions found in APZ[158]

Dittrich A, Vonarx S, Staub S
1985
International study on altered states of consciousness (ISASC): Summary of the results
Ger J Psychol 9: 319–339.

Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=dittrich+%22International+study+on+altered+states+of+consciousness%22

Dittrich 1994 (Oct. 1993) in book 50 Years of LSD – Readable at Google Books

Sweet, I snagged every page and made a nice printout of the front matter & article.

Dittrich A
1994
Psychological aspects of altered states of consciousness of the LSD type: Measurement of their basic dimensions and prediction of individual differences
In:
Pletscher A, Ladewig D, eds.
50 Years of LSD: Current Status and Perspectives of Hallucinogens: A Symposium of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences, Lugano-Agno (Switzerland) October 21 and 22, 1993
New York NY: Parthenon. pp 101–118.

Swiss Academy of the Medical Sciences. Proceedings of a Symposium of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences, Lugano-Agno (Switzerland), October 21-22, 1993.
Pharmacological and clinical research on LSD, for pharmacologists or psychiatrists.
17 contributors, 5 U.S.

url https://www.amazon.com/Fifty-Years-LSD-Perspectives-Hallucinogens/dp/1850705690

Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Psychological+aspects+of+altered+states+of+consciousness+of+the+LSD+type%22

Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?id=3s5vkfmXKNUC&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=%22Psychological+aspects+of+altered+states+of+consciousness+of+the+LSD+type%22&source=bl&ots=ShQ1XvbfV2&sig=ACfU3U2WfSbeLLorHgerwhe43ypkD5LDXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiwrZ-O5Kn8AhUCIH0KHdfUAk4Q6AF6BAgnEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Psychological%20aspects%20of%20altered%20states%20of%20consciousness%20of%20the%20LSD%20type%22&f=false

Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?id=3s5vkfmXKNUC&pg=PA101

Dittrich 1994 OAV with inflated O & V, shrunken A, in book Worlds of Consciousness, Volume 3 (German)

Bodmer I, Dittrich A, Lamparter D.
Aussergewöhnliche Bewusstseinszustände – Ihre gemeinsame Struktur und Messung
[Altered states of consciousness – Their common structure and assessment].
1994
In:
Hofmann A, Leuner H, editors.
Welten des Bewusstseins. Bd. 3, Experimentelle Psychologie, Neurobiologie und Chemie.
Berlin, Germany: VWB; 1994. pp. 45–58.

Annual journal book that in 1994 defines OAV:
Worlds of Consciousness
Bodmer, I., Dittrich, A. & Lamparter, D. in Welten des Bewusstseins. Bd. 3 (eds. Hofmann, A. & Leuner, H.) 45–58 (Experimentelle Psychologie, Neurobiologie und Chemie., 1994).

Welten des Bewußtseins, Bd.3 – https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Adolf-Dittrich/dp/3861354020/

Dittrich 1998 article about OAV questionnaire [66 items] with improved (tilted positive) OAV items compared to APZ [158 items]

Dittrich A (1998)
The standardized psychometric assessment of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) in humans
Pharmacopsychiatry 31: 80–84.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9754838/ – paywall for PDF fulltext

Abstract:

“The APZ questionnaire was developed in order to explore hypotheses on ASCs.

“First — in a series of 11 experiments using different induction methods on N = 393 healthy subjects — the hypothesis was tested that ASCs have major dimensions in common irrespective of the mode of their induction.

“In the International Study on Altered States of Consciousness (ISASC) the external validity of the experimental results was assessed.

“The ISASC was carried out on a total of N = 1133 subjects in six countries.

“The main results of the experimental studies were corroborated in the field studies.

“The results can be summarized as follows:

“the common denominator of ASCs is described by three oblique dimensions, designated as
“Oceanic Boundlessness (OSE)”,
“Dread of Ego Dissolution (AIA) [DED, AED]” and
“Visionary Restructuralization (VUS)”.

“The reliability and validity of the scales are satisfactory.

“Tested versions of the APZ scales are available in English (UK, USA), German, Italian and Portuguese.

“Psychometrically as yet untested versions exist in Dutch, Finnish, French, Greek, Spanish and Russian.

“The APZ questionnaire has become the international standard for the assessment of ASCs, thus helping to integrate research.

“A psychometrically improved version exists in German (OAV questionnaire).

“The BETA questionnaire, which measures the dimensions “Vigilance Reduction (VIR)” and “Auditive Alteration (AVE)” is also available in German. “

This 1998 mention of dimensions 4 & 5 corroborates Studerus’ claim that 5D-ASC data was gathered starting in 2000, not in 2006 when the 5D (German) article was published.

“These dimensions are most likely etiology-dependent.”

Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22The+standardized+psychometric+assessment+of+altered+states+of+consciousness%22

Dittrich 2006 5D-ASC (German) Adding 2 Positive Dimensions to Reduce Negative from 1/3 to 1/5

6. Dittrich, A, Lamparter, D, Maurer, M (2006) 5D-ABZ:
German garbled from pdf, see Studerus 2010: References.
Fragebogen zur Erfassung Aussergewo¨hnlicher Bewusstseinszusta¨nde. Eine kurze Einfu¨hrung
[5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the assessment of altered states of consciousness. A short introduction]. Zurich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

todo – link (good luck finding)

Dittrich 2010 5D-ASC (English)

Dittrich, A, Lamparter, D, Maurer, M (2010)
5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the assessment of altered states of consciousness. A short introduction.
Zurich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

todo – link (good luck finding)

Search:

url https://www.google.com/search?q=Dittrich+Lamparter+Maurer

url https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Questionnaire+for+the+assessment+of+altered+states+of+consciousness%22+%22A+short+introduction%22

url https://www.google.com/search?q=Dittman+%22Questionnaire+for+the+assessment+of+altered+states+of+consciousness%22

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 224: Question 54 😱

Michael Hoffman, December 27, 2022 10:13 pm UTC+0

_{Site Map}

Contents:

Intro
Download
Post-Recording Realizations
Naivety
Timestamps & Content
Production Notes
See Also

Intro

Download

Download for 1 week, starting Dec. 27, 2022: https://we.tl/t-6asnMSS894

50:47. Stereo. 83 MB.

Some guitar in the middle, but has typing too: track 1 of 4, of:
🎸🌌 Rebirth into the Sphere of Shattered Stars

54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

I articulate my questions, I work up a set of questions in this recording.

I then answer those questions in text format in my postings (new & updates), in posts before & after this post.

Post-Recording Realizations

Please Research: Need English Translation of Dittrich 1994 OAV and 2006 5D-ASC Questionnaire Specifications Listing Question 54: “I Was Afraid to Lose My Self-Control”
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/27/please-research-need-english-translation-of-dittrich-1994-oav-and-2006-5d-asc-questionnaire-specifications-listing-question-54-i-was-afraid-to-lose-my-self-control/

The Dittrich/ Studerus/ Griffiths Scheme to Progressively Get Rid of Negative Psychedelics Effects and Replace Them by Stock Psychotherapy Ailments
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/28/the-dittrich-studerus-griffiths-scheme-to-progressively-get-rid-of-negative-psychedelics-effects-and-replace-them-by-stock-psychotherapy-ailments/

Griffiths’ Dread-Replacement Agenda: Start from Reduced Dread Questions in 11-Factor, then Remove Remaining Dread Questions
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/28/griffiths-dread-replacement-agenda-start-from-reduced-dread-questions-in-11-factor-then-remove-remaining-dread-questions/

Naivety

I’m so innocent/ naive in the first 2/3 of this recording – maybe at the end I start to get a clue:

Griffiths is trying to take down O A V, and is not interested in making sure he starts with all 17 of its Dread questions.

He wants to be ignorant of them and start from the smaller subset of 13 that’s retained in 11-Factor.

Among the 4 pre-removed questions removed by 11-Factor is
#54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

Timestamps & Content

0:00

10:00

20:00

Cough it up!

Where’s the damn questionnaire specification listing all of the dimensions, including General (G-ASC), and which specific questions are in each dimension, of Dittrich’s OAV (1994) or German 5D-ASC (2006) or English translation of 5D-ASC (2010)?

30:00

40:00

50:00

Production Notes

Typing 👎 ⌨️ 🙉

Lotsa typing in the middle; must skip past. I should make a trimmed, Core version of this episode.

Distortion

Probably distortion when I exclaim at 29:30 –

Cough it up! Where’s the damn questionnaire specification listing all of the dimensions, including General (G-ASC), and which specific questions are in each dimension, of Dittrich’s OAV (1994) or German 5D-ASC (2006) or English translation of 5D-ASC (2010)?

For the first time ever, perhaps, I simply recorded the session, then exported as mp3 with no production hassle at all. Looks like the voice, and voice and guitar miking, came out good, all around.

Miking for guitar: wo SM57 close mics on two 8″ cabs.

Miking: AT2020, E100. eq: listed at start.

Please Research: Need English Translation of Dittrich 1994 OAV and 2006 5D-ASC Questionnaire Specifications Listing Question 54: “I Was Afraid to Lose My Self-Control”

Contents:

Need URL for Dittrich 1994 OAV or 2006/2010 5D-ASC Questionnaire Spec
Found Major Basic Counting Errors and Academic Research Errors in both Griffiths’ CEQ Article and Studerus’ 11-Factor Article: How Question 54 Got Foolishly Dropped
Key Question: How Many Effects/Questions Are in Dittrich’s 1994 or 2006 “Dread of Ego Dissolution” Dimension?
Griffiths Doesn’t Start from the Full Set of Dittrich’s 17 “Dread” Questions, but Is Working only with Studerus’ Culled Subset of 13 ICC+ANX Questions
Hypothesis: Griffiths Failed to Go to the Source, Dittrich’s Articles, but Relied on Studerus 2010 Article, Which in Figure 1 Entirely Removed Question 54 and 6 others from Dittrich’s OAV Dimensions (Figure S1 Tree Hierarchy)
More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 End Omits 2 Questions (61 & 62)
More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 Gets Count of Tree’s Factor Member Items Wrong (It’s 49, not 47)
References
New Database Article about the Altered States Database (ASDB), a WordPress-Powered Database Site
Studerus’ Email Address

Need URL for Dittrich 1994 OAV or 2006/2010 5D-ASC Questionnaire Spec

We don’t have Science, but we have black magic, until someone can give me two URLs: I need to click the URLs and see the list in English of the 4 dimensions or 6 dimensions and which questions are in each dimension.

Includes G-ASC General dimension.

Includes question 54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control”.

Best bet: What is the URL for:

Dittrich A, Lamparter D and Maurer M
2010
5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the Assessment Of Altered States of Consciousness. A Short Introduction.
Zürich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

Take heart: I’m starting to suspect that Griffiths couldn’t get ahold of the real Dittrich questionnaire specs either, but worked off the more obtainable corrupted, shrunken, stunted, final result from Studerus.

Studerus’ ICC+ANX factor categories are smaller by 4 effects questions than Dittrich’s Dread dimension.

The 11-Factor Studerus questionnaire might be smaller by 7 effects questions than the Dittrich OAV questionnaire.

Found Major Basic Counting Errors and Academic Research Errors in both Griffiths’ CEQ Article and Studerus’ 11-Factor Article: How Question 54 Got Foolishly Dropped

omg 8:30 pm Dec 27 2022 I just found ANOTHER clue and a mistake: it’s 17, not 13! Griffiths 2016 page 4 right column.

Make that, a whole nest of interconnected mistakes in Studerus, and then in Griffiths.

Figure S1 – tree hierarchy:
Studerus’ 8 (not 6) Anxiety effects questions initially copied from
Dittrich’s “Angst of/ Dread of Ego Dissolution” (AED/DED) dimension, and
9 (not 7) “Impaired control and cognition” effects questions initially copied from Dittrich’s “Dread” dimension.
Ignore the “1” item in between, from Dittrich’s G-ASC General dimension.
Counting & addition skills contributed by Cybermonk, Christmas 2022

Marked in orange above – just like the Default Mode Network part of the brain – here are the four “Angst of/ Dread of Ego Dissolution” questions that were dropped by Studerus in the final version of their 11-Factor revision of Dittrich’s OAV/ 5D-ASC questionnaire:

#54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

#12. I felt tormented.

#62. Everything around me was happening so fast that I could no longer follow what was going on.

#41. My body seemed to me numb, dead and weird.

For example, those questions are missing from Studerus page 9 Figure 1 (final factors’/ categories’ questions), which Griffiths likely worked off of as a starting point to try to represent Dittrich’s “Angst/Dread” dimension questions – after Studerus had already removed 24% of the Dread questions.

I have now managed to deduce and explain how, incredibly, the key question got dropped, question 54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

I found who removed it, when, and why, and how Griffiths failed to see this question when picking questions from 3 questionnaires to form his Initial Item Pool.

That’s distinct from explaining Griffiths’ insanely aggressive reduction from 66 to 24 items when defining the final CEQ. “Since I’m adding a bunch of negative questions, which Studerus won’t like, I better remove 10 of Studerus’ 13 questions.”

The “13” effect questions are those that remain from the 17 questions in Dittrich’s Dread dimension, but Griffiths is only aware of the 13 subset, not the 17 full set, because Griffiths isn’t working from Dittrich’s source specs, but from the downstream final result after Studerus has already whittled-down the Dread questions.

The 13 items of the 5DASC[sic; 5D-ASC] that constitute the [final version of the] ICC and ANX sub-scales were retained for the initial item pool for the CEQ.
Griffiths 2016 page 4 right column.

“The 13 [not 17???] items [questions] of the 5DASC [5D-ASC] that constitute the [final] ICC and ANX sub-scales [sub-categories of psychedelics effects questions] were retained for the initial item pool [of 64 challenging-effects questions from 3 questionnaires (5D, SOCQ, HRS)] for the CEQ.” – Griffiths 2016 CEQ article.

Key Question: How Many Effects/Questions Are in Dittrich’s 1994 or 2006 “Dread of Ego Dissolution” Dimension?

You can handle a simple count question, right, Griffiths? right, Johns Hopkins?

But you counted wrong, from the wrong, downstream, corrupted, modified subset of the Dread dimension’s questions!

Griffiths says Dread — known as the “bad-trip” sub-scale – has 13 questions.

But actually, per Studerus end of page 8 + Figure S1, it’s evident that (after correcting Studerus’ own mistakes in basic counting) Dread — before Studerus reduced it, has 17 effects/ questions, not just 13.

