Shamanic Imagery and Ritual Experience: An Empirical Study of Emotions, Beliefs, and States of Consciousness

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and for giving us the opportunity to revise the article.

We have uploaded the revised version and the responses to your questions.

Thank you again for your support.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am afraid that I do not at all understand this paper. It was advertised as a clinical study of 30 participants, but I have learned nothing about the actual clinical study itself. Are the authors the ones who carried out this clinical study of 30 persons? Was there ever an actual clinical study of 30 persons? The only information given about the clinical study comes from references, many of which are several decades old. It seems that maybe the authors have collected the published results from many and various other clinical studies and they use them as their own text cases, but this cannot be right.

So I am unable to understand the first thing about this paper. I suggest that the authors provide much more detailed descriptions about their clinical study, as every other serious academic work with clinical study does.

If the authors did not themselves carry out these clinical studies, then of course this paper will be rejected. But if they in fact carried out a clinical study and this paper is their record of the results, then it must be rewritten to demonstrate this. Because I am not sure which is the case, I am giving the authors the opportunity to rewrite/ revise their paper and re-submit.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I am afraid that I do not at all understand this paper. It was advertised as a clinical study of 30 participants, but I have learned nothing about the actual clinical study itself. Are the authors the ones who carried out this clinical study of 30 persons? Was there ever an actual clinical study of 30 persons? The only information given about the clinical study comes from references, many of which are several decades old. It seems that maybe the authors have collected the published results from many and various other clinical studies and they use them as their own text cases, but this cannot be right.

So I am unable to understand the first thing about this paper. I suggest that the authors provide much more detailed descriptions about their clinical study, as every other serious academic work with clinical study does.

If the authors did not themselves carry out these clinical studies, then of course this paper will be rejected. But if they in fact carried out a clinical study and this paper is their record of the results, then it must be rewritten to demonstrate this. Because I am not sure which is the case, I am giving the authors the opportunity to rewrite/ revise their paper and re-submit.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and for giving us the opportunity to revise the article.

We have uploaded the revised version and the responses to your questions.

Thank you again for your support.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Ethical concerns on research design, participant screening, care taking and after support

The text raises grave ethical concerns. If the screening and the aftercare of the participants was done it was not disclosed, which it needs to be. Leading participants into trance, induced by an 8-beat drum sound needs careful clinical and psychological vetting and screening for potential mental health issues, past traumas and other emotional and/or psychological vulnerabilities since trance states can trigger or re-trigger these as well as evoke dissociative states. Trance states can also cause general instability if not applied with proper safety measurements. (See Britton et.al.) Hence thorough vetting and screening are mandatory. Beyond this, guidance by experienced and professional mental health personal within the trance session and caretaking directly after but also within the following weeks is highly advised. Additional questions such as, were the participants able to leave the trance session, are not disclosed. A chain of support for the participants, and ethical research practices that support the chosen method and research design are not discussed.  

Please see the following two articles on this topic:

Clinical psychologist Willoughby Britton of Brown University has dedicated her studies to the adverse effects of mediation practices. Her findings have also scientific importance for inducing trance states. See: Britton, Willoughby B., Lindahl, Jared R., Cooper, David J., Canby, Nicholas K., Palitsky, Roman. "Defining and Measuring Meditation-Related Adverse Effects in Mindfulness-Based Programs."  Clinical Psychological Science, 2021.

Researcher Alexander Alich has published on „Shamanism and Safety“ (2015). He discusses safety practices in relation to trance states. See: Alich, Alexander. „Shamanism and Safety: Ancient Practices and Modern Issues.“, Routledge Handbook of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Perspectives from Social Science and Law, Nicola K. Gale, Jean V. McHale, London, Routledge, 2015, 87-97.

