Overview

Gerhard Mayer represents a distinctive voice in contemporary anomalistics and parapsychology research, one grounded in rigorous methodological critique and sociological awareness. His work spans empirical investigation of anomalous experiences, editorial stewardship of a major German-language journal in the field, and theoretical development of what he terms “reflexive anomalistics”, a framework that positions anomalistics as a content-defined scientific discipline committed to appropriate methodology while remaining epistemologically self-aware about the cultural and institutional pressures that shape research in this domain.

Mayer’s career has been centered at the Institut für Grenzgebiete der Psychologie und Psychohygiene in Freiburg, one of Europe’s longest-established research centers for parapsychology and anomalous phenomena. His contributions span empirical studies of sleep paralysis and extraordinary experiences, methodological essays on the integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches, editorial work on the Zeitschrift für Anomalistik, and historical-conceptual analysis of foundational ideas in parapsychology such as Jung’s synchronicity principle. His work is characterized by a commitment to scientific rigor without dismissal of phenomena that fall outside conventional frameworks, and by an insistence that anomalistics research must be transparent about its own social and epistemic conditions.

Life and career

Mayer trained as a psychologist and joined the Institut für Grenzgebiete der Psychologie und Psychohygiene as a scientific staff member. He became responsible editor of the Zeitschrift für Anomalistik, the German-language journal dedicated to anomalistics and parapsychology research, and in 2012 assumed the role of executive director (Geschäftsführer) of the Gesellschaft für Anomalistik (Society for Anomalistics), the professional organization supporting research in the field.

His editorial role has positioned him as a gatekeeper and curator of anomalistics research in the German-speaking world. The Zeitschrift für Anomalistik publishes peer-reviewed empirical studies, methodological essays, historical analyses, and critical reviews of work in parapsychology, psychology of anomalous experiences, and related fields. Through this platform, Mayer has helped establish standards for what constitutes rigorous anomalistics research and has fostered dialog between parapsychologists, skeptics, and social scientists.

Research

Methodological framework: Reflexive anomalistics

Mayer’s most significant theoretical contribution is the articulation of a “reflexive anomalistics” paradigm. In a 2016 essay co-authored with Michael Schetsche, he argued that anomalistics should be understood not as a discipline defined by specific methodology, but as a content-determined field, one organized around the ascription of anomalous character to phenomena and experiences, that draws on appropriate methods from whatever scientific discipline is relevant to the question at hand.²

Historically, parapsychology and anomalistics research have been dominated by quantitative experimental laboratory approaches, modeled on natural-science paradigms. Mayer and Schetsche documented a significant shift in recent decades toward qualitative research methods and social-scientific approaches. They argued that this shift is not a retreat from scientific rigor but rather an expansion of legitimate scientific methodology. Qualitative approaches, including single-case studies, ethnographic investigation of ostensible spontaneous psi phenomena, and interview-based research, avoid the considerable reduction of complexity required by quantitative experimental designs and can bring researchers closer to the lived-world manifestations of anomalous experiences.²

The reflexive anomalistics paradigm emphasizes that research in this domain must be systematically aware of three critical dimensions: (a) the epistemic particularities of anomalous phenomena themselves, their resistance to standardization, their sensitivity to observer effects, their entanglement with meaning and belief; (b) the precarious cultural and institutional framework conditions under which anomalistics research operates, including media representation, science policy, and funding constraints; and (c) the areas of tension between subjective evidence, scientific proof, and broader social discourse about the paranormal.² This framework does not abandon scientific standards but rather makes explicit the conditions under which anomalistics research must operate and the ways those conditions shape what questions can be asked and how they can be answered.

Sleep paralysis and extraordinary experiences

Mayer’s empirical research has focused on sleep paralysis (SP), a phenomenon in which a person is conscious but unable to move, typically occurring at sleep onset or upon waking. Sleep paralysis is classified in sleep medicine as a REM-related parasomnia, thought to result from a desynchronization of REM sleep’s muscular atonia with waking consciousness.

In a 2022 study, Mayer and Max Fuhrmann investigated the relationship between sleep paralysis and extraordinary experiences using an online questionnaire administered to 380 participants who had experienced at least one SP episode.¹ They employed multiple assessment instruments: the Fragebogen zur Phänomenologie außergewöhnlicher Erfahrungen (PAGE-R-II), a German questionnaire measuring the extent to which people have had other extraordinary experiences; the Belief in the Supernatural Scale (BitSS); and the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS), which measures the capacity for focused attention and imaginative involvement.

The hypotheses regarding positive correlations between SP frequency and extraordinary experiences, paranormal beliefs, and absorption were only partially confirmed. Mayer and Fuhrmann found significant correlations between SP frequency and two PAGE dimensions (“Dissociation” and “External”) but not between SP frequency and other scales or with supernatural beliefs and absorption overall.¹ However, a striking finding emerged: the 55% of participants who reported paranormal experiences during SP had highly significant higher mean scores on the PAGE, BitSS, and TAS compared to those who did not interpret their SP experiences as paranormal.