And one of the questions that got dropped along the way (to improve the psychometrics math to give a better fit by removing cross-category and ambiguous effects questions), is #54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

🤦‍♂️ 🙈

🏥 🍽 🐉

See Figure S1, count the questions in Anxiety (8) and in Impaired Control (9), which correspond to Dittrich’s “Dread/Anxiety of Ego Dissolution” dimension, the ‘A’ in “OAV”. 8+9= 17 effects question items, not 13. The four dropped Dread dimension items that Griffiths failed to consider adding to his Initial Item Pool are:

Anxiety:

54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

12. I felt tormented.

Impaired Control and Cognition:

62. Everything around me was happening so fast that I could no longer follow what was going on.

41. My body seemed to me numb, dead and weird.

They Can’t Even Count! 😅

How many questions are in Dread dimension? 13 – or, 17?! It’s 17, not 13.

Griffiths Doesn’t Start from the Full Set of Dittrich’s 17 “Dread” Questions, but Is Working only with Studerus’ Culled Subset of 13 ICC+ANX Questions

Dittrichs’ actual Dread dimension contains 17 questions, which got arbitrarily reduced to 13 during Studerus’ forming the ICC+ANX subcategories that strive to REPLACE the Dread category.

Studerus removes questions during the course of subdividing categories! Not merely from the factor categories, but from the entire questionnaire!

Griffiths didn’t start from Dittrich’s full set of 17 Dread questions, or from Studerus’ Figure S1 which shows all 17 — he started from the bastardized, corrupted, trimmed-down by 24% subset (Studerus’ Figure 1, p. 9) of only 13 questions that Studerus retained from Dittrich’s Dread dimension.

So, Griffiths looks at the questions in the final “factor” categories after Studerus is done removing all 17 General G-ASC questions and removing 7 of the Dimension questions, including removing 4 of the ICC+ANX questions (now forming a subset of the Dread dimension’s questions) and picks from only that set of 42 questions that end up remaining in the shrunken Studerus factor categories, NOT starting from the full set of Dittrich’s 17 Dread questions or 49 total questions, when picking questions for Griffiths’ Initial Item Pool.

There should have been at least 67, not 66 questions, in Griffiths’ Initial Item Pool: add back in the key Question 54 which Studerus removed.

Question for Studerus: What happens to the 7 – which you wrongly count as 5 – factor-member items which you remove? Do they leave the questionnaire or do they get moved to the General dimension?

🦗 🦗

You removed the 7 questions from the 11-Factor version of Dittrich’s questionnaire entirely, didn’t you?

End of Studerus 2010 page 8: “the dropped items (# 12, 39, 41, 48, and 54)” – you mean, “the dropped items (# 12, 39, 41, 48, 54, 61, and 62)”.

Studerus, where did you put these 7 (not 5) effects questions that you dropped – are you entirely removing Dittrich’s standard questions from your version of his questionnaire? Did you MOVE them to G-ASC General dimension, or did you put them in Wouter Hanegraaff’s Rejected wastebasket?

🐉 –> 🗑

So, since Griffiths only drew questions from the Dread dimension – or worse, only from the shrunken-by-4 ICC + ANX factors that Dread was broken into, Griffiths only pulled from Studerus’ final 13 ICC+ANX factor questions, NOT from Dittrich’s 17 Dread questions.

Notice the slop in Griffiths’ wording, next to his typo “5DASC”:
“The 13 items of the 5DASC that constitute the ICC and ANX sub-scales were retained for the initial item pool for the CEQ.”
should read:
“The 17 items of the 5D-ASC questionnaire’s Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED) dimension, from which Studerus’ 13 items in Studerus’ final version of the ICC and ANX sub-scales were drawn, were retained for the initial item pool for the CEQ.”
or, should have written:
“The 13 out of 17 items of the 5D-ASC that constitute Studerus’ final ICC and ANX sub-scales were retained for the initial item pool for the CEQ.”
Griffiths 2016 page 4 right column.

But Griffiths failed to Go To The Sources, so he missed considering 4 of Dittrich’s Dread questions, when picking questions from 3 questionnaires for the Initial Item Pool – that’s how Griffiths failed to include Dittrichs’ item “54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

Studerus doesn’t MOVE the 7 questions from factor categories into the G-ASC General category – Studerus REMOVES ENTIRELY the 7 “dropped items”.

Either way, Griffiths wouldn’t see them, since Griffiths only drew questions from the ICC & ANX Studerus factor categories – not directly from Dittrich’s upstream complete Dread dimension, nor from Studerus’ General G-ASC questions.

Regardless of whether Studerus removed the 7 questions or moved them to General, either way, Griffiths wouldn’t see them.

Griffiths needed to start from Studerus’ Figure S1 tree hierarchy, which was still faithful to Dittrich’s Dread category, or start from Dittrich’s mythological 1994 OAV or 2006/2010 5D-ASC articles which don’t actually exist, and are the authoritative sources.

I don’t think Griffiths has Dittrich’s OAV but he’s using a corrupted subset provided by Studerus, which is easier to get than Dittrich’s nonexistent, mythological articles.

ICC = impaired control and cognition, a “factor” broken out from Dittrich’s “Anxiety/Dread of ego dissolution” dimension by Studerus 2010.

ANX = anxiety, a “factor” (category of effects questions) broken out from Dittrich’s “Anxiety/Dread of ego dissolution” dimension by Studerus 2010.

Studerus 2010 in one figure, only, the Figure S1 tree hierarchy, shows not 13 questions but 17, including THE question, #54.

There, only, Studerus lists not 6 questions in the Anxiety factor (category), but 8 (?!) questions, including THE question, 54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control”.

Where did this question 54 come from or go to? Does the question exist, or not?

Evidently Griffiths didn’t have that question when picking the Initial Pool of 64 questions from 3 questionnaires.

2nd best: give me URLs for German language original Dittrich articles 1994 and 2006.

The 2006 article’s English translation is Dittrich 2010, subtitled like “Short Intro to 5D-ASC”. I couldn’t find it.

It’s 2022, and these “scientific” articles are impossible to find on the World-Wide Web.

Hypothesis: Griffiths Failed to Go to the Source, Dittrich’s Articles, but Relied on Studerus 2010 Article, Which in Figure 1 Entirely Removed Question 54 and 6 others from Dittrich’s OAV Dimensions (Figure S1 Tree Hierarchy)

I’ve found/ identified/ collected about 10 errors now in Griffiths 2016 & Studerus 2010, which support this hypothesis.

If Griffiths had made his initial item pool of “66” questions by pulling from Dittrich’s ACTUAL OAV 1994 questions or from Dittrich’s three OAV dimensions of 5D-ASC 2006 (German)/ 2010 (English), then given the decent judgment that Griffiths shows during making the initial item pool, Griffiths would certainly have included OAV question 54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

I propose that Griffiths did not work off Dittrich’s 1994 or 2006/2010 document, questionnaire spec’n, and didn’t work off of Figure S1 which Studerus said was preliminary, but rather, Griffiths drew from only the final OAV questions that Studerus included in page 9 Figure 1.

Griffiths, given that you brag about your whole objecting being to define a questionnaire that focuses only on, and focuses on all of, the challenging psychedelics effects, don’t you think you should have picked your Initial Item Pool questions from all 17 of Dittrich’s Dread dimension items, rather than merely starting from “all 13” of Studerus’ ICC+ANX items that remained after Studerous had already discarded 4 out of Dittrich’s 17 effects items (24%)?

If Griffiths had drawn from the lists of questions from Dittrich 1994 or 2006/2010, or had drawn from Studerus’ Figure S1 tree hierarchy, then Griffiths would have included in the initial item pool not “all 13 ” but rather ALL 17 questions that are actually – I glean – in the 1994 or 2006/2010 “Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED)” aka “Anxious Ego Dissolution (AED)” dimension.

Dittrich A, Lamparter D and Maurer M
2010
5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the Assessment Of Altered States of Consciousness. A Short Introduction.
Zürich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

The 13[sic; 17] items of the 5DASC that constitute the ICC and ANX sub-scales were retained for the initial item pool for the CEQ.
Griffiths 2016 page 4 right column.

More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 End Omits 2 Questions (61 & 62)

The list of 5 removed category questions at end of page 8 is wrong, it should list 7 removed items, including #61 in “Bliss” and #62 in ICC factors/ categories:

“Because the dropped items (# 12, 39, 41, 48, and 54) had been …”
should read:
“Because the dropped items (# 12, 39, 41, 48, 54, 61, and 62) had been …”

That’s regarding foolishly removing the all-important question 54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 Gets Count of Tree’s Factor Member Items Wrong (It’s 49, not 47)

“The model revision led to a final model that still contained the same number of factors, but a slightly lower number of items (42 instead of 47).”
is wrong, should read:
“The model revision led to a final model that still contained the same number of factors, but a slightly lower number of items (42 instead of 49).”

Paragraph Containing Those Errors

Studerus 2010 page 8 end:

“By applying the criteria defined in the method section, 11 item clusters formed from 47[sic; 49] of the 66 original items were detected and used for initial CFA model specification.

“The ICLUST tree diagram and the item clusters that were used for the initial CFA model are shown in Fig. S1 (for the ICLUST tree diagram based on the categorized variables see Fig. S2).

“As the model fit of the initial CFA model was not sufficient according to the CFI and TLI indexes (see Table 2), we tried to improve model fit by dropping items [eg. question 54] showing large modification indexes for cross-loadings and ambiguous item wordings.”

[Why did you remove specifically question 54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control”?
Did you think it cross-loaded and fit into multiple of your 11 “factor” categories?
Did you think it was ambiguous?]

“The model revision led to a final model that still contained the same number of factors, but a slightly lower number of items (42 instead of 47[sic; 49]).

“Because the dropped items (# 12, 39, 41, 48, and 54[sic; 54, 61, and 62]) had been mostly assigned to different factors, the model revision did not lead to a major change in the interpretation of any factor.”

(all we did was merely improve the psychedelic effects by removing effect question 54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control” — NO BIG DEAL)

“Figure 1 [p. 9; not Figure S1 tree hierarchy] shows the factorial structure of the final model, including the [final] names that we gave to the 11 factors and the fully standardized loadings and error variances.

“The correlations between the latent factors as well as their associations with the original OAV scales are shown in Table 3.

“Although the CFI and TLI of this final CFA model were still slightly below the recommend cutoffs, the RMSEA and the SRMR indicated excellent model fit (see Table 2).”

All we had to do to accomplish this excellent model fit into our Procrustean bed was remove 7 questions, including #54: I was afraid to lose my self-control. 👍

🚫🐉

References

Griffiths 2016 CEQ article

Griffiths’ CEQ article; the article that develops and presents the CEQ:

The Challenging Experience Questionnaire: Characterization of challenging experiences with psilocybin mushrooms
https://www.academia.edu/33760114/The_Challenging_Experience_Questionnaire_Characterization_of_challenging_experiences_with_psilocybin_mushrooms
Frederick Barrett, Matthew Bradstreet, Jeannie-Marie Leoutsakos, Matthew Johnson, Roland Griffiths
2016

Studerus 2010 article breaking 3 dimensions into 11 factors

Studerus 2010 article breaking 3 “dimensions” (ignoring General) into 11 “factors”: Oceanic into 4, Anxiety/Dread into 2, Visionary into 5.

Proposes 11 dimensions for the OAV or 5D-ASC (ignoring 2 later dimensions not relevant). Shows 17 q’s in Dread dimension, question 54 is in Studerus’ Anxiety sub-category of Dittrich’s Anxiety/Dread dimension.

Fig S1 shows q 54 I was afraid to lose my self-control. Fig 1 lacks q54, and shows only 13 q’s in Dread dimension.

Erich Studerus, Alex Gamma, Franz X. Vollenweider
2010
Psychometric evaluation of the altered states of consciousness rating scale (OAV)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2930851/
SEE Figure S1 tree hierarchy diagram:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2930851/bin/pone.0012412.s001.pdf
This tree diagram Figure S1 is THE BEST VIEW OF THE OAV QUESTIONS WITHIN CATEGORIES I’ve found so far, and general G-ASC questions as well.
In that diagram, you have to know that:
“Unpleasant” = the Dread dimension of Dittrich’s OAV, and that
“Pleasant” = the Ocean & Visionary dimensions of Dittrich’s OAV.
Ocean was broken into 4 factors, and,
Visionary broken into 5 factors, by Studerus.

Dittrich 1994 OAV specification in German

Bodmer I, Dittrich A, Lamparter D
1994
Aussergewo¨hnliche Bewusstseinszusta¨nde – Ihre gemeinsame Struktur und Messung
[Altered states of consciousness – Their common structure and assessment]
In: Hofmann A, Leuner H, eds. Welten des Bewusstseins. Bd. 3, Experimentelle Psychologie, Neurobiologie und Chemie.
Berlin, Germany: VWB. pp 45–58.

Worlds of Consciousness

Bodmer, I., Dittrich, A. & Lamparter, D. in Welten des Bewusstseins. Bd. 3 (eds. Hofmann, A. & Leuner, H.) 45–58 (Experimentelle Psychologie, Neurobiologie und Chemie., 1994).

Welten des Bewußtseins, Bd.3 – https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Adolf-Dittrich/dp/3861354020/

Band 2 (1993):

url https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Adolf-Dittrich/dp/3861354012

Dittrich 1996

Dittrich, A
1996
A¨tiologie-unabha¨ngige Strukturen vera¨ nderter Wachbewusstseinszusta ¨nde.Ergebnisse empirischer Untersuchungen u¨ber Halluzinogene I. und II. Ordnung, sensorische Deprivation, hypnagoge Zusta¨nde, hypnotische Verfahren sowie Reizu¨berflutung
[Etiology-independent structures of altered states of consciousness. Results of empirical studies on hallucinogens of the first and second order, sensory deprivation, hypnagogic states, hypnotic procedures, and sensory overload]. Berlin, Germany: VWB.