Incorrect uses of key terms and concepts, misuse of literature and studies

The text displays many examples of constant incorrect use of key terms relevant to the research subject such as „shamanism“, „ceremony“, „religious imagery in shamanic rituals“, „religious images“, „shamanic images“, and more. Already the first two sentences of the introduction gives a false scientific statement and is misleading: „Shamanism is a traditional religious practice widely distributed in central and Northern Asia, Northern Europe, North America, and Africa. It is a cross-cultural phenomenon.“ (23-24)

Within contemporary scientific discourse on shamanism(s) shamanic practices are not classified as religious. In fact, many acknowledged authors claim that there are key differences between shamanic and religious practices, hence also between „religious images” and „shamanic images“. In the text these terms are used synonymously without further definition or explanation. Please see article by Ulla Johansen on „Shamanism and Neoshamanism” (2001). (Johansen, Ulla, „Shamanism and Neoshamanism: What is the Difference?”, In „The Concept of Shamanism: Uses and Abuses“,  Francfort, Henri-Paul, Hamayon, Roberte E., Akadémiai Kiodó, Budapest, 2001, 297-303.)

It is acknowledged that shamanic practices are found within many different cultures, nevertheless it is controversially debated that these practices and cultures can be put into synonymous description and comparison as the authors of this text are doing. Please see in regard to this the complete book by Francfort and Hamayon on „The Concept of Shamanism: Uses and Misuses“ (2001).

Additionally, in the literature review (50-170) next to standard and classic texts and studies by Eliade (1964), Kendall (2014), Krippner (2000) studies on pre-historic paintings and cultures are cited. Within the current discourse on shamanism and rock art studies there is no proof that for example the pre-historic Lascaux Cave paintings – as mentioned in lines 177ff – can be linked to shamanic practices and cultures. Please see article by Paul G. Bahn on the misuse of shamanism in rock art studies. (Bahn, Paul G., “Save The Last Trance for me: An Assessment of the Misuse of Shamanism in Rock Art Studies, in: „The Concept of Shamanism: Uses and Abuses“, Francfort, Henri-Paul, Hamayon, Roberte E., Akadémiai Kiodó, Budapest, 2001, 51-93.)

The use of the terms „ceremony“ and „ritual“ for describing the chosen method of exposing 15 participants to drum beat sound without spiritual meaning, preparation or context is confusing and misleading and disrespectful to living cultures with shamanic heritage.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and for giving us the opportunity to revise the article.

We have uploaded the revised version and the responses to your questions.

Thank you again for your support.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations on your successful revision.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We sincerely thank the reviewer for his/her continued encouragement and generous comments. Thank you for your suggestions on this article. Thank you very much for your approval of this article.

Best regards

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is now a fine paper.

I would like to have seen more direct quotes from cited sources instead of simple citations. The lack of direct quotes weakens the paper. The paper is somewhat short and could be expanded, so if the authors would like to provide more direct quotes, I encourage the journal to give them a few extra days before final submission. But if the authors do not wish to do so, the paper is fine enough.

Too many of the paragraphs are over-long and need to be broken down.

"Shamanic" is not a proper key word, it should be "Shamanism"

"Shamanic" on line 129 should be "shamanic"

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s positive comments and valuable suggestions.

1. Regarding direct quotations from the cited literature:
Following the reviewer’s suggestion, we have carefully added several direct quotations from key cited references throughout the manuscript. These direct quotations effectively illustrate critical arguments and strengthen the manuscript's overall clarity and scholarly impact. We have also slightly expanded relevant sections to accommodate these direct citations.

2. Paragraph length:
We have revised and appropriately divided lengthy paragraphs throughout the manuscript, enhancing readability and logical coherence as per the reviewer’s suggestion.

3. Capitalization of "Shamanic":
The capitalization error at line 129 has been corrected from "Shamanic" to "shamanic".

We are grateful for the opportunity provided by the journal to enhance the manuscript's quality and appreciate the reviewer’s meticulous guidance.