This pattern led Mayer and Fuhrmann to propose a hypothesis of two distinct types of SP experience: one primarily connected with typical negative emotions (fear, dread) and a more external focus of attention, and another characterized by positive emotions and more internally experienced perceptions, particularly of the vestibular-motor kind (sensations of movement, floating, or spatial displacement).¹ The data suggest that people with high absorption and paranormal beliefs are more likely to interpret the internally experienced, positive-emotion SP episodes as paranormal, while those with lower absorption and fewer paranormal beliefs may experience the same physiological phenomena but interpret them as purely medical or psychological. This work illustrates Mayer’s approach: rigorous quantitative measurement combined with attention to the interpretive and experiential dimensions that shape how people make sense of anomalous phenomena.

Historical and conceptual analysis: Synchronicity and coincidence

Mayer has also contributed to the historical and conceptual analysis of foundational ideas in parapsychology. In a 2018 review published in the Zeitschrift für Anomalistik, he examined Laurence Browne’s philosophical history of coincidence and synchronicity. Mayer’s review traced the genealogy of Jung’s synchronicity concept, including its intellectual precursors (Schopenhauer, Leibniz, Kammerer) and the crucial influence of theologian and sinologist Richard Wilhelm, who introduced Jung to Chinese philosophy and the I Ching.³

Mayer highlighted the productive but contentious dialog between Jung and physicist Wolfgang Pauli in the late 1940s and 1950s, during which Pauli offered critical scrutiny of Jung’s formulation. Pauli recognized the potential of synchronicity as an explanatory principle for acausal connections but objected to Jung’s imprecise handling of quantum-mechanical concepts and his uncritical embrace of experimental parapsychology findings as evidence for synchronistic principles.³ Pauli also questioned the term “synchronicity” itself, arguing that it was imprecise because synchronistic events need not occur simultaneously in conventional time. Jung, however, maintained the term on the grounds that synchronistic events involve a connection between the timeless sphere of archetypes and temporal events, a distinction that, Mayer noted, made Pauli’s critique of Jung’s attempt to subsume Rhine’s parapsychological experiments under the synchronicity framework more understandable.³

This work exemplifies Mayer’s commitment to careful historical and conceptual analysis. Rather than accepting synchronicity as a settled explanatory framework or dismissing it as pseudoscience, he traces the concept’s development, identifies the points of genuine disagreement between its proponents, and clarifies what remains contested. This approach models how anomalistics research can engage with foundational ideas in a way that is both scientifically rigorous and historically informed.

Editorial and professional contributions

As editor of the Zeitschrift für Anomalistik, Mayer has shaped the discourse of anomalistics research in the German-speaking world. The journal publishes empirical studies, methodological critiques, historical analyses, and reviews that maintain scientific standards while remaining open to phenomena that conventional science has marginalized. His editorial work has helped establish the Zeitschrift as a venue where parapsychologists, skeptics, and social scientists can engage in substantive dialog.

Mayer’s role as executive director of the Gesellschaft für Anomalistik has also positioned him as an institutional steward of the field. The society organizes conferences, supports research, and maintains professional standards for anomalistics research in German-speaking Europe.

Influence and reception

Mayer’s influence operates primarily within the European anomalistics and parapsychology community, particularly in German-speaking countries. His theoretical framework of reflexive anomalistics has provided a language and conceptual structure for researchers seeking to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods while remaining epistemologically self-aware about the conditions under which anomalistics research operates. This framework has resonated with researchers who recognize that the traditional quantitative-experimental paradigm, while valuable, cannot capture all dimensions of anomalous experience and that social-scientific approaches offer legitimate scientific tools for investigation.

His empirical work on sleep paralysis demonstrates how anomalistics research can employ rigorous quantitative measurement while remaining attentive to the interpretive and experiential dimensions that shape how people understand their experiences. The finding that paranormal interpretation of sleep paralysis is associated with higher absorption and paranormal beliefs, rather than with the frequency of SP episodes themselves, illustrates how anomalistics research can illuminate the interaction between physiological phenomena and psychological/cultural interpretation.

Mayer’s editorial stewardship of the Zeitschrift für Anomalistik has established him as a curator of standards and a facilitator of dialog in the field. By publishing rigorous empirical work, methodological critiques, and historical analyses alongside skeptical commentary, he has helped maintain the Zeitschrift as a venue where anomalistics research is held to scientific standards while remaining open to phenomena that conventional science has not yet explained.

His work has also contributed to a broader shift in parapsychology and anomalistics toward greater methodological pluralism and epistemological reflexivity. The recognition that qualitative research methods are scientifically legitimate tools for investigating anomalous phenomena, and that anomalistics research must be aware of its own cultural and institutional conditions, represents a maturation of the field. Mayer’s articulation of reflexive anomalistics has provided theoretical scaffolding for this shift.