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/5d-asc-five-dimensional-altered-states-of-consciousness-questionnaire/#OAV-History

Dittrich 1994 OAV specification in English

Dittrich 2006 5D-ABZ specification in German

6. Dittrich, A, Lamparter, D, Maurer, M (2006)
5D-ABZ: Fragebogen zur Erfassung Aussergewo¨hnlicher Bewusstseinszusta¨nde. Eine kurze Einfu¨hrung
[5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the assessment of altered states of consciousness. A short introduction]. Zurich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

ScienceOpen has a bare entry:
url https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=5c0a44be-3de4-42e3-b197-f835f9b724d4 –

5D-ABZ: Fragebogen zur Erfassung Aussergewhnlicher Bewusstseinszustnde. Eine kurze Einfhrung
[5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the assessment of altered states of consciousness. A short introduction], volume 3rd ed
Author(s): V. DITTRICH, D Lamparter, M Maurer
Publication date: 2006

Dittrich, A., Lamparter, D., and Maurer, M. (2006).
5D-ABZ: Fragebogen zur Erfassung Aussergewöhnlicher Bewusstseinszustände. Eine kurze Einführung
[5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the Assessment of Altered States of Consciousness. A Short Introduction].
Zürich: PSIN PLUS Publications.

Dittrich, A., Lamparter, D. & Maurer, M. 5D-ABZ: Fragebogen zur Erfassung Aussergewöhnlicher Bewusstseinszustände. Eine kurze Einführung [5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the assessment of altered states of consciousness. A short introduction]. (2006).

WANTED: Dittrich 2010 English article “5D-ASC … A Short Introduction”

Dittrich A, Lamparter D and Maurer M
2010
5D-ASC: Questionnaire for the Assessment Of Altered States of Consciousness. A Short Introduction.
Zürich, Switzerland: PSIN PLUS.

This is the #1 article to find, this English translation by Dittrich of the 2006 original German article by Dittrich.

This is merely a derivative subset, questions only; no dimensions specified: https://www.researchgate.net/file.PostFileLoader.html?id=562e5e0b6307d9997c8b45a4&assetKey=AS:288852905349121@1445879307530 – contains “79. I was afraid of losing control over myself.”
“Translation from the original German by Felix Hasler and Rael Cahn”.

That PDF has no Dimensions/ Factors/ categories of questions, and can’t trust the question numbering or wording.

I need the Dittrich English 2010 translation or even the German original 2006 article with the categories, and specific questions in the specific categories, including General (G-ASC) category/dimension — not some derivative questions-only subset that’s dubious. How did Hasler & Cahn obtain the 2006 German original article by Dittrich? Why didn’t they use Dittrich’s own English translation in 2010?

Impossible to find on the web. I couldn’t even find a trace of this article’s existence, in article databases – other than references to it in other articles.

Do you have to buy Dittrich dinner to get a personal, secret copy of this nonexistent, rumored, mythical “science” article?

“Psychometrically Improved”
from 😱🐉 to 🦄🌈

Translation: “psychometrically improved” = we puffed up the Ocean & Visionary unicorns & rainbows categories to try to give the false impression that they contain as many questions as the too-dominant Dread dragon effects category.

DON’T CARE, LOSING FOCUS, LOST THE PLOT:
“The BETA questionnaire, which measures the dimensions “Vigilance Reduction (VIR)” and “Auditive Alteration (AVE)” is also available in German. These dimensions are most likely etiology-dependent.”

Another entry for Dittrich’s 1998 article about 1994 OAV questionnaire:
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-06236-004
Dittrich, A. (1998). The standardized psychometric assessment of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) in humans. Pharmacopsychiatry, 31(Suppl 2), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-979351
Again, has PDF, requires registering, maybe payment.

1. Dittrich A (1998) The standardized psychometric assessment of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) in humans. Pharmacopsychiatry 31: 80–84. 10.1055/s- 2007-979351.

url https://orbiscascade-washington.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_73934771&context=PC&vid=01ALLIANCE_UW:UW&lang=en&search_scope=UW_EVERYTHING&adaptor=Primo%20Central&tab=UW_default&query=any,contains,Questionnaire%20for%20the%20Assessment%20Of%20Altered%20States%20of%20Consciousness

From Studerus 2010 References

The original 1975 APZ:
2. Dittrich A (1975) Zusammenstellung eines Fragebogens (APZ) zur Erfassung abnormer psychischer Zusta¨nde
[Construction of a questionnaire (APZ) for assessing abnormal mental states]. Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother 23: 12–20.

Identifies the 1975 initial inadequate O, A, V dimensions w/ too few questions:
3. Dittrich A (1985) A ¨ tiologie-unabha¨ngige Strukturen vera¨nderter Wachbewusstseinszusta ¨nde. Ergebnisse empirischer Untersuchungen u¨ber Halluzinogene I. und II. Ordnung, sensorische Deprivation, hypnagoge Zusta¨nde, hypnotische Verfahren sowie Reizu¨berflutung [Etiology-independent structures of altered states of consciousness. Results of empirical studies on hallucinogens of the first and second order, sensory deprivation, hypnagogic states, hypnotic procedures, and sensory overload]. Stuttgart, Germany: Enke.

New Database Article about the Altered States Database (ASDB), a WordPress-Powered Database Site

This article and db WordPress site could have leads. It names the 11 factor scheme. But there I found plain-text citations, only, for Dittrichs’ questionnaire specification publications.

url https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-022-01822-4

“In this paper, we present the development of the Altered States Database (ASDB), an open-science project based on a systematic literature review.

“The ASDB contains psychometric questionnaire data on subjective experiences of altered states of consciousness (ASC) induced by pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods.

“The systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

“Scientific journal articles were identified through PubMed and Web of Science.

“We included studies that examined ASC using the following validated questionnaires:
Altered States of Consciousness Rating Scale (APZ, 5D-ASC, 11-ASC),
Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory (PCI),
Hallucinogen Rating Scale (HRS), or
Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ30). [SOCQ contains MEQ43 which is older]
“The systematic review resulted in the inclusion of a total of 165 journal articles, whereof questionnaire data was extracted and is now available on the Open Science Framework (OSF) website (https://osf.io/8mbru) and on the ASDB website (http://alteredstatesdb.org), where questionnaire data can be easily retrieved and visualized.
“This data allows the calculation of comparable psychometric values of ASC experiences and of dose-response relationships of substances inducing ASC.”

“11-ASC” must mean Studerus 2010.

It’s odd that they don’t even mention OAV, before 5D-ASC.
APZ 1975,
OAV 1994,
5D-ASC 2006 (English 2010),
11-ASC 2010.

Their db Info/FAQ page lists:

url http://alteredstatesdb.org/faq/

“Here is some general information on the questionnaires including the origianl[sic] references for further details:

APZ(3D)
5D-ASC(3D-OAV+2D)
5D-ASC (11D + 2D)
HRS
MEQ30
PCI

Those are expanders.

“5D-ASC(3D-OAV+2D) … a total of 94 items” (questions) but no one wants the questions that are in the useless new dimensions “Auditory” and “Reduced Vigilance” – subtract those, to get 72? Unfortunately here they skip over the 1994 OAV.

The expander sections contain some info I wanted: German acronyms:

“Oceanic Boundlesness (OBN): Items (e.g. I had the feeling everything around me was somehow unreal; The boundary between myself and my surroundings seemed to blur; I felt totally free and released from all responsibilities. ) clustered in the OBN dimension measure the positive symptoms of dissolution of boundaries between self and surroundings. In general, they describe common states that can be compared to a mystical experience.
GERMAN: Ozeanische Selbstentgrenzung (OSE).

“Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED): Items (e.g. I had difficulty in distinguishing important from unimportant things; My thinking was constantly being interrupted by insignificant thoughts; My own feelings seemed strange to me, as though they did not belong to me. ) clustered in the DED dimension measure the negative symptoms of dissolution of boundaries between self and surroundings. The common state depicted by this list of items can be interpreted as an experience of depersonalization. Alternative naming:
Anxious Ego Dissolution (AED),
[an ‘A’ acronym is nice instead of ‘D’ bc part of acronym OAV]
GERMAN: Angstvolle Ichauflösung (AIA)

“Visual restructuralization (VRS): Items (e.g. I saw lights or flashes of light in total darkness or with closed eyes; I saw scenes rolling by like in a film in total darkness or with my eyes closed; Objects around me engaged me emotionally much more than usual.) clustered in the VRS dimension measure both changes in perception as well as in imagination.
GERMAN: Visionäre Umstrukturierung (VUS)

Studerus’ Email Address

In Studerus 2010: erich.studerus bli.uzh.ch

Pls give me Dittrich 2010 pdf thx

Dragon Right Leg Branching Message Mushroom Tree in Bodleian Manuscript

12:15 noon Christmas 2022: The dragon’s left wing tip touches the branching part of the mushroom tree; the artist considers the left wing as a branching limb, same as the dragon’s left foot, which touches the branching part of the branching-message mushroom tree.

The dragon’s right leg, I previously noted, like in the salamander image, touches (affirms, asserts) the nonbranching part of the tree.

Earlier today, I recognized that the shield protects the left, vulnerable leg from the dragon serpent fire.

The right leg is immune and can endure the fire of the Psilocybin altered state, the control loss threat capability.

The cloak is white spots on red, which is Amanita-themed.

The tree could be considered a hybrid of Amanita on the left and psilocybin on the right.

The loop in this context, or spiral, refers to how the mind in paranoid style is attracted and drawn into the vortex, like a maelstrom, the attractive control vortex.

The sirens attract the steersman sailor pilots to their death on the rocks.

Standing on right leg = lifting left leg; this means relying on eternalism-thinking, the non-branching model of possibilities – instead of relying on the branching possibilities model with open future that the steersman agent creates (naive possibilism-thinking, which is perishable & vulnerable to being burned away by transformative psilocybin fire).

The dragon in its rock cave guarding treasure at the fountainhead wellspring of control-thoughts exudes an attractive scent, and we smell this and are attracted to the treasure – with the dragon guarding the treasure from the impure and unworthy.

The funnel hat represents an advanced and high-dose knowledge/ facility/ capability of handling that.

I have explained and posted extensively around March 2022 about the left and right limbs, fire, that which endures psilocybin loose-cognition fire (eternalism-thinking), branching, touching, non-branching, the cut right trunk, etc., for the salamander dancing man image.

On Christmas & Christmas Eve of 2015, I posted my initial analysis of this salamander picture, regarding standing on the right leg: I conjectured that means relying on eternalism-thinking.

Post 7442 Christmas Eve: https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-144/#message7442

7454 Christmas 2015: https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-144/#message7454

7459 🎉 On Christmas 2015, seven years ago, I decoded “left leg = possibilism-thinking, right leg = eternalism-thinking” – https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-145/#message7459

The Egodeath Yahoo Group (the Max Freakout archive) is awesome content as always.

Across posts, you can see my hypothesis progressively come into view and develop towards the theory of {relying on right leg} equals eternalism-thinking.

The big confirmation of that hypothesis is the fact that in Nov. 2020, that interpretation successfully acted as the key to coherently decode the Eadwine image.

Around April 2022, the {legs/ limbs and handedness} theory was further confirmed by my recognizing and decoding the first and last pictures in my 2006 main article regarding {handedness} and {branching} diagrammatic morphology motifs.

Thomas Hatsis caught Carl Ruck incorrectly saying that the dancing man tree has a red cap, showing the overemphasis of Carl Ruck on only looking for Amamita.

I wondered how could Samorini possibly put this green mushroom cap into his amanita column?

I asked: does Samorini only have the black and white, and he’s just guessing?

Apparently Carl Ruck was guessing based on Samorini’s black and white article photographs, and he guessed wrong, and Hatsis caught Ruck on that color error.

Ruck puts far too much weight on the colors red and white – we need to do better than that.

Handedness (favoring {right limb}) and {branching vs. non-branching} themes are profoundly sophisticated and elegant descriptions of long-term multi-session mushroom effects, a relevant type of evidence of mushroom imagery.

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/defining-compelling-evidence-criteria-of-proof-for-mushrooms-in-christian-art/

Relying on right leg for stable control:

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/06/29/hatsis-gallery-of-mushroom-imagery-in-christian-art/

Thomas Hatsis’ pages show images of dancing man and dragon.

They’re not on the same article page from him.

I wouldn’t expect him to recognize the shared morphology of these images, as I have identified and fully explained.

I do not operate from a basis of being an entheogen scholar.

I operate from a basis of a theorist of mental model transformation, and then I enter into the field afterwards of entheogen scholarship to correct its blindnesses and errors.

Hatsis has the exact wrong inclination: he is inclined to give the text priority, and let the text dictate how he reads the image.

But the images are the primary thing, actually.

Ignore the text narrative storyline, and just look at the image, from a branching morphology point of view, and a handedness point of view.

— Cybermonk, Christmas 2022 🍄🎄

Ardent Mushroom Advocates Membership Test 🎅🦌🛷🎁🎄🍄👶✝️

If you think, with Jan Irvin and John Rush, that the St. Walburga tapestry refers in any way to Amanita, then you are – I’m sorry to have to deliver the bad diagnosis – a member of the Ardent Advocates.

And the problem is much worse than just a single piece of art: by proxy, you are suffering from the delusion that all mushroom imagery in religious, mystical, and esoteric art is intended by the artist to force upon you a mushroom impression.

Panofsky’s sekrit 2nd letter to Wasson, published by Browns 2019

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/05/11/erwin-panofskys-secret-pair-of-letters-to-gordon-wasson-exposed/

🍄🍄 You are suffering from the hallucinogen-induced delusion that sensible, moderate Dr. Brown warned against: 🍄 you’re suffering from seeing mushrooms everywhere. 🍄

🍄 Seek help: get professional 🍄 psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy.

url https://compasspathways.com

🏥 🍽 🐉

compasspathways.com

Merry Amanita Christmas!

🎅🦌🛷🎁🎄🍄👶✝️

url 🍄 https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/20/merry-amanita-christmas/

2019 article from Dr. Brown warning against the dangers of being a member of the Ardent Advocates: https://www.academia.edu/40312824/Entheogens_in_Christian_art_Wasson_Allegro_and_the_Psychedelic_Gospels

🍄 url https://www.amazon.com/Psychedelic-Gospels-History-Hallucinogens-Christianity/dp/1620555026 🍄

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/06/29/hatsis-gallery-of-mushroom-imagery-in-christian-art/

🦵🛡🦵🔥🐉🍄🎄🎁

🍄🎄 https://www.bing.com/search?q=Amanita+Christmas 🍄🎄

🍄🎄– Cybermonk 🍄, Christmas 2022 🍄🎄🎁

Psychedelic Questionnaires’ Effects Questions (and Categories) Mapped to Egodeath Theory’s Explanatory Concept Categories

_{Site Map}

Contents:

Objective
Effects Classification vs. Explanatory System
- Specialized Narrow Scope of the Egodeath Theory Concepts, Scope of Explanandum Domain
How All the Questionnaires’ Questions Fit into the Egodeath Theory’s Core Concepts Categories
OAV Categories of Psychedelic Effects
- Dittrich Inflated the Ocean and Visionary Dimensions to Force them to Be as Big as the Anxiety/Dread Dimension
SOCQ/MEQ Categories of Psychedelic Effects
HRS Categories of Psychedelic Effects
Walter Stace 1961 Categories of Mystical Experiences
- Stace’s List of Mystical Effects Doesn’t Match the Reported Mystics’ Data Archive; Provides an Unscientific Basis for Questionnaires, Failing to Account for Challenging Experiences

Objective

To speed science forward at maximum velocity towards the heart of the Shadow and beyond through the black hole gate 🌌 I am mapping the core concepts categories of the Egodeath Theory to the main psychedelic effects questionnaires – all very Sciency. 😑

🍄 ☸️🚀🌌💥🚪🎄🍄

url https://youtu.be/4MlYgt-QdMI

The actual mapping is tbd.