Best regards

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

• Ethical and Methodological Concerns

In the revisited paper the author provides more information on how the study was done methodologically then in the first version. However, my original ethical concerns on methodology, research design, participant screening, care taking and after support remain. In fact, the further provided information create contradictory statements and propositions within the revisited text.

In chapter 2 (Literature Review) the author provides important information on shamanic drum beats and the effect on the nervous system potentially causing trance and hallucinations:

„The frequency of drum beats used in shamanic rituals is usually concentrated between 7-9 Hz. This rhythm range is close to the basic brain wave rhythm of the human brain (especially alpha and theta waves), and can affect the central nervous system through the "auditory driving" mechanism, inducing trance, hallucinations, and trance states (Neher 1962). (118-121)

In contrast to this the author further elaborates in chapter 3 (Method) that: „All procedures were designed as noninvasive and low-risk activities, focusing on passive sensory exposure and self-reported psychological assessments. The structure and procedure of the practice were informed by existing phenomenological approaches to simulate shamanic ritual experiences (Harner 1990; Rock and Krippner 2007). (317-319)

These two statements contradict each other: The author first claims that shamanic drum beats cause trance and hallucinations and secondly claims that the applied method of using shamanic drum beats is noninvasive and a low-risk activity. – From a methodological but also a mere logical position this makes no sense. If the first statement is true that shamanic drum beats can cause trance and hallucinations these drum beats are not noninvasive and a low-risk activity. Since this is one of the central arguments of the author in this text this needs to be clarified with reason.

Within the response letter to the reviewer the author furthermore explained „Before the start of the study, the authors assessed all participants individually through health self-reports and observational interviews. Individuals with a known history of psychiatric illness, recent trauma, or physical discomfort were excluded.“ This mandatory information on research design and participant screening is still not provided within the revisited text. These disclosures on ethics and safety need to be integrated in the text – not only to be addressed to the reviewer.

Again the author claims without further disclosure in chapter 3 (Method) that „the intervention in this study was non-invasive and posed minimal risk — involving only passive sensory exposure, symbolic guidance, and self-reported questionnaires — it qualified for exemption from ethical review by our institution’s review board, the Life Science Committee.“ (285-287)

In chapter 3 (Method) the author furthermore describes the applied method: „Participants lay down in a quiet and comfortable environment and listened to a recording of shamanic drumming, characterized by a repetitive 8-beat cycle of monosyllabic beats. Simultaneously, all participants were guided by brief imagery prompts to imagine sensations of bodily elevation or floating.“ (357-359)

Previously recommended literature by clinical psychologist Willoughby Britton of Brown University on the adverse effects of mediation practices have not been included in these sections of the text. Britton's findings have scientific importance for inducing trance states (e.g. „sensations of bodily elevation or floating“). Also, further recommended literature on shamanism and safety by Alexander Alich of University of Birmingham has not been included. Yet, these two researchers provide key evidence on the importance of safety in relation to shamanic practices, trance states and meditation. – Hence, my ethical concerns on research design, participant screening, care taking and after support have not been disproved but remain strongly.

• Use and misuse of terms and key concepts

In my first review I have recommended to clarify the use of key terms such as “shamanism“, “shamanic culture“, “shamanic imagery“ and “ritual“, etc. These recommendations and changes as well as the suggested literature have not been integrated in the revisited text consistently. The terms “shamanism“ and “shamanic culture“ are used as generalized terms for ALL shamanic cultures that potentially ever existed since the dawn of human evolution up until today and across various continents. It is widely acknowledged within the discourse on shamanic cultures that there is no such thing as ONE shamanic culture, but instead researchers from various disciplines argue that a wide range of culturally embedded shamanic practices existed, exist today and change over time and cultural context.

