ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Organizational transitions in awareness: a framework of access, coordination, and regulation.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Consciousness research often uses overlapping terms such as consciousness, awareness, conscious access, subjective experience, reportability, selfhood, and metacognition. This conceptual compression can make it difficult to distinguish different awareness-related processes or to identify which capacities are preserved, disrupted, or restored across altered states. This paper proposes an organizational framework for distinguishing awareness processes in terms of constrained access, representational coordination, adaptive regulation, and recursive self-modeling. The framework distinguishes three related but partially separable organizational conditions: biological regulation, integrated experiential awareness, and recursive self-modeling. Here, partially separable means that these organizational conditions may overlap and interact while nevertheless exhibiting different patterns of degradation, persistence, or recovery under perturbation. Biological regulation refers to adaptive control and responsiveness that need not involve stable experiential organization. Integrated experiential awareness refers to first-order experiential organization in which sensory, interoceptive, affective, and contextual information is coordinated and stabilized across time. Recursive self-modeling refers to the capacity of a system to represent aspects of its own internal, evaluative, or behavioral states across time. The central hypothesis is that these conditions may show ordered vulnerability across perturbation and recovery. Recursive self-modeling should often be more vulnerable than integrated first-order experiential organization under conditions such as sleep onset, anesthesia, dissociation, depersonalization, neurological disruption, and other altered states, and should often re-emerge later during recovery. This prediction does not require sharp thresholds or fixed natural boundaries. Instead, the proposed conditions are treated as graded transition zones within a multidimensional organizational landscape. The framework is positioned as an organizational crosswalk rather than a replacement for existing theories. Its aim is to clarify relationships between biological regulation, experiential organization, metacognitive accessibility, and recursive self-related processing while generating testable predictions for consciousness research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.