Effects Classification vs. Explanatory System

The focal items in the Egodeath theory are underlying mechanisms that produce resulting effects.

The Egodeath theory is a system of explanatory constructs to explain the resulting isolated effects. Or at least some of the effects.

The Egodeath theory’s Core Concepts catalog is a classification and inventory of concepts and explanatory constructs, not an inventory of raw individual psychedelic effects.

The altered states questionnaires list the effects; the Egodeath theory lists the causes or explanatory constructs to model and explain certain of those effects.

The Egodeath theory is not scoped to be a wide comprehensive inventory of all loose cognitive psilocybin effects.

The Egodeath theory Core Concepts are a selected subset of all loose cognitive psilocybin effects.

The scope of Josie Kins’ Cognitive Effects Database is a partial overlap with the Egodeath theory. https://effectindex.com

“Effect Index … is a resource dedicated to establishing the field of formalised subjective effect documentation. It is the home of the Subjective Effect Index (SEI), which contains 233 effect descriptions that exist to serve as a comprehensive map of all potential experiences that can occur under the influence of any class of psychoactive compound, particularly hallucinogens.”

I object: SEI jumbles two conflicting objectives. All psychoactives, vs. classic psychedelics.

The “effect” which is not usually spotted by a simple inventory of newbie effects is the transformation from naive possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

Conventional discussion talks in terms of predictions, immediate acute effects, then long-term outcome/ effects.

That’s not same as the mental model transformation during the altered state, from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

Specialized Narrow Scope of the Egodeath Theory Concepts, Scope of Explanandum Domain

The Egodeath theory focuses only on classic psychedelics effects that relate to the Egodeath theory.

The Egodeath theory explains:

The actual nature of ego transcendence.
The concept of tight cognitive vs. loose cognitive binding.
Mental model transformation in the loosecog state.
The concept of the personal control system, the contrast between the possibilism vs eternalism mental world models.
How mythology describes by analogy the experiences of the altered state, and the transformative experiences trajectory, not merely the isolated effects.

The Egodeath theory focuses only on Psilocybin; classic psychedelic effects, only.

The range of beginner unity consciousness effects is not an interest/ explanatory domain of the Egodeath theory, except to contrast beginners’ “ego dissolution” vs. advanced control-transgression/ “ego death”/ the mental worldmodel transformation process from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

Dittrich sought to identify categories of altered-state effects across different ways of inducing altered states.

The Egodeath theory only covers classic psychedelics’ effects, and doesn’t cover all psychedelics effects, but only the most profound transformation effects.

The Egodeath theory is not equally interested in all psychedelic effects. The Egodeath theory is more a model of Transcendent Knowledge than a model of psychedelics effects.

The Egodeath theory contains enough description of loosecog meta-perception to enable describing mental model transformation about control, time, and possibilities; to model personal control agency operating in a world.

Alleged non-drug mystic experiencing per Dittrich’s 1975 APZ inventory, or per meditation or hyperventilation, is not of interest to the Egodeath theory.

That’s a difference of motivation between the APZ/ OAV/ 5D/ 11 Factors questionnaire vs. the Egodeath theory.

Strassman’s HRS is more focused on specifically psychedelics effects, although ideally the focus should be limited to classic psychedelics.

SOCQ (including MEQ) is centered around a misrepresentation of alleged (imagined, fantasized) non-drug mystic-state experiences.

How All the Questionnaires’ Questions Fit into the Egodeath Theory’s Core Concepts Categories

Strategy

First, list all 300 questions from the 3 questionnaires, and for each question, write what sort of Egodeath theory core concept that is.

Stay loose at first; don’t assume I’m using the 13 Core Concepts page categories.

I’m not using just the 4 Categories in the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ) (which were negative only, merely a a subset of the questionnaires’ inventories).

~~Start with the Core Concepts categories, then take the 300 effects questions and the categories from the 3 questionnaires (OAV, SOCQ, HRS), and place them within the Core Concepts categories.~~

Studerus (2010) retains all of Dittrich’s OAV (1994) questions, but gets rid of (or subdivides) Dittrich’s 3 dimensions/ categorization/ grouping scheme, and provides his own set of 11 Factors (question categories).

The Egodeath theory does the same – provides its own set of categories in which to place all of the OAV (1994) & SOCQ & HRS effects questions:

ignoring OAV’s 3 categories

ignoring Studerus’ 11 categories

ignoring HRS’ 6 categories

ignoring SOCQ’s 7 categories.

Egodeath Theory Core Concept Categories

The 13 high-level groups of core concepts.

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/17/glossary-for-the-egodeath-theory/

Categories in the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ)

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/eternalism-and-control-transformation-effects-in-the-psychedelics-effects-questionnaires/

High-Level Mapping of Dittrich’s Ocean/ Anxiety/ Visionary Dimensions to Egodeath Theory Core Concepts Categories

Equivalents

Block-universe eternalism = Oceanic Boundlessness.

Control Seizure = Anxiety/Dread.

Loose cognitive association binding/ Mental construct processing/ mental model transformation = Visionary Restructuralization.

Equivalents

Ocean ~= Eternalism.

Anxiety/Dread ~= Non-control.

Visionary ~= Loose cognitive state for mental model transformation.

All of the Questions from the 3 Questionnaires, and the Egodeath Theory Concept Category

todo: line-wrap the 2nd line of each item, specifying the category.
n/a means not part of my experiential lexicon and explanatory model.

A melody occurred to me that I had to constantly repeat.

A rush.

A sound or sounds accompanying the experience.

A voice commented on everything I thought although no one was there.

Able to “let go”.
levels of control

Able to focus attention.

Able to follow the sequence of events.

Able to move around if asked to.

Able to remind yourself of being in a clinical room, being administered a drug, the temporary nature of the experience.

Amount of time between when the drug was administered and feeling an effect.

Anxious.

Awareness of the life or living presence in all things.

Awe, Amazement.

Being in a realm with no space boundaries.

Bodily sensations were very enjoyable.

Body feels different.

Certainty of encounter with ultimate reality (in the sense of being able to “know” and “see” what is really real ) at some time during your session.

Change in “amount” of emotions.

Change in body temperature.

Change in brightness of objects in room.

Change in distinctiveness of sounds.

Change in effort of breathing.

Change in feelings of closeness to people in room.

Change in quality of thinking.

Change in rate of thinking.

Change in rate of time passing.
eternalism

Change in salivation.
n/a

Change in sense of body weight.
n/a

Change in sense of sanity.
loose cog, transgressing control, mental model transformation

Change in skin sensitivity.
n/a

Change in strength of sense of self.
levels of control, mental model transformation

Change in visual distinctiveness of objects in room.

Conflict and contradictions seem to dissolve.
n/a

Conflicts and contradictions seemed to dissolve.
n/a

Contradictory feelings at the same time.

Convincing feeling of contact with people who have died.

Desire for the experience regularly.

Difference in brightness of visions compared to usual daylight vision.

Difference in feeling of reality of experiences compared to everyday experience.

Dimensionality of images.
meta perception, loose cog

Dreamlike nature of the experiences.

Electric /tingling feeling.

Emotional and/or physical suffering.

Emotions seem different than usual.

Euphoria.

Everyday things gained a special meaning.

Everything around me seemed to be animated with life.

Everything happened so fast that I could not follow it all.

Everything seemed to unify into an oneness.
eternalism

Excited.

Experience of a paradoxical awareness that two apparently opposite principles or situations are both true.

Experience of amazement.

Experience of antagonism toward people around you.
n/a

Experience of confusion, disorientation and/or chaos.
mental model transformation

Experience of ecstasy.

Experience of fear.

Experience of isolation and loneliness.

Experience of meaninglessness and absurdity of life.

Experience of oneness in relation to an “inner world” within.
eternalism

Experience of oneness or unity with objects and/or persons perceived in your surroundings.
eternalism

Experience of overflowing energy.
n/a

Experience of physical distress (e.g. nausea, vomiting, sweating, rapid heartbeat, etc.).
n/a

Experience of pure Being and pure awareness (beyond the world of sense impressions).

Experience of repulsive biological material.

Experience of the fusion of your personal self into a larger whole.
eternalism

Experience of the insight that “all is One”.
eternalism

Experience of timelessness.
eternalism

Experience of unity with ultimate reality.

Experiences of intense pressures on various parts of your body.

Eyes open visual field vibrating or jiggling.

Fear that you might lose your mind or go insane.
loosecog, non-control

Feel as if moving falling flying through space
.

Feel body shake or tremble.
n/a

Feel isolated from people and things.

Feel like laughing.
n/a, loose cog

Feel of oneness with universe.
eternalism

Feel presence of a numinous force, higher power, God.

Feel reborn.
mental model transformation

Feel removed detached separated from body.

Feeling of being rejected or unwanted.

Feeling of disintegration, falling apart.
loosecog mental model transformation

Feeling that it would be difficult to communicate your own experience to others who have not had similar experiences.
mental model transformation

Feeling that people were plotting against you.

Feeling that the consciousness experienced during part of the session was more real than your normal awareness of everyday reality.

Feeling that you could not do justice to your experience by describing it in words.

Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.

Feeling that you experienced something profoundly sacred and holy.

Feeling that you have been “outside of” history in a realm where time does not exist.

Feelings of anger or aggression.

Feelings of despair.

Feelings of exaltation.

Feelings of grief.

Feelings of guilt.

Feelings of joy.

Feelings of peace and tranquility.

Feelings of tenderness and gentleness.

Feelings of universal or infinite love.

Flushed.

Freedom from the limitations of your personal self and feeling a unity or bond with what was felt to be greater than your personal self.

Frightened.
non-control

From an initially diffuse noise, which I could not identify as real, clear rings and tones evolved.

Frustrating attempt to control the experience.
noncontrol

Gain of insightful knowledge experienced at an intuitive level.

Heard something faintly that I could not identify.
mental model transformation

How soon would you like to repeat the experience?

I could see images from my memory or imagination with extreme clarity.

I could see pictures from my past or fantasy extremely clearly.

I enjoyed boundless pleasure.
n/a

I experienced a kind of awe.
mental model transformation

I experienced a kind of awe.
n/a

I experienced a profound peace in myself.
mental model transformation

I experienced a touch of eternity.
eternalism

I experienced an all-embracing love.
eternalism

I experienced boundless pleasure.

I experienced everything as frighteningly distorted.
meta perception

I experienced everything terrifyingly distorted.
loosecog

I experienced my surroundings as strange and weird.

I experienced past, present and future as an oneness.
eternalism

I experienced profound inner peace.

I experienced unbearable emptiness.
suspension of egoic agency

I felt anxious.

I felt as if dark forces had overtaken me.

I felt as if I no longer had a body.

I felt as if I was floating.

I felt as if I was half-asleep.

I felt as if I were paralyzed.
non-control

I felt as though I were floating.

I felt as though I were paralyzed.
noncontrol

I felt connected to a higher power.

I felt drowsy.
n/a

I felt drunk.

I felt exhausted.

I felt extraordinary powers within myself.
2 levels of control, control agency

I felt high.

I felt I was about to fall asleep.

I felt I was being transformed forever in a miraculous way.

I felt incapable of making even the smallest decision.
the personal control system, personal control agency

I felt isolated from everything and everyone.

I felt like a puppet or marionette.
noncontrol

I felt like I do shortly before falling asleep.

I felt numb.
n/a

I felt one with my surroundings.
spatial block-universe eternalism

I felt sleepy.

I felt that I was in a wonderful other world.
mental model transformation

I felt that I was on the verge of unconsciousness.

I felt threatened.
control transformation; noncontrol

I felt tormented.

I felt totally free and released from all obligations.

I felt very profound.
mental model transformation

I gained clarity into connections that puzzled me before.
mental model transformation

I had difficulties in distinguishing important from unimportant.
mental model transformation

I had difficulty in distinguishing important from unimportant things.
n/a

I had difficulty making even the smallest decision.
control agency

I had feelings of unreality.
mental model transformation

I had insights into connections that had previously puzzled me.
mental model transformation

I had suspicious ideas or the belief that others were against me.
control vortex

I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.
levels of control

I had the feeling of being outside of my body.
mental model transformation, eternalism

I had the feeling something horrible would happen.
noncontrol

I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
levels of control

I had the feeling that I no longer had my own will.
non-control

I had the feeling that something terrible was going to happen.
control loss/ transgression

I had the idea that events, objects, or other people had particular meaning that was specific for me.

I had the impression I was out of my body.

I had very original thoughts.
mental model transformation

I heard a ticking, knocking, ringing, or rattling without being able to recognize the cause.

I heard complete sentences without knowing where they came from.
source of control thoughts

I heard diffuse noises without knowing where they came from.

I heard music without knowing where it came from.
source of thoughts

I heard my thoughts as if I had spoken them out loud.

I heard rings and tones without knowing where they came from.

I heard single words without knowing where they came from.

I heard something like a buzzing, swooshing, or humming without recognizing the cause.

I heard voices or sounds that were not real.

I heard voices that did not come from the surroundings as usual.

I perceived everything as blurry, as if through a kind of fog.

I saw brightness or flashes of light with closed eyes or in complete darkness.
meta perception, loose cognition

I saw colors before me in total darkness or with closed eyes.

I saw colors with closed eyes or in complete darkness.

I saw lights or flashes of light in total darkness or with closed eyes.

I saw regular patterns in complete darkness or with closed eyes.

I saw regular patterns with closed eyes or in complete darkness.