Sentences such as the following need to be revisited: “Shamanism is a traditional cultural practice that is widely distributed across Central Asia, Northern Asia, Northern Europe, North America, and parts of Africa.“ (25) – Please see Atkinson (1992) on the topic of “shamanism(s)“: Atkinson, Jane Monnig, 1992: Shamanisms Today. Annual Review of Anthropology. 21: 307–330. doi:10.1146/ annurev.an.21.100192.001515

Additionally (but again also in contrast to previous generalizations) the author claims on “shamanic imagery“ that: “These images not only encode cultural meanings, but may also trigger changes in emotions, beliefs, and self-awareness through neuropsychological mechanisms activated during altered states of consciousness. (265-267) Please elaborate on the “encoding of cultural meanings“. If cultural meaning is encoded within the “shamanic imagery”  this needs to be discussed in depth within the text – since this is the central aim and rational of the study and text. So far, the author does not provide this discussion. It is also important to disclose within the method chapter how “shamanic imagery“ was chosen, what images were shown to the participants and how these images relate to any specific shamanic culture.

• Literature review and method, research design

Within the literature review mostly texts on historical shamanic practices are introduced. Yet, “the study aims to investigate the practical effects of symbolic imagery in shamanic religious rituals, in emotional elevation, belief deepening, and alterations in states of consciousness.” (4-5) It is to believed that the aim of the study is about contemporary effects of symbolic imagery. Therefore, it is important to include literature on contemporary practices, and possibly original voices from contemporary shamanic practitioners. I have concerns about the research design here as well. Most parts of the provided information come from archeology and historical anthropology. What do these studies on historic shamanic practices and images have to do with “thirty randomly recruited participants“ who were exposed to a “cultural-phenomenological simulation“? Here a methodological framework is missing and not clearly argued. What does have “New Age philosophy” have in common with shamanic practices? This conclusion and causality is questionable and needs further exemplification.

Please put the following statements in relation to the question above.

• „In shamanic culture, symbolic images carry not only aesthetic or decorative elements, but also profound spiritual symbolic meanings.“ (41)
• "Shamanic imagery is primarily manifested in the symbolic creation of images representing early shamanic life and culture, as well as in the symbolic depiction of images arising from altered states of consciousness.“ (176-177)
• "Namely, the shamanic imagery used in this study primarily focused on traditional spiritual themes such as ancestor worship, natural spirituality, and cosmic order, with limited reference to the individualism and animistic concepts found in New Age philosophy. (465-467)
• "Data showed that after the ritual, scores for traditional supernatural beliefs increased significantly, while scores for New Age philosophical beliefs showed only a slight improvement. (463-464)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer：

 

We sincerely thank Reviewer 3 for highlighting the crucial ethical, methodological, and conceptual issues. We have made extensive revisions as follows:

 

Ethical and Methodological Clarification:

We carefully reconsidered the reviewer’s concerns regarding the ethical risks associated with rhythmic auditory stimulation. Our revised manuscript explicitly states that the drumming employed was controlled at a safe volume (50–55 dB), limited to 15 minutes of monotonous rhythm without additional reinforcement techniques. We strictly followed ethical safety standards by integrating recommendations from Britton et al. (2021) and Alich (2015). Additionally, we detailed the rigorous participant screening procedure, exclusion criteria, stop-word mechanisms, and follow-up checks, ensuring psychological safety and ethical robustness throughout the study (see revised Section 3.1).

 

Terminological and Conceptual Clarifications:

To address terminological clarity requested by the reviewer, we have explicitly clarified that our references to "shamanism," "shamanic culture," and "shamanic imagery" acknowledge cultural diversity and variation rather than implying a universal culture. In the Methods section, we further specified the cultural origin, selection criteria, and symbolic content of the imagery used in our study, emphasizing cultural specificity and encoded meanings (see revised Section 3.3).

 

Literature on Contemporary Shamanic Practices:

Responding to the suggestion to include contemporary shamanic practice literature, we incorporated recent ethnographic and experimental studies (e.g., Ivanescu & Berentzen, 2020; Storm & Rock, 2009). These additions demonstrate how contemporary practitioners use symbolic imagery for spiritual transformation and reinforce the methodological relevance of our "shamanic-like techniques" approach.

