Another great paper that is quite interesting.
Abstract: This research was exploratory, and its main objective was to analyze whether anomalous experiences related to parapsychology had statistical behavior similar to psychoticlike experiences (e.g., hallucinations). If psi phenomena have a different ontology from psychotic-like experiences, then they should have a different statistical representation and measurement. In this hypothetical scenario, there would be empirical–statistical grounds for discriminating between psychotic perceptual distortions and anomalous experiences without clinical origin. Different clinical variables common in psychotic disorders were measured in 562 participants. Psychotic-like experiences (such as hallucinations) and anomalous experiences (such as experiences outside the framework of psychosis) also were quantified. Several forward stepwise multiple regression models and techniques based on Exploratory Factor Analysis were used. The EFA extracted 2 factors; the first grouped the variables that measured anomalous phenomena from the continuum of psychosis models and the second gathered the variables that measured them as anomalous perceptions without scientific explanation.
Both EFAs explained more than 70% of the variance. Only 3 clinical variables were necessary to predict 75.9% of psychotic–like experiences assessed from the psychopathological model. Up
to 5 indicators were necessary to predict 73.4% of the unexplained anomalous experiences. Empirical–statistical indicators in the sample used enable differentiation of the anomalous phenomena into 2 prominent models: the psychotic-like experiences model and the anomalous experiences unexplained model. Variables that characterize the psychotic phenotype more successfully predict psychotic-like experiences than they do anomalous experiences. The implications of these findings in relation to psi phenomena and how to distinguish them from psychotic symptoms are discussed.