I saw scenes rolling by in total darkness or with my eyes closed.
metaperception, loosecog

I saw things I knew were not real.

I saw whole scenes roll by with closed eyes or in complete darkness.
meta perception, loose cognition

I stayed frozen in an very unnatural position for an extended period of time.
personal control agency

I was able to remember certain events with exceeding clarity.
meta perception, loose cog

I was afraid of losing control over myself.
non-control

I was afraid that the state I was in would last forever.
eternalism

I was afraid without being able to say exactly why.

I was not able to complete a thought, my thought repeatedly became disconnected.

I was not able to complete a thought; my thoughts repeatedly became disconnected.

I was scared without knowing exactly why.
threat of loss of control

In control.
the personal control system

Insights into personal or occupational concerns.

Intensity.

Intuitive insight into the inner nature of objects and/or persons in your surroundings.

It seemed to me as though I did not have a body anymore.
mental model, personal control agency

It seemed to me that my environment and I were one.
eternalism, mental model transformation

It was difficult to control my thoughts.
noncontrol

Kaleidoscopic nature of visual images.
meta percption, loose cog

Like the experience.

Loss of feelings of difference between yourself and objects or persons in your surroundings.

Loss of usual awareness of where you were.

Loss of your usual identity.
the personal control system

Loss of your usual sense of space.
eternalism

Loss of your usual sense of time.
eternalism

Many things appeared to me as breathtakingly beautiful.

Many things seemed incredibly funny to me.

Meaningless noises sounded like real words or phrases.

Movement within images.
meta perdception, loose cognition

My body felt numb, lifeless, and/or alien.

My body or body parts seemed to change their shape or position.

My experience had religious aspects.
levels of control

My imagination was extremely vivid.
loose cog, meta perception, mental model transformation

My perception was blurred.
loose cog, meta perception

My sense of time and space was altered as if I was dreaming.
eternalism

My surroundings seemed to change in size, depth, or shape.

My thoughts and actions were slowed down.

New thoughts or insights.

Noises seemed to influence what I saw.

Objects around me engaged me emotionally much more than usual.

Objects in my surroundings engaged me emotionally much more than usual.
mental model transformation

Physically restless.

Pressure or weight in chest or abdomen.

Profound experience of your own death.
noncontrol

Room looks different.

Room overlaid with visual patterns.

Safe.

Sense of awe or awesomeness.

Sense of being “outside of” time, beyond past and future.
eternalism

Sense of being at a spiritual height.
meta perception

Sense of being separated from the normal world, as though you were enclosed in a thick, silent glass chamber.

Sense of being trapped and helpless.
noncontrol

Sense of chaos.
noncontrol

Sense of profound humility before the majesty of what was felt to be sacred or holy.

Sense of reverence.
2 levels of control

Sense of speed.

Sense of the limitations and smallness of your everyday personality in contrast to the Infinite.

Sense that in order to describe parts of your experience you would have to use statements that appear to be illogical, involving contradictions and paradoxes.

Sense that the experience cannot be described adequately in words.

Sexual feelings.

Shaky feelings inside.

Shapes seemed to be changed by sounds or noises.

Some everyday things acquired special meaning.
systemic reindexing, mental model transformation

Sounds and noises were fainter than usual.

Sounds in room sound different.

Sounds seemed to influence what I saw.

The boundaries between myself and my surroundings seemed to blur.

The colors of things seemed to be altered by sounds or noises.

The colors of things seemed to be changed by sounds and noises.

The intensity of colors changed.

The intensity of sound changed.

The passing of time was altered.

The shapes of things seemed to change by sounds and noises.

The world seemed to me beyond good and evil.

There were sounds in the room that I feel were unlikely to have been real.

Things around me had a new strange meaning for me.

Things came to my mind that I thought long forgotten.

Things in my environment had a new strange meaning.
mental model transformation, systemic re-indexing

Things in my surroundings appeared smaller or larger.

Thoughts and ideas flashing by very rapidly.

Time passed slowly in a tormenting way.
eternalism

Urge to close eyes.

Visions of demons, devils or other wrathful deities.

Visual effects.
meta perception, loose cognition

Visual images.

Waxing and waning of the experience.

White light.

With eyes open, seeing something in your surroundings more and more intensely and then feeling as though you and it become one.

Worries and anxieties of everyday life felt unimportant.

You are convinced now, as you look back on your experience, that in it you encountered ultimate reality (i.e. that you “knew” and “saw” what was really real).

OAV Categories of Psychedelic Effects

The OAV questionnaire’s 3 dimensions and how the Studerus 2010 11 Factors fit into the 3 dimensions.

Oceanic Boundlessness (OB, OBN)

Experience of unity
Spiritual experience
Blissful state
Disembodiment

Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED, AED)

Impaired control and cognition (ICC) 👑☸️🌳 😱🐉🚪💎
Anxiety (ANX)

Visionary Restructuralization (VR, VRS)

Changed meaning of perception
Audio-visual synesthesia
Complex imagery
Insightfulness
Elementary imagery

General altered state effects (G-ASC)

todo: list the non categ’d q’s from Fig S1 supplement: tree diagram, from Studerus 2010, to add in my 5D page a General category.

That might help map the Egodeath theory to the main questionnaires.

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/5d-asc-five-dimensional-altered-states-of-consciousness-questionnaire/

Dittrich Inflated the Ocean and Visionary Dimensions to Force them to Be as Big as the Anxiety/Dread Dimension

Dittrich in 1985 identified Ocean, Anxiety/Dread, and Visionary dimensions found in 1975’s APZ questionnaire, but found that:
The Ocean & Visionary dimensions detected in APZ were relatively too small.
The Anxiety/Dread dimension detected in APZ was relatively too big.

So in 1994, Dittrich released OAV that had more items to pad out (enlarge) the Ocean & Visionary dimensions.

But in 2010 Studerus found that now instead of only Anxiety/Dread being a bloated, over-broad, uselessly broad dimension/ category of effects, now all three O/A/V dimensions are uselessly broad, so Studerus:

broke up Ocean dimension questions into 4 factors:
Experience of unity
Spiritual experience
Blissful state
Disembodiment

broke up Anxiety/Dread dimension questions into 2 factors:
Impaired control and cognition
Anxiety

broke up Visionary dimension questions into 5 factors:
Insightfulness
Complex imagery
Elementary imagery
Audio-Visual Synesthesia
Changed meaning of percepts

Dittrich 1985/1994: The 1994 OAV questionnaire fixes a problem with the 1975 APZ questionnaire: Given the large number of Dread (negative effects) questions, there needs to be a greater number of Oceanic & Visionary (positive effects) questions:

the OBN and VRS dimensions contained a relatively low number of items, and the conceptual breadth of the VRS dimension was considered too narrow.

… widening the conceptual breadth of the OBN [Oceanic Boundlessness] and VRS [Visionary Restructuralization] dimensions.

Whereas the OBN [Oceanic Boundlessness] dimension was changed toward a more complete assessment of mystical experiences by incorporating items that were formulated on the basis of six of the nine categories of mystical experiences proposed by Stace [20],

the VRS [Visionary Restructuralization] dimension was conceptually widened by incorporating items that measure an increase of imaginations, associations, and memory retrieval. The re-conceptualization of the VRS [Visionary Restructuralization] dimension was mainly driven by theoretical considerations of Leuner [22,23], who had hypothesized that visual hallucinations are associated with an increased internal stimulus production.
Studerus 2010 p. 2 right column top

Root Cause of Problem Has Been Identified: Walter Stace, 1960/1961, mysticism = all peace & light.

The one thing missing here is the outlines of so-called inventory of mystical experiencing, which probably like Charles Stang accused Roland Griffiths multiple times, fails to account for the negative mystical experiences.

Especially Stace 1961.

Supplement Figure S1, Studerus 2010 –
“Unpleasant” on right replaced or characterizes the “Anxiety/Dread” dimension.
“Pleasant” replaced or groups the “Ocean” and “Visionary” dimensions.

A better view of the 11 factors is page 9, figure 1 except that you need to move the “Insightfulness” factor down above “Complex Imagery” factor if you want to preserve the 3 O/A/V dimensions groupings. Ocean/ Anxiety/ Visionary.

Magic Math: now only 2/11 instead of 1/3 of psychedelic effects are classified as Here Be Dragons 🏥 🍽 🐉 “Unpleasant”

OAV 3 Dimensions: the above tree shows:

The topmost 2 Factors are within the OAV dimension “Dread of Ego Dissolution” (DED), those Factors are: Impaired control & cognition, & Anxiety.

The middle 5 Factors are within the OAV legacy dimension called “visionary restructuring”.

The bottom 4 Factors are within OAV’s “Oceanic Boundlessness” dimension.

CEQ article 2016 Griffiths – My critique of the Dionysus-free, Shadow-scrubbed final 26 psychedelic effects questions, after Griffiths’ Psychotherapy Marketing Dept. removed all the Control and Volition questions and replaced them by 6 duplicate redundant psychotherapy-paradigm Fear and Sad questions.

His psychometrics stats math proves that his masters should support his psychotherapy project.

I like how through trickery and sleight of hand in 2010, Studerus replaced the OAV’s 3 dimensions, one of which was considered “Unpleasant Experiencing”, and the other two are “Pleaseant Experiencing” by a set of 11 – most of them small – so-called “Factors”, so that now two of the 11 Factors are categorized as “unpleasant experiencing”

And this way, we have manufactured a bigger number, 9 out of 11 Factors are treated/ classified as “pleasant experiences”.

By this re-categorization sleight-of-hand of fabricating more-granular categories, and making sure that none of them are “negative”, we have magically increased from 2 out of 3 positive, to 9 out of 11 positive categories of psychedelic effects! 🎉

never mind that by far the biggest category is control loss. 7-8 q’s.

The second biggest Factor/ category is anxiety (6-8 q’s)

the third biggest Factor category is block universe “unity experiencing” (5-6 q’s)

Ocean, Anxiety/Dread, and Visionary work together/ conspire to drive transformation from egoic to transcendent thinking.

HRS Categories of Psychedelic Effects

The HRS has these subscales:

intensity
somaesthesia
affect
perception
cognition
volition 👑☸️🌳 😱🐉🚪💎

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/hrs-hallucinogen-rating-scale/

SOCQ/MEQ Categories of Psychedelic Effects

I. Internal Unity

II. External Unity

III. Transcendence of Time and Space

IV. Ineffability and Paradoxicality

V. Sense of Sacredness

VI. Noetic Quality

VII. Deeply-Felt Positive Mood

Bad Foundation Produces Pseudo Science of Psychedelic Psychometrics

These categs suck- no Volition, no Impaired Control.

No surprise, since SOCQ includes MEQ, Mystical Experiences Questionnaire.

Walter Stace’s 1961 massive false dichotomy, unscientific “inventory of mystic experiences” is the sand foundation for this Pseudo Science of Psychedelic Psychometrics.

Proposes 11 dimensions for the OAV or 5D-ASC:
Studerus E, Gamma A and Vollenweider FX (2010)
Psychometric evaluation of the altered states of consciousness rating scale (OAV)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2930851/

What categ do these SOCQ q’s go in?:

66. Frustrating attempt to control the experience.

28. trapped and helpless

Walter Stace 1961 Categories of Mystical Experiences

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/23/socq-states-of-consciousness-questionnaire/

The foundation of sand for Psychedelic Psychometric Science.

⌛️

Stace’s List of Mystical Effects Doesn’t Match the Reported Mystics’ Data Archive; Provides an Unscientific Basis for Questionnaires, Failing to Account for Challenging Experiences

Charles Stang & Cybermonk Refute that Stace’s List of Mystical Effects Matches the Scientific Archive Base of Data Reported by Mystics – Stace’s List Unscientifically Omits Challenging Experiences

Ocean of Dread Vision

One of Studerus’ categories of effects questions is ICC – Impaired Control and Cognition, which is the essence of the OAV legacy broad category/dimension, DED – Dread of Ego Dissolution.

Forget Studerus’ categories. Use the Egodeath theory’s categories of Core Concepts instead.

They say “we match the scientific(!) basis of our understanding of mysticism effects, provided by Walter Stace 1960/1961.”

Walter Stace 1961 = “the scientific data about what mystic effects are” and “we match that scientific data”.

But the FACTS/reality of mystic effects contradict Griffiths & Studerus’ EXPECTATIONS and presumptions about mystic effects – not the “scientific facts about the nature and character of mystic effects per Stace”.

Stace’s list of mystic effects is given as an example of “the scientific literature on the psychology of religion”:

High scores on the OBN [Oceanic Boundlessness] scale therefore indicate a state similar to mystical experiences as described in the scientific literature on the psychology of religion (eg, see [20]).

20. Stace WT (1961) Mysticism and philosophy. London, England: Macmillan.
Studerus 2010 p. 2 left column 2/3 down

I keep seeing the name Walter Stace 1961, though there are other lists of mystical effects, but Stace’s list seems to be the soggy foundation that these questionnaires are using to define what they imagine & fantasize mystical effects to be.

Stace’s foundation for the Science of Psychedelic Psychometrics:

🦄💨🌈

Griffiths’ model fails to match the gathered scientific base of mystics’ reported data, says Professor Stang.

ECQ – “Eternalism and Control Questionnaire” (Hoffman 2022)

Michael Hoffman, December 22, 2022

_{Site Map}

Contents:

Intro
Dimensions/ Scales/ Factors

Objectives of the ECQ
History of Dimensions: APZ, OAV, 5D-ASC, 11 Factors
The Inadequacy of the CEQ
See Also
Pictures

Intro

This questionnaire selects and groups the key phrases that describe
experiencing eternalism and its control-transformation aspects that are reported by the 5D-ASC, SOCQ, HRS, & EDI (Ego Dissolution Inventory) psychedelic effects questionnaires.

Dimensions/ Scales/ Factors

Block-Universe Eternalism (Time) [12 items]

Experience of timelessness.

Feeling that you have been “outside of” history in a realm where time does not exist.

I experienced a touch of eternity.

I experienced past, present, and future as a oneness.

Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.

Loss of your usual sense of time.

Sense of being “outside of” time, beyond past and future.

My sense of time and space was altered as if I was dreaming.

Time passed slowly in a tormenting way.

Change in rate of time passing.

My thoughts and actions were slowed down.

The passing of time was altered.

Block-Universe Spatial Unity [17 items]

I felt that I was in a wonderful other world.

Everything seemed to unify into a oneness.

Feel of oneness with universe.

Experience of the insight that “all is One”.

I felt at one with the universe

Experience of oneness or unity with objects and/or persons perceived in your surroundings.

Loss of your usual sense of space.

Experience of oneness in relation to an “inner world” within.

I felt a sense of union with others

The boundaries between myself and my surroundings seemed to blur.

I felt one with my surroundings.

Freedom from the limitations of your personal self and feeling a unity or bond with what was felt to be greater than your personal self.

Experience of the fusion of your personal self into a larger whole.

Experience of unity with ultimate reality.

Experiences of intense pressures on various parts of your body.

I felt as if I no longer had a body.

It seemed to me as though I did not have a body anymore.

Non-Control, Egoic Agency Suspension [22 items]

It was difficult to control my thoughts.

Frustrating attempt to control the experience.

I had the feeling that I no longer had my own will.

I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.

Feel presence of a numinous force, higher power, God.

I felt connected to a higher power.

I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.

I felt incapable of making even the smallest decision.

I had difficulty making even the smallest decision.

In control. [scale]

Experience of confusion, disorientation and/or chaos.

I lost all sense of ego.

Change in strength of sense of self.

I experienced a dissolution of my “self” or ego.

I experienced a disintegration of my “self” or ego.

Sense of profound humility before the majesty of what was felt to be sacred or holy.

All notion of self and identity dissolved away.

Loss of your usual identity.

I felt extraordinary powers within myself.

Able to “let go”.

I heard complete sentences without knowing where they came from.

A voice commented on everything I thought although no one was there.

Threat of Loss of Control [20 items]

I had the feeling that something terrible was going to happen.

I had the feeling something horrible would happen.

I was afraid of losing control over myself.

I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Sense of being trapped and helpless.

I felt threatened.

I felt as if dark forces had overtaken me.

I felt like a puppet or marionette.

I felt like a marionette.

I felt as if I were paralyzed.

I felt surrendered to dark powers.

I was scared without knowing exactly why.

I was afraid without being able to say exactly why.

Feeling that people were plotting against you.

I had suspicious ideas or the belief that others were against me.

Experience of fear.

I felt tormented.

I felt anxious.

Frightened.

Visions of demons, devils or other wrathful deities.

Control Model Transformation [26 items]

I felt I was being transformed forever in a miraculous way.

I had very original thoughts.

Able to focus attention.

I felt very profound.

I had insights into connections that had previously puzzled me.

I gained clarity into connections that puzzled me before.

New thoughts or insights.

My imagination was extremely vivid.

Gain of insightful knowledge experienced at an intuitive level.

Some everyday things acquired special meaning.

Things in my environment had a new strange meaning.

Things around me had a new strange meaning for me.

Feel reborn.

Profound experience of your own death.

Feelings of grief.

Feeling of being rejected or unwanted.

Excited.

Difference in feeling of reality of experiences compared to everyday experience.

Feeling that the consciousness experienced during part of the session was more real than your normal awareness of everyday reality.

I had feelings of unreality.

I experienced my surroundings as strange and weird.

The world seemed to me beyond good and evil.

Change in sense of sanity.

Fear that you might lose your mind or go insane.

I was afraid that the state I was in would last forever.

My experience had religious aspects to it.

Objectives of the ECQ

The Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ) directly addresses the peak challenging experience for safety.

Research that’s informed by the ECQ will provide the greatest number of successful transformation experiences, while minimizing turmoil.

A major, distinctive reported challenging effect of psilocybin is the experience of eternalism and control-model transformation, as the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire demonstrates and highlights.

This questionnaire research enables people to freely use psilocybin while having viable stable control that is compatible with the psilocybin eternalism state of consciousness.

Key Phrases Describing Experiencing Eternalism and Its Control Transformation Aspects

The Eternalism and Control Questionnaire highlights phrases of the standard questionnaire items that describe the experience of eternalism and control transformation.

This questionnaire collects and groups key phrases that describe experiencing eternalism and its control-transformation aspects.

The shadow is usefully identified by the ECQ and the Egodeath theory as:
the control-threat that’s posed by the experience of eternalism during mental model transformation in the loose cognitive association state from psilocybin.

The Egodeath theory is corroborated by its match with these eternalism and control effects that are reported by these questionnaire items.

{king steering in tree} {stand left leg} {see dragon snake monster} {guarded gate} {stand right leg} {snake frozen in rock} {treasure fruit immortality} {pass in and out} {prize}

Effects Categories Matched

The coverage provided by the ECQ and its categories of eternalism and control effects is approximately equivalent to these 5D-ASC categories:

Experience of unity
Spiritual experience
Anxiety
Impaired control and cognition
Insightfulness

The coverage provided by the ECQ includes selected items in all of the 5D-ASC top-level categories:

Oceanic boundlessness (OB, OBN)
Dread of ego dissolution (DED); anxious ego-dissolution (AED)
Visionary restructuralization (VR, VRS)

That’s an example of Domain Dynamics:

Visionary restructuralization is involved in control transformation.

Visionary restructuralization is mental model transformation in the loose cognitive state, and elevated awareness able to perceive cognition, which helps drive control-model transformation.

Visionary restructuralization is involved in the eternalism experiential state, driving control mental model transformation.

The three dimensions that are defined in the OAV inventory of psychedelic effects are oceanic boundlessness, dread of ego dissolution, & visionary restructuralization.

History of Dimensions: APZ, OAV, 5D-ASC, 11 Factors

APZ: 0 – 1975
OAV: 3 – 1994 (identified in 1985)
5D-ASC: 5 – 2006 – keeps the OAV 3, adds 2 supp’l unused dimensions.
11 Factors: 11 – 2010 – they replace & fit within the OAV 3 dimensions.

The main 3 of the 5 dimensions which are defined in Dittrich’s v2 of APZ, OAV (1994, identified in 1985): oceanic boundlessness, dread of ego dissolution, & visionary restructuralization.

The name “OAV” indicates that here is when Dittrich defined the main 3 dimensions (along with General): O, A, V = OB, AEA (DED), VR.

APZ (1975) used 0 categories.
OAV (1994) used 3 dimensions (identified in 1985): oceanic boundlessness, dread of ego dissolution, visionary restructuralization.
5D-ASC (2006) added two rarely used dimensions (auditory alterations, reduction of vigilance).
Studerus 2010 replaced the 3 main broad dimensions by more granular breakout of those 3 main dimensions to 11 more granular dimensions.

Oceanic boundlessness, dread of ego dissolution, & visionary restructuralization fit together and work all together to transform from naive possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

Egoic control agency is tested and experimented with by the God-mode mind, by combining oceanic boundlessness, dread of ego dissolution, and visionary restructuralization, working together toward the specific end, of transforming the mental model to be imperishable, no longer subject to that type of control-collapse.

Visionary restructuralization – control transformation mental model transferring control reliance onto a different foundation/ source.

Questionnaires Used

This questionnaire includes effects questions from these main psychedelics questionnaires:

Five-Dimensional Altered States of Consciousness (5D-ASC)
Hallucinogen Rating Scale (HRS)
States of Consciousness Questionnaire (SOCQ)
- … Mystical Experiences Questionnaire (MEQ)
Ego Dissolution Inventory (EDI)

The ECQ questionnaire proves that the Egodeath theory (psychedelic eternalism) successfully explains the most important of the challenging effects – the shadow (dragon monster).

The ECQ questionnaire together with the Egodeath theory is essential for understanding the nature of the most interesting risk of psychedelics, the experience of threat of loss of control while transforming thinking.

Relation Between ECQ, the Main Psychedelic Questionnaires, and the Egodeath Theory

The ECQ bridges the standard psychedelic questionnaires with the Egodeath theory.

Designing the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ)

The Egodeath theory here defines a new subset-based questionnaire comparable to the Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ), by selecting psychedelic effects questions from the main standard questionnaires: the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ).

This ECQ questionnaire lists and groups the eternalism and control-transformation effects that are in the psychedelics effects questionnaires.

Strategy for further grouping into categories per the Egodeath theory – check the 1997 outline topic categories, and the topic categories in the Core Concepts page.

The ECQ is presently missing some questions from some of the main questionnaires, which are surprisingly hard to find.

See my per-questionnaire posts to identify the item numbers and name of which questionnaire each effect item is from.

The Inadequacy of the CEQ

The Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ) is inadequate and doesn’t deliver on its stated strategic coverage of all of the reported negative experiences.

When the Initial Pool of 64 questions was reduced to the final set of 26 questions, all of the control-loss related questions were removed, leaving the peak challenging experience without any coverage.

The CEQ doesn’t discuss the decision to remove the control-loss questions; this selection process is undocumented.

The main objective of the CEQ wasn’t met: to provide a superset of the scope of challenging effects that are covered by the main questionnaires.

The main questionnaires cover an important negative effect that the CEQ removes from their scope of coverage: control-loss problems.

The CEQ isn’t driven by a comprehension of eternalism including control challenges, but the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire is.

The ECQ covers control-loss effects as its focus together with experiencing eternalism – providing a better treatment of these effects than the SOCQ, HRS, and 5D-ASC.

The ECQ provides the safety coverage and framework of comprehension to effectively provide the coverage which CEQ Initial Pool had but the final CEQ lacks and declined to cover.

Charles Stang’s assertion stands, despite the CEQ. Roland Griffiths claims to match negative as well as positive mystic experiencing effects, but upon examination of the 26 final items vs. the 64 Initial Pool items, the CEQ delivers woefully inadequate coverage of major, common, quintessential psychedelic effects, of non-control challenges during transformation of control agency.

Researchers need to continue using DED (dread of ego dissolution), ICC (impaired control and cognition), and now this ECQ, because the CEQ has a fatal gap in coverage of negative effects, that the main instruments cover.

The CEQ claims to deliver a superset of the main instruments’ negative effects coverage, but it’s actually only a partial overlap.

The CEQ fails to provide the complete coverage that it claims, and so – by its own argument – it leaves risky challenges without coverage or acknowledgement, suppressing the shadow, failing to acknowledge the commonplace experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control while transforming to the eternalism mental world model.

At the same time CEQ added Depression, claiming complete coverage, then they shrank to exclude all ICC control-related problems, so that the CEQ fails to do what it claims: provide full coverage of the negative, challenging effects that are actually reported by mystics and by the main questionnaires.

We cannot remove control-loss questions even if we add psychotherapy-conformant depression questions to the previous questionnaires.

Why is CEQ removing coverage of control-loss questions, instead of providing the superset of coverage that they claimed motivated the creation of the CEQ?

Control-loss effects need to be recognized and understood, as they are by the ECQ.

Mental World Model Transformation and Control Transformation

— Michael Hoffman, December 22, 2022

Pictures

The guarded gate is between Saturn and the sphere of the fixed stars, represented by the zodiac.

morphology match identified by Cybermonk Dec. 24 2022, a.m. 🍄🎄

🏥 🍽 🐉

👑☸️🌳 😱🦵🐉🚪🦵💎 🐍🧊🪨 🌳🍄😇 🍄🚪🏆

👑☸️🌳 😱🦵🐉🚪🦵💎 🐍🧊🪨 🌳🍄😇 🍄🚪🏆

HRS – “Hallucinogen Rating Scale” Questionnaire

Contents:

Intro
Bizarre Omissions from CEQ Initial Item Pool
The 99 Effects Questions
Categories of Effects Questions
Notes
Links
Article: Psychometric assessment of the Hallucinogen Rating Scale
References

Intro

So far, this lists 83 of 99, missing 16.

Keywords for the Egodeath theory highlighted by Cybermonk – key words about experiencing eternalism and its control aspects.

News flash update: Jan 13, 2023:

Griffiths didn’t pick item “It was difficult to control my thoughts.” !!

HOW COULD YOU RECKON THAT THE EFFECT “It was difficult to control my thoughts” IS NOT CHALLENGING — even though it says “IT WAS DIFFICULT“?

So I am now adding notes from CEQ article’s HRS section of “Initial Item Pool” (Apx 2) to here: item numbers and WHICH QUESTIONS GRIFFITHS OMITTED AS “NOT POTENTIALLY CHALLENGING”.

Bizarre Omissions from CEQ Initial Item Pool

It was difficult to control my thoughts.
CEQ: “not challenging” (!!) really?

I had suspicious ideas or the belief that others were against me.
CEQ: “not challenging” (!) really?

Given that Griffiths struggled mightily with their flawed and broken category “Paranoia” that they warn people not to use, why didn’t they pad out their broken Paranoia CEQ factor (category) by adding this HRS question?

Griffiths demonstrates great enthusiasm for padding out their other fabricated pseudo-“categories” by 3 dups of the identical same single effect, “felt isolated” AND “feel isolated” AND “feeling of isolation” –> yay, its a 3-item category! 🤗

Answer/hypothesis: b/c they didn’t add their 7th, Paranoia factor until the last minute, seat of the pants method, out-of-band; see that Paranoia Bunk Factor paragraph in CEQ article Griffiths 2016, p. 13:

“An accepted clinical definition of “paranoia” is “unfounded fears that others intend harm to the individual” (Freeman et al., 2015).

“While one item of the paranoia scale of the CEQ is consistent with this definition (“feeling that people were plotting against you”), the other (“experience of antagonism toward people around you”), while likely related, is not closely consistent with this definition.

“Thus, the CEQ paranoia scale may be viewed as a crude measure of the clinical construct of “paranoia”, and the external validity of the paranoia scale may be somewhat restricted by this limitation.”

Change in strength of sense of self.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

Feel presence of a numinous force, higher power, God.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really? subjection to higher power isn’t challenging?

I had feelings of unreality.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

Change in rate of thinking.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

I heard voices or sounds that were not real.
CEQ: “not challenging” really?

Change in effort of breathing
CEQ: “not challenging” – really? having to effortfully breathe isn’t challenging?

The 99 Effects Questions

find “really?” below:

My body or body parts seemed to change their shape or position.
CEQ: “not challenging”

My surroundings seemed to change in size, depth, or shape.
CEQ: “not challenging”

The passing of time was altered.
CEQ: “not challenging”

I had feelings of unreality.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

It was difficult to control my thoughts.
CEQ: “not challenging” (!!) really?

The intensity of colors changed.
CEQ: “not challenging”

The intensity of sound changed.
CEQ: “not challenging”

I heard voices or sounds that were not real.
CEQ: “not challenging” really?

I had the idea that events, objects, or other people had particular meaning that was specific for me.
CEQ: “not challenging”

I had suspicious ideas or the belief that others were against me.
CEQ: “not challenging” (!) really?