 

Distinguishing Traditional and New Age Beliefs:

Finally, we clarified the distinct impacts observed between traditional supernatural beliefs and New Age philosophy, supported by clear empirical data (see Section 4.1).

 

We believe that these detailed revisions have answered the questions raised by Reviewer 3. We are also grateful that we have significantly improved the clarity, ethical rigor, and theoretical coherence of the manuscript.

 

Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Ethical and Methodological Concerns

In my two previous reviews I have articulated strong ethical concerns on research design, participant screening, care taking and after-care. I have recommended literature on meditation-related adverse effects and safety principles within shamanic practices (since trance is a defining element of shamanic practices). Within the current version of the text the author states that „the design of this study still incorporates the key ethical recommendations of Britton et al. (2021) regarding meditation-related adverse effects and Alich (2015) regarding safety principles for ritual-based symbolic practices.“ (356-358) The author does not further describe how this has been done so that the reader can follow process and argumentation. Please exemplify how these principles have been integrated within the study design. – Hence my ethical concerns on research design, participant screening, care taking and after-care have still not been fully addressed.

 Use and misuse of terms and key concepts

In my two previous reviews I have pointed out that key terms and concepts need clarification. I have asked for clarification of terms and concepts (“key terms such as ‘shamanism’, ‘shamanic culture’, ‘shamanic imagery’ and ‘ritual’, etc.”). In the current version of the text these terms and concepts have been defined with more care. But only these examples have been worked on. Other key terms and concepts have still not been defined; it is unclear whether they are used synonymously or merely as unexplained terms. Examples are „ego-dissolution“ (11), „hallucinations“ (31), „Altered State of Consciousness (ASC)“ (18, 50, 54, etc.), „alterations in states of consciousness“ (5), „Shamanic State of Consciousness“ (SSC) (118), „shamanic altered states of consciousness“ (156). In addition, „three stages of trance“ (243-253) are described in chapter 2. To the reader it remains unclear what these terms mean and how they are related to each other and the terms mentioned above. Are they meant as synonyms? Do these terms describe different phenomena? I have to repeat, please clarify key concepts and terms. – Furthermore, in results in chapter 4 two new terms are introduced and seem central in relation to the discussion of the results: „New Age Philosophy“ (465 ff) and „Traditional Paranormal Beliefs“ (465 ff). I have previously pointed out that these terms need explanation in relation to the rationale and methodology of the presented study. Please clarify these and other key terms.

Literature review and hypothesis, research design

My strong concerns on the use of literature and the way the literature review has been done remain. Within the abstract the author states that: „These findings suggest that shamanic symbolic imagery can effectively activate participants’ visual perception and symbolic psychological mechanisms, aiding transformative conscious states. It also plays a positive role in emotional regulation and belief formation.“ (13-16)

To me it seems that the hypothesis has not been studied within an open process but was rather followed through as a given proof. Hence literature and studies were used to support and confirm the hypothesis rather than test and discuss it. In addition to this, it still seems a very big stretch to equate contemporary use of “Day-Glo” colors by contemporary Mexican Huichol people of Western Mexico (263) to rock art paintings from 15.000 to 36.000 years ago in Europe/France (206ff) within a literature review for a study that is situated in contemporary China.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3:

 

We sincerely thank you for your thoughtful professional review of our manuscript. Your comments reflected your deep understanding of Shamanism and provided valuable insights that significantly improved the quality and clarity of our work.

 

We have carefully revised the manuscript based on your suggestions and all corresponding changes have been noted in the revised version. Each of the key issues you raised, including ethical design, concept definitions, and the literature framework, has been addressed through detailed revisions. These have been clearly noted in the notes of the article for reference.

 

Thank you again for your time, expertise, and guidance. Your review has played a vital role in making this manuscript more rigorous and meaningful.

 

Best regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf