Summary: Researchers examined how people perceive and interpret nonordinary experiences (NOEs)—events such as out-of-body episodes, extrasensory perception, and sensing an unseen presence. Using a newly validated 47-item Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences with a large general-population sample of 5,117 adults, the study distinguished the raw context of the events from the cognitive appraisal and long-term meaning-making that follow.
The findings show that while about one in four people report immediate distress during a nonordinary experience, more than half (51%) report positive long-term effects and personal growth after reflecting on the event.
Key Facts
- Positive long-term outcomes: 51% of participants from the general population said their nonordinary experience ultimately led to positive, lasting personal growth and insight.
- Immediate discomfort versus later meaning: Although 25% reported immediate suffering or discomfort and 20% described a net negative impact, most people later recalled these experiences as meaningful or neutral.
- Often occur during alert states: 57% of respondents reported being fully awake and alert during the event, and 39% reported being alone—indicating these experiences commonly happen during ordinary daily life.
- Experience does not equal diagnosis: Features that overlap with psychosis or dissociation are common in non-clinical populations and do not necessarily indicate mental illness.
- Appraisal drives outcome: How someone interprets, frames, and integrates a nonordinary event largely determines the psychological trajectory that follows.
Source: PLOS
One in four people who undergo an extraordinary experience report immediate discomfort, but more than half say the episode produced positive long-term effects, according to a study published August 5, 2026 in the open-access journal PLOS One by Ronald Fischer, Instituto D’Or de Pesquisa e Ensino, São Paulo, Brazil, and colleagues.
Unlikely coincidences, out-of-body experiences and extrasensory perception are types of nonordinary experiences that many people report. Cultures and individuals interpret these events in widely varying ways: one person may interpret a near-death experience as spiritual, while another views it as coincidence. In some traditions, hearing voices is treated as a sign of the supernatural; in others, as a symptom of mental illness.
Whether these experiences are framed as religious, spiritual, paranormal or pathological, affected individuals may either flourish or suffer afterward. This study investigated how people make sense of nonordinary experiences and which interpretations are linked to the best psychological outcomes.
Fischer and colleagues began by validating the Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences, a tool that measures the universal, cultural and religious dimensions of NOEs. They asked 160 Brazilian adults to evaluate the clarity and relevance of each item, identifying ambiguous wording and missing response choices. The original 38 core questions were tested alongside nine new items and revised until at least 80% of participants understood each question as intended.
The finalized 47-item inventory was then administered to 5,117 people representing the general population. Responses indicate that, despite the diverse content of NOEs, people tend to interpret them using a consistent set of beliefs and appraisal patterns. Key descriptive results include:
- 20% of respondents reported a negative overall impact from their nonordinary experience, while 25% reported suffering or discomfort associated with it.
- 51% said their experience led to positive long-term effects in their lives.
- Approximately 39% were alone during the episode, and roughly 57% were awake and alert when it occurred.
- Many participants attributed their experience to chance rather than to a specific cause.
- Most respondents reported at least some sense of control over what happened.
These descriptive findings underscore the complex ways people process NOEs. The authors suggest the results could inform approaches that promote wellbeing and reduce stigma surrounding such experiences.
Ronald Fischer commented: “Experiences like sensing a presence, having a vision, or feeling as though you are observing yourself from outside your body are far more common in the general population than clinical diagnosis rates would imply. Most people in our sample who reported these experiences were not unwell, and most described them as neutral or positive—both at the time of occurrence and in later reflection.”
“Previous research often merged the raw experience with how people made sense of it,” Fischer added. “Our study separates context, the event itself, and subsequent meaning-making. That separation reveals patterns that challenge assumptions prevalent in prior theory, research and clinical practice.”
He continued: “For many people, these events can be meaningful and lead to personal growth. Emphasizing positive outcomes helps normalize these experiences and reduce stigma. Nevertheless, we recommend that anyone who feels such experiences interfere with daily life seek help from a trusted professional.”
Pedro Fortes observed: “What struck us was the mismatch between phenomenology and clinical labels. Features resembling psychosis or dissociation occur frequently in the general population. Our prevalence data show these experiences often arise in ordinary moments—when people are awake, alert and alone—and are commonly remembered as meaningful rather than frightening.”
Jorge Moll added: “How a person interprets an unusual experience appears to matter more than the experience itself in determining whether it becomes a source of distress or meaning. That has direct implications for how clinicians and families should respond when someone reports something extraordinary.”
Funding: This research was supported in part by an external grant from the John Templeton Foundation (Grant ID: 62651), a grant from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnologico (Process: 309085/2023-3) to the last author, and internal funding from the Pioneer Science Initiative of the D’Or Institute for Research and Education, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Additional support came from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) – Finance Code 001. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.
Key Questions Answered:
A: Historically, researchers and clinicians often conflated experiences such as hearing voices or sensing a presence with psychiatric illness. Separating the event from the individual’s appraisal shows that identical phenomena can lead to distress for some people and growth for others, depending on interpretation and social context.
A: Phenomena similar to subclinical psychosis or dissociation are far more common in the healthy general population than clinical diagnosis rates suggest. Because most people evaluate these events as neutral or positive while staying fully functional, experiencing a nonordinary event is not inherently a sign of mental illness.
A: Rather than immediately pathologizing or dismissing a reported extraordinary event, clinicians and loved ones should focus on how the individual is interpreting it. If the person frames it adaptively and experiences no functional impairment, normalizing the event can reduce unnecessary stigma and anxiety.
Editorial Notes:
- This article was edited by a Neuroscience News editor.
- The journal paper was reviewed in full by editorial staff.
- Additional context was added by the editorial team.
About this psychology research news
Author: Hanna Abdallah
Source: PLOS
Contact: Hanna Abdallah – PLOS
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News
Original Research: Open access.
“Making sense of the extraordinary – An investigation of the content and prevalence of appraisals of nonordinary experiences” by Manabu Kubota et al., PLOS One.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0353126
Abstract
Making sense of the extraordinary – An investigation of the content and prevalence of appraisals of nonordinary experiences
People worldwide report nonordinary experiences that stand out from everyday life. These events can be interpreted in diverse ways, sometimes promoting wellbeing and growth, and in other cases contributing to marginalization or mental health problems.
A key challenge has been the lack of systematic study into appraisal processes and contextual features of these experiences. In Study 1, the authors validated and expanded a set of appraisal and contextual questions for the Inventory of Nonordinary Experiences with a Brazilian sample (N = 160). The work confirmed existing appraisal categories with minor adjustments and added nine new context and appraisal items. In Study 2, the revised inventory was used in a prevalence study with a general population sample (N = 5,117), where individuals reported on one of 38 types of nonordinary experiences.
Most contextual features and appraisals showed unimodal distributions approximating normality, suggesting that despite their heterogeneity, nonordinary experiences are typically interpreted using a common set of beliefs and appraisal strategies and share similar temporal characteristics.
Although 20% of participants reported an immediate negative effect and 25% reported some suffering or discomfort, 51% judged their experience to have promoted positive long-term life effects. These findings underscore human resilience and highlight the complex role of nonordinary experiences as potential protective factors for mental health and wellbeing.