I felt high.
CEQ: “not challenging”

I felt drowsy.
CEQ: “not challenging”

25. I felt anxious.
CEQ Initial Item Pool

A rush
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in salivation
CEQ: “not challenging”

Body feels different
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in sense of body weight
CEQ: “not challenging”

Feel as if moving falling flying through space
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in body temperature
CEQ: “not challenging”

Electric /tingling feeling
CEQ: “not challenging”

9. Pressure or weight in chest or abdomen
CEQ Initial Item Pool

10. Shaky feelings inside
CEQ Initial Item Pool

11. Feel body shake or tremble
CEQ Initial Item Pool

16. Physically restless
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Sexual feelings
CEQ: “not challenging”

21. Feel removed, detached, separated from body
CEQ Initial Item Pool

25. Anxious
again: CEQ Initial Item Pool

26. Frightened
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Feel like laughing
CEQ: “not challenging”

Excited
CEQ: “not challenging”

Awe, Amazement
CEQ: “not challenging”

Safe
CEQ: “not challenging”

Feel presence of a numinous force, higher power, God.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really? subjection to higher power isn’t challenging?

Euphoria
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in feelings of closeness to people in room.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in “amount” of emotions.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Emotions seem different than usual
CEQ: “not challenging”

Feel of oneness with universe
CEQ: “not challenging”

44. Feel isolated from people and things
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Feel reborn
CEQ: “not challenging”

Like the experience
CEQ: “not challenging”

48. How soon would you like to repeat the experience
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Desire for the experience regularly
CEQ: “not challenging”

Flushed
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in skin sensitivity
CEQ: “not challenging”

A sound or sounds accompanying the experience
CEQ: “not challenging”

Sounds in room sound different
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in distinctiveness of sounds
CEQ: “not challenging”

Visual effects
CEQ: “not challenging”

Room looks different
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in brightness of objects in room.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in visual distinctiveness of objects in room
CEQ: “not challenging”

Room overlaid with visual patterns
CEQ: “not challenging”

Eyes open visual field vibrating or jiggling.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Visual images.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Kaleidoscopic nature of visual images.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Difference in brightness of visions compared to usual daylight vision.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Dimensionality of images.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Movement within images.
CEQ: “not challenging”

White light
CEQ: “not challenging”

Sense of speed
CEQ: “not challenging”

74. Contradictory feelings at the same time
CEQ Initial Item Pool

75. Sense of chaos
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Change in strength of sense of self.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

New thoughts or insights
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in rate of thinking.
CEQ: “not challenging” – really?

Change in quality of thinking
CEQ: “not challenging”

Difference in feeling of reality of experiences compared to everyday experience.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Dreamlike nature of the experiences.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Insights into personal or occupational concerns.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Change in rate of time passing.
CEQ: “not challenging”

88. Change in sense of sanity.
CEQ Initial Item Pool

89. Urge to close eyes
CEQ Initial Item Pool – why?

Change in effort of breathing
CEQ: “not challenging” – really? having to effortfully breathe isn’t challenging?

Able to follow the sequence of events
CEQ: “not challenging”

Able to “let go”
CEQ: “not challenging”

Able to focus attention
CEQ: “not challenging”

94. In control
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Able to move around if asked to
CEQ: “not challenging”

96. Able to remind yourself of being in a clinical room, being administered a drug, the temporary nature of the experience.
CEQ Initial Item Pool

Amount of time between when the drug was administered and feeling an effect. (Put time)

Waxing and waning of the experience.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Intensity.
CEQ: “not challenging”

Categories of Effects Questions

From WordPress-based Altered States Database (ASDB):
http://alteredstatesdb.org/faq/ –

“Originally developed to quantify acute effects of synthetic dimethyltryptamine (DMT), the Hallucinogen Rating Scale has become a frequently used instrument in the assessment of hallucinogen induced ASCs.

“Characteristic effects of hallucinogenic substances are covered by a collection of 100 items conceptually distinct in six distinct dimensions:”

Somaesthesia

“Interoceptive, visceral, and cutaneous/tactile effects

The faculty of being sensitive to stimuli originated inside the body (e.g. Urge to urinate; Urge to move bowels; Sexual feelings)
“18. Urge to urinate” is in CEQ Initial Item Pool,
“19. … bowels” is in CEQ Initial Item Pool

Affect

“Emotional as well as affective responses (e.g.

Feel like laughing;

Feel presence of numinous force, higher power, God;

Awe, amazement).

Perception

“Changes in the process of perceiving.

Alterations in the ordinary visual, auditory, gustatory, and olfactory experiences (e.g. Change in visual distinctness of objects in room;

Visual synesthesia (“seeing” sound or other non-visual perception);

Kaleidoscopic nature of images/ visions/ hallucinations).

Cognition

“Alterations in thought processes or content (e.g.

Sense of chaos;

Memories of childhood;

Change in rate of thinking).

Volition

“Changes in the interactive capacity such as

the faculty of making deliberate choices or decisions.

Alterations in the ability to willfully interact can be addressed to themselves, the environment, or certain aspects of the experience (e.g.

Able to focus attention;

Able to remind yourself of being in a research room, being administered a drug,

the temporary nature of the experience;

Able to follow the sequence of effects).

Intensity

The overall strength and the course of the experience (e.g. Waxing and waning of the experience; Intensity; High).

List of Categories

The HRS has these subscales:

intensity
somaesthesia
affect
perception
cognition
volition

Defines 11 subscales instead of the 3 OAV or 5 5D categories:

Psychometric evaluation of the altered states of consciousness rating scale (OAV)
Studerus E, Gamma A and Vollenweider FX (2010)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2930851/

Notes

There are only 83 items from the spreadsheet I found, where are the others to make 99 total? 16 are missing. These questions are sure unclear and choppy.

Really strange choppy wording of some items. Poorly written, inarticulate.

A non-numbered list, try find better format: (CEQ article gives numbers for the Initial Pool’s HRS q’s)

Links

search: “Hallucinogen Rating Scale” https://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Hallucinogen+Rating+Scale%22

Rick Strassman’s Hallucinogen Rating Scale (HRS)

no numbers https://form.jotform.com/220464650288256

Article: Psychometric assessment of the Hallucinogen Rating Scale

Psychometric assessment of the Hallucinogen Rating Scale
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11295326/

J Riba, A Rodríguez-Fornells, R J Strassman, M J Barbanoj

Drug Alcohol Depend. 2001.

Article Filled In

This article links to preprint xls https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/rf88fks8mt/1

References

Strassman, R. J., Qualls, C. R., Uhlenhuth, E. H. & Kellner, R.
Dose-response study of N,N-dimethyltryptamine in humans.
II. Subjective effects and preliminary results of a new rating scale.
Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 51, 98–108 (1994).
https://maps.org/research-archive/w3pb/1994/1994_Strassman_22714_1.pdf
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8297216/

Bing Search:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Dose-response+study+of+N%2CN-dimethyltryptamine+in+humans%22

Google Search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Dose-response+study+of+N%2CN-dimethyltryptamine+in+humans%22

SOCQ – “States of Consciousness Questionnaire”

Contents:

Intro
References
The 100 SOCQ Questions about Psychedelic Effects
The 7 Categories
Categories for MEQ
Notes
Links

Intro

SOCQ includes Walter Pahnke’s Good Friday Experiment’s Mystical Experiences Questionnaire (MEQ).

References

Pahnke, W. N. Drugs and Mysticism.
International Journal of Parapsychology 8, 295–314 (1966).

Pahnke, W. N.
Drugs and mysticism: An analysis of the relationship between psychedelic drugs and the mystical consciousness.
Harvard University Press, 1963

MacLean, K. A., Leoutsakos, J.-M. S., Johnson, M. W. & Griffiths, R. R.
Factor Analysis of the Mystical Experience Questionnaire: A Study of Experiences Occasioned by the Hallucinogen Psilocybin.
J. Sci. Study Relig. 51, 721–737 (2012).
Search:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Factor+Analysis+of+the+Mystical+Experience+Questionnaire%22
Copy of article at PubMed:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23316089/

Stocker (2023): PES/PEQ/SOCQ

Article:
The revival of the psychedelic experience scale: Revealing its extended-mystical, visual, and distressing experiential spectrum with LSD and psilocybin studies
Kurt Stocker, Matthias Hartmann, Laura Ley, Anna M. Becker, Friederike Holze, Matthias Liechti
Published 2023/10/31
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375158331_The_revival_of_the_psychedelic_experience_scale_Revealing_its_extended-mystical_visual_and_distressing_experiential_spectrum_with_LSD_and_psilocybin_studies
Journal of Psychopharmacology 38(1)
DOI:10.1177/02698811231199112

The 100 SOCQ Questions about Psychedelic Effects

Sorted by number is available in “Supplement4_PES_English-and-German.docx”.

Complete, from Stocker “Supplement3_PES_Factors_Themes.xls“:

THE PSYCHEDELIC EXPERIENCE SCALE (PES100): OVERVIEW FACTORS AND THEMES

MYSTICAL — INTERNAL UNITY

12. Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.

35. Freedom from the limitations of your personal self and feeling a unity or bond with what was felt to be greater than your personal self.

41. Experience of pure being and pure awareness (beyond the world of sense impressions).

54. Experience of oneness in relation to an “inner world” within.

77. Experience of the fusion of your personal self into a larger whole.

83. Experience of unity with ultimate reality.

MYSTICAL — EXTERNAL UNITY

14. Experience of oneness or unity with objects and/or persons perceived in your surroundings.

47. Experience of the insight that “all is One”.

74. Awareness of the life or living presence in all things.

MYSTICAL — NOETIC QUALITY

9. Gain of insightful knowledge experienced at an intuitive level.

22. Certainty of encounter with ultimate reality (in the sense of being able to “know” and “see” what is really real) at some time during your experience.

69. You are convinced now, as you look back on your experience, that in it you encountered ultimate reality (i.e., that you “knew” and “saw” what was really real).

MYSTICAL — SACREDNESS

36. Sense of being at a spiritual height.

55. Sense of reverence.

73. Feeling that you experienced something profoundly sacred and holy.

POSITIVE MOOD

5. Experience of amazement.

18. Feelings of tenderness and gentleness.

30. Feelings of peace and tranquility.

43. Experience of ecstasy.

80. Sense of awe or awesomeness.

87. Feelings of joy.

TRANSCENDENCE OF TIME AND SPACE

2. Loss of your usual sense of time.

15. Loss of your usual sense of space.

29. Loss of usual awareness of where you were.

34. Sense of being “outside of” time, beyond past and future.

48. Being in a realm with no space boundaries.

65. Experience of timelessness.

INEFFABILITY

6. Sense that the experience cannot be described adequately in words.

23. Feeling that you could not do justice to your experience by describing it in words.

86. Feeling that it would be difficult to communicate your own experience to others who have not had similar experiences.

PARADOXICALITY

19. Experience of a paradoxical awareness that two apparently opposite principles or situations are both true.

26. Loss of your usual identity.

42. Feeling that you were “outside of” history in a realm where time does not exist.

51. Loss of feelings of difference between yourself and objects or persons in your surroundings.

59. Sense that in order to describe parts of your experience you would have to use statements that appear to be illogical, involving contradictions and paradoxes.

CONNECTEDNESS

58. Increase in the beauty and significance of music. [Connected to beauty]

60. Feelings of universal or infinite love. [Connected to spiritual principle]

62. Intuitive insight into the inner nature of objects and/or persons in your surroundings. [Connected to others and/or the world]

95. Experience of increased awareness of beauty. [Connected to beauty]

99. Increased awareness of the importance of interpersonal relationships. [Connected to others]

VISUAL EXPERIENCE

1. Visions of abstract geometric patterns of colored lines.

17. Visions of art objects (e.g. mosaics, statues, jewelry, buildings) that reflect expert craftsmanship.

38. With open eyes, seeing objects around you turn into great works of art.

DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE

13. Emotional and/or physical suffering.

16. Feelings of despair.

28. Sense of being trapped and helpless.

45. Experience of isolation and loneliness.

52. Experience of fear.

Personal/Transpersonal Transition

70. Profound experience of your own death.

84. Feeling of disintegration, falling apart.

85. Fear that you might lose your mind or go insane.

Personal/Transpersonal Post-Transition

25. Experience of radiant, golden light.

67. Visions of brilliant white light.

100. Feeling of being reborn.

MORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE: Nonordinary Consciousness More Real Than Ordinary Consciousness

3. Feeling that the consciousness experienced during part of the session was more real than your normal awareness of everyday reality.

MORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE: Humility

8. Sense of the limitations and smallness of your everyday personality in contrast to the Infinite.

31. Sense of profound humility before the majesty of what was felt to be sacred or holy.

MORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE: Dynamically Unfolding Extrovertive Mystical Experience

27. With eyes open, seeing something in your surroundings more and more intensely and then feeling as though you and it become one.

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE (at times possibly also only “sensed” rather than actually “seen”):

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Out-of-Body/Detached-Perspective-Point Experience

53. Sense of being outside your body.

68. Experience of exploring organs, tissues or cells of your own body.

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Archetypes/Entities

37. Visions of demons, devils or other wrathful deities.

49. Visions of angels, cherubim or seraphim.

56. Visions of blissful or compassionate deities.

71. Visions of beautiful jewels and precious stones.

82. Visions of events in the life of Christ (e.g. birth, crucifixion, resurrection, etc.).

96. Vision of a religious Personage (e.g. Moses, Christ, Buddha, etc.).

97. Visions of landscapes (e.g. oceans, mountains, deserts, etc.).

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Age Regression

20. Sense of decreasing in body size to infancy or early childhood.

33. Convincing feeling that you relived experiences that you had as an infant during your biological birth.

92. Reliving of sensations and feelings associated with past surgery, illness or accidents

98. Reliving of situations and events from your childhood.

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Travel or Contact With the Past

7. Sense of passing through stages in evolution.

75. Convincing feeling of contact with people who have died.

81. Convincing experiences of life in civilizations that existed in another time and/or place (e.g. Ancient Egypt or Rome, Renaissance France, Colonial America, etc.).

90. Convincing feelings of reliving part of another life prior to your birth (a previous incarnation).

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Transformation Into An Animal

94. Sense of becoming a specific animal and feeling like that animal.”

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Sexual Organs

11. Visions of sexual organs (genitals, breasts).

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Extrasensory Perception

46. Convincing feeling that you obtained information about people or events in an extrasensory manner (telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, etc.).

MORE VISUAL EXPERIENCE: Repulsive Material

39. Experience of repulsive biological material (urine, feces, pus, dead flesh, etc).

MORE DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE: Confrontation with Emotions

4. Feelings of anger or aggression.

57. Feeling of being rejected or unwanted.

88. Feelings of guilt.

91. Feelings of grief.”

MORE DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE: Paranoia

40. Feeling that people were plotting against you.

72. Experience of antagonism toward your guide or assistant guide.

MORE DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE: Separated From The World

76. Sense of being separated from the normal world, as though you were enclosed in a silent glass chamber with thick walls.

MORE DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE: Meaninglessness/Absurdity of Life

61. Experience of meaninglessness and absurdity of life.

MORE DISTRESSING EXPERIENCE: Physical distress

89. Experiences of intense pressures on various parts of your body.

93. Experience of physical distress (e.g. nausea, vomiting, sweating, rapid heartbeat, etc.).

TRIPARTITE MIND (COGNITION/AFFECT/CONATION) MISCELLANEOUS EXPERIENCE:

TRIPARTITE MIND: Cognition: Cognitive excellence

32. Feeling that you could think with an unusually high degree of sharpness and clarity.

79. Feeling of being extremely sensitive to fine nuances of meaning between different words.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Cognition: Rapid Thought

44. Thoughts and ideas flashing by very rapidly.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Cognition: Delusion of Grandeur

24. Feelings of being more important than other people and having a very important task to accomplish.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Cognition: Impaired Cognition

21. Experience of confusion, disorientation and/or chaos.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Affect: Exaltation

50. Feelings of exaltation.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Affect: Closeness With Guide

63. Feeling of emotional closeness with your guide or assistant guide.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Affect: Return Reluctance

64. Feeling of reluctance to return to normal consciousness.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Affect: Sexual Excitement [could be nonordinary, more “”‘spiritual’ rather than ‘erotic’ in nature”” (Pahnke & Richards, 1966, p. 180)]

78. Experience of sexual excitement.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Affect: Overflowing Energy

10. Experience of overflowing energy.

TRIPARTITE MIND: Conation: Impaired Volition

66. Frustrating attempt to control the experience.

The 100 SOCQ Questions about Psychedelic Effects [incomplete]

Keywords for the Egodeath theory highlighted by Cybermonk – key words about experiencing eternalism and its control aspects.

2. Loss of your usual sense of time.

3. Feeling that the consciousness experienced during part of the session was more real than your normal awareness of everyday reality.

4. Feelings of anger or aggression.

5. Experience of amazement.

6. Sense that the experience cannot be described adequately in words.

8. Sense of the limitations and smallness of your everyday personality in contrast to the Infinite.

9. Gain of insightful knowledge experienced at an intuitive level.

10. Experience of overflowing energy.

12. Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.

13. Emotional and/or physical suffering.

14. Experience of oneness or unity with objects and/or persons perceived in your surroundings.

15. Loss of your usual sense of space.

16. Feelings of despair.

18. Feelings of tenderness and gentleness.

19. Experience of a paradoxical awareness that two apparently opposite principles or situations are both true.

21. Experience of confusion, disorientation and/or chaos.

22. Certainty of encounter with ultimate reality (in the sense of being able to “know” and “see” what is really real ) at some time during your session.

23. Feeling that you could not do justice to your experience by describing it in words.

26. Loss of your usual identity.

27. With eyes open, seeing something in your surroundings more and more intensely and then feeling as though you and it become one.

28. Sense of being trapped and helpless.

29. Loss of usual awareness of where you were.

30. Feelings of peace and tranquility.

31. Sense of profound humility before the majesty of what was felt to be sacred or holy.

34. Sense of being “outside of” time, beyond past and future.

35. Freedom from the limitations of your personal self and feeling a unity or bond with what was felt to be greater than your personal self.

36. Sense of being at a spiritual height.

37. Visions of demons, devils or other wrathful deities.

39. Experience of repulsive biological material (urine, feces, pus, dead flesh, etc.)

40. Feeling that people were plotting against you.

41. Experience of pure Being and pure awareness (beyond the world of sense impressions).

42. Feeling that you have been “outside of” history in a realm where time does not exist.

43. Experience of ecstasy.

44. Thoughts and ideas flashing by very rapidly.

45. Experience of isolation and loneliness.

47. Experience of the insight that “all is One”.

48. Being in a realm with no space boundaries.

50. Feelings of exaltation.

51. Loss of feelings of difference between yourself and objects or persons in your surroundings.

52. Experience of fear.

54. Experience of oneness in relation to an “inner world” within.

55. Sense of reverence.

57. Feeling of being rejected or unwanted.

59. Sense that in order to describe parts of your experience you would have to use statements that appear to be illogical, involving contradictions and paradoxes.

60. Feelings of universal or infinite love.

61. Experience of meaninglessness and absurdity of life.

62. Intuitive insight into the inner nature of objects and/or persons in your surroundings.

65. Experience of timelessness.

66. Frustrating attempt to control the experience.

69. You are convinced now, as you look back on your experience, that in it you encountered ultimate reality (i.e. that you “knew” and “saw” what was really real).

70. Profound experience of your own death.

72. Experience of antagonism toward people around you.

73. Feeling that you experienced something profoundly sacred and holy.

74. Awareness of the life or living presence in all things.

75. Convincing feeling of contact with people who have died.

76. Sense of being separated from the normal world, as though you were enclosed in a thick, silent glass chamber.

77. Experience of the fusion of your personal self into a larger whole.

80. Sense of awe or awesomeness.

83. Experience of unity with ultimate reality.

84. Feeling of disintegration, falling apart.

85. Fear that you might lose your mind or go insane.

86. Feeling that it would be difficult to communicate your own experience to others who have not had similar experiences.

87. Feelings of joy.

88. Feelings of guilt.

89. Experiences of intense pressures on various parts of your body.

91. Feelings of grief.

93. Experience of physical distress (e.g. nausea, vomiting, sweating, rapid heartbeat, etc.).

The 7 Categories

I. Internal Unity

II. External Unity

III. Transcendence of Time and Space

IV. Ineffability and Paradoxicality

V. Sense of Sacredness

VI. Noetic Quality

VII. Deeply-Felt Positive Mood

Categories for MEQ

Ineffability
Mystical
Positive mood
Transcendence of time and space

Notes

33 of the distractor questions are not found yet. Why do they make it impossible to simply get the list of the 100 questions?

I moved headings to a separate list.

I sorted numerically mixing all of the MEQ questions with the distractor questions which were in CEQ initial pool.

I have separated the headings/categories into a separate list. I’m interested in words in questions, and in category labels, but not interested in their use of categories.

I was going to sort 1-100 in order, but they make it as hard as possible [IMPOSSIBLE] to just simply get the list of all 100 questions.

VIII. Feeling That a Dragon Is Going to Eat the Entire Clinic

🏥 🍽 🐉

Links

The Questionnaire

States of Consciousness Questionnaire [SOCQ] and Pahnke-Richards Mystical Experience Questionnaire [MEQ]
https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~jfkihlstrom/ConsciousnessWeb/Psychedelics/States-of-Consciousness-Questionnaire-and-Pahnke.pdf

Source: RR Griffiths, WA Richards, U McCann, R Jesse. 2006. “Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance.” Psychopharmacology (Berl). 187(3), 268-83, commentaries 284-292. Available on the Council of Spiritual Practices’ Psilocybin Research page (pdf).
http://csp.org/psilocybin/
~~http://www.csp.org/psilocybin/Hopkins-CSP-Psilocybin2006.pdf~~
http://files.csp.org/Psilocybin/Hopkins-CSP-Psilocybin2006.pdf – bottom has the grouped questions – but only the 43 MEQ questions, no trace of the 57 distractor questions, of which CEQ initial pool selected 24, omitting 33 (which I haven’t found yet).

Search

search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22States+of+Consciousness+Questionnaire%22

Short page about SOCQ

url https://blossomanalysis.com/measures/states-of-consciousness-questionnaire/

“The States of Consciousness Questionnaire (SOCQ) was developed [1970] to assess the occurrence features of the change in consciousness induced by psilocybin [Pahnke’s Good Friday experiment]

“and includes the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ).

“The SOCQ consists of 100 items, 43 of which are from the MEQ.”

“The remaining 57 items in the questionnaire served as distracter items.”

But a big problem in Stocker 2023 article is, the item count switches back and forth between “the 57 distractor items” and suddenly, mysteriously, “the 70 distractor items” – as if it doesn’t redefine the term.

Moving from MEQ43 to MEQ30 while the SOCQ superset remains fixed at 100 items, means that 13 “mystical items” from MEQ43 magically transformed into “distractor items” – need to EXPLAIN how that transformation (reclassification) makes sense.

“Mystical” is misconceived, producing indeterminate switching of classification.

	AI on Why Transcendent Knowledge Is…
	Dona on Recognizing Mushroom Imagery i…
	egodeaththeory on Letcher Disproved 1st-Gen Enth…
	egodeaththeory on The Official Brown Database of…
	Jerry B. Brown on Letcher Disproved 1st-Gen Enth…
	Jerry B. Brown on The Official Brown Database of…
	wrmspirit on Mycologists, Find Cubensis in…
	wrmspirit on New Domain Name EgodeathTheory…
	wrmspirit on Deniers of Mushrooms in Christ…
	egodeaththeory on Erwin Panofsky’s Letters…
	Jerry B. Brown on Erwin Panofsky’s Letters…
	cyberdisciple on Egodeath Mystery Show Ep264: F…
	wrmspirit on Idea Development page 22 …
	wrmspirit on Idea Development page 22 …
	egodeaththeory on Branching-message mushroom tre…

Does Griffiths Comprehend Volition-Control Challenges?

Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Ego/Control Is a Challenging Experience

Quote Indicating Griffiths Grasps that Loss of Control of the Mind Is a Challenging Experience

Removal of “Dread” Category in Phases

Charles Stang’s Accusation of Ignoring Negative Mystic Effects, and Griffith’s Pointing to CEQ as Defense Claiming that CEQ Covers Negative Mystic Effects

Griffiths’ Dread-Replacement Agenda

Replace Dittrich by Studerus, Replace OAV by 11-Factor

🛏🛠

☹️🦄💨🌈

🛏🛠

11-Factor Questionnaire Serves as a Deliberate OAV Replacement, Not Supplement

We Are Removing the Dread Questions and Adding the Depression Questions Instead

Griffiths Worked off the 11-Factor Studerus Reduced Dread Category and Didn’t See the 4 Removed Questions

Update Jan. 2: Initial Item Pool Reduced from 64 to 24 Because CEQ Must Have Fewer Negative Effects than MEQ’s 30 Positive Effects

CEQ Misspells “5D-ASC”

Update Dec. 30: Studerus Didn’t Delete Questions

🎩🪄 🎉

😱🐉🚪💎🏆 ➡️ 🗑

54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Phase 1: Dittrich’s 1994/2006 List of 21 Angst/Dread Dimension Effects

Phase 2: Studerus’ 2010 List of 13 Impaired Control and Cognition (ICC) & Anxiety (ANX) Effects

Phase 3: Griffiths’ 2016 List of 3 Effects from Studerus’ ICC+ANX Categories

Result: Removed 18 of 21 the Dread/ Unpleasant effects questions; 86%

Why Griffiths Needed the Final CEQ to Have Greater than 21 and Fewer than 30 Negative/ Non-mystical Psychedelic Effects

The Progressive Story of Inflating the Positive Effects and Removing Negative Effects

Dittrich 1975

Dittrich 1985

Dittrich 1994

Dittrich 2006

Studerus 2010

Griffiths 2016

Selling Covering a Superset, But Delivering Merely a Shift of Which Subset Is Covered

Not Believable that Griffiths Started from Dittrich’s Full Angst/ Dread Dimension’s 21 Questions

References

Dittrich 1975 APZ

Dittrich 1985: OAV dimensions found in APZ[158]

Dittrich 1994 (Oct. 1993) in book 50 Years of LSD – Readable at Google Books

Dittrich 1994 OAV with inflated O & V, shrunken A, in book Worlds of Consciousness, Volume 3 (German)

Dittrich 1998 article about OAV questionnaire [66 items] with improved (tilted positive) OAV items compared to APZ [158 items]

Dittrich 2006 5D-ASC (German) Adding 2 Positive Dimensions to Reduce Negative from 1/3 to 1/5

Dittrich 2010 5D-ASC (English)

Intro

Download

54. I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Post-Recording Realizations

Naivety

Timestamps & Content

0:00

10:00

20:00

30:00

40:00

50:00

Production Notes

Typing 👎 ⌨️ 🙉

Distortion

See Also

Need URL for Dittrich 1994 OAV or 2006/2010 5D-ASC Questionnaire Spec

Found Major Basic Counting Errors and Academic Research Errors in both Griffiths’ CEQ Article and Studerus’ 11-Factor Article: How Question 54 Got Foolishly Dropped

Key Question: How Many Effects/Questions Are in Dittrich’s 1994 or 2006 “Dread of Ego Dissolution” Dimension?

🤦‍♂️ 🙈

🏥 🍽 🐉

They Can’t Even Count! 😅

Griffiths Doesn’t Start from the Full Set of Dittrich’s 17 “Dread” Questions, but Is Working only with Studerus’ Culled Subset of 13 ICC+ANX Questions

🦗 🦗

🐉 –> 🗑

Hypothesis: Griffiths Failed to Go to the Source, Dittrich’s Articles, but Relied on Studerus 2010 Article, Which in Figure 1 Entirely Removed Question 54 and 6 others from Dittrich’s OAV Dimensions (Figure S1 Tree Hierarchy)

More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 End Omits 2 Questions (61 & 62)

More Errors: Studerus 2010 p. 8 Gets Count of Tree’s Factor Member Items Wrong (It’s 49, not 47)

Paragraph Containing Those Errors

🚫🐉

References

Griffiths 2016 CEQ article

Studerus 2010 article breaking 3 dimensions into 11 factors

Dittrich 1994 OAV specification in German

Worlds of Consciousness

Dittrich 1996

Dittrich 1994 OAV specification in English

Dittrich 2006 5D-ABZ specification in German

WANTED: Dittrich 2010 English article “5D-ASC … A Short Introduction”

“Psychometrically Improved”
from 😱🐉 to 🦄🌈