After-Death Communications (Overview)

After-death communications (ADCs) are spontaneous experiences in which people perceive contact from someone who has died. This overview examines their history, forms, prevalence and effects, from sensed presences and dreams to apparitions, voices and signs, and surveys psychological, neuroscientific and survival-based explanations.

ADCs are distinguished from mediumship and other deliberately sought communications by their spontaneous and unsolicited character, and may involve sensed presences, dreams, apparitions, voices, touch, scents, signs or coincidences.
Research suggests that ADCs are relatively common and are frequently experienced as comforting or transformative, particularly in bereavement, although prevalence estimates vary substantially according to definitions and methods.
Explanations remain contested: psychological and neuroscientific models emphasize grief, attachment and perception, while parapsychological research examines veridical information and other evidence potentially relevant to survival after death.

Introduction

After-death communications (ADCs) are apparent spontaneous, direct communications from the deceased to the living, without intermediaries such as mediums, Ouija boards, or electronic devices. ADCs have been reported across cultures, throughout history, and across religious traditions. They are among the most frequently described anomalous experiences associated with the bereaved. Although phenomenologically diverse, ADCs typically involve sensing the presence of the deceased, seeing an apparition of the deceased, hearing the deceased’s voice, sensations of being touched by the deceased, smelling a scent associated with the deceased, or witnessing a meaningful sign or coincidence reminiscent of the deceased. Many ADCs also occur in dreams, meditative states, or in moments of quiet reflection.¹

Experiencers typically report the deceased seeming to convey messages of reassurance that they are now in a better place, promises to always watch over the experiencer, desires to resolve conflicts they were unable to resolve while living, or expectations of being reunited when death comes to the experiencer.² Research has shown that ADCs are reported as comforting and give the experiencer a sense of peace surrounding the death of a loved one.³ In bereavement studies, those who have reported having an ADC typically have a shorter period of grief and report positive influences from their experience.⁴ Although there has been a research focus on bereaved populations, ADCs have been reported outside this period also, as well as from individuals who have never been in mourning.⁵

For most individuals, ADCs are associated with positive psychological outcomes, including reduced fear of death, higher spirituality, and increased comfort surrounding, and reassurance about, the deceased.⁶ While the response to ADCs is typically positive, there are instances in which the experiencer reports distress or confusion, particularly when conflicting with an individual’s ontological viewpoint.⁷

ADC research takes an interdisciplinary approach to examining experiences through different lenses within psychology, psychiatry, anthropology, neuroscience, and parapsychology. Within psychology, research focuses on attachment to the deceased, continued bonds, and meaning-making. Psychiatrists view the underlying mechanisms of experience, as well as the effects on grief in bereavement. Anthropologists focus on the religious and cultural elements that have shaped belief in communications with the deceased. Neuroscience views ADCs as a process in how the brain processes grief and sensory anomalies. Lastly, parapsychologists investigate whether some ADCs may provide insight into questions related to the survival of consciousness after bodily death.

The present article provides an overview of the prevalence of ADCs, their phenomenology, and the history of research that has been done with them. It also outlines explanatory frameworks and examines current literature and debates concerning the nature of ADCs. The aim is not to advocate for a single interpretation of ADC phenomena, but to present a range of perspectives that have informed the understanding of ADCs and highlight areas where further interdisciplinary research is needed.

Terminology

The term ‘after-death communication’ was coined by Bill and Judy Guggenheim in their 1996 book Hello From Heaven! The Guggenheims introduced the term as a descriptive label that encompasses the various forms of communication with the deceased reported by bereaved individuals. They aimed to avoid assumptions about the ontological status of experience, permitting researchers from different disciplinary perspectives to investigate the phenomenon using common terminology. Since then, the term has been adopted in parapsychology, consciousness, and bereavement literature, although there is no strict definition of “experience”.

Prior to the Guggenheims, ADC experiences had been discussed under the umbrella terms of ‘hallucinations’ or ‘apparitions’ of the deceased, as well as ‘post-bereavement experiences’ and ‘sense of presence experiences’. While these labels overlapped considerably, they were not entirely synonymous. For example, ‘hallucinations’ of the deceased implied that the communications were either pathologized or not considered possibly to be real. However, ‘apparitions’ or ‘sense of presence experiences’ did not encompass the whole of the modalities. Post-bereavement experiences are a wider category that encompasses experiences but excludes communications outside this period.

It is important to distinguish ADCs from related phenomena such as mediumistic communications, near-death experiences (NDEs), and instrumental trans-communications (ITCs). Differences exist between mediumistic communications and ADCs: mediumistic individuals initiate communication with the deceased, act as channels for receiving messages from them, and pass them on to others. Near-death experiences occur when one is near or survives death. Individuals have reported experiences such as out-of-body experiences, going through a vast tunnel or immense light, and feelings of unconditional love, as well as meeting deceased loved ones. ITC includes telephone calls from the dead and electronic voice phenomena (EVP) devices that may be spontaneous but are not direct communications with the deceased and may be sought-out communications.

Prevalence

The diverse terminology reflects ongoing conceptual debates regarding what should be included within the definition of an ADC. While some researchers prefer a narrow definition, limiting ADCs to direct communications with the deceased through sensory modalities or dreams, others advocate for a wider definition, including symbolism, synchronicities, electrical disturbances, or intuitive impressions. Due to this lack of definitional boundaries, prevalence estimates vary considerably depending on the definition of experience included in surveys.

Jenny Streit-Horn conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of ADCs, one of the most comprehensive syntheses of prevalence research to date. Streit-Horn compared the means of five of the strongest studies in her sample and found that 30-35% of the general population are likely to have at least one ADC in their lifetime.⁸ Across all 35 studies, the prevalence estimates ranged from 2% to 88%. This wide range was mainly attributed to differing definitions of the phenomenon, sampling methods, and data collection techniques. Throughout the different studies, some restricted ADCs to waking sensory experiences, while others included dreams, sensed presence, or meaningful signs or coincidences.

There are also several studies that were not representative, focusing on bereaved populations or spiritualist communities, among whom prevalence may be higher. Streit-Horn concluded that ADCs are more common than previously understood and highlighted methodological heterogeneity across the literature. Methodological issues include inconsistent definitions, reliance on retrospective self-report, and the absence of standardized measurement instruments.

Dewi Rees was one of the first researchers to conduct a systematic investigation of the prevalence of ADCs among bereaved spouses. In The Hallucinations of Widowhood, Rees (1971) reported interviewing 293 widows and widowers. She found that nearly half (46.7%) reported at least one experience where they described a visitation from their deceased spouse. Modalities included visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and sensing the presence of their deceased spouse. Men and women reported similar prevalence and were described as sane-of-mind individuals. The vast majority of participants reported these experiences as comforting or emotionally significant in helping with their grief recovery, with only about 6% reporting the experience as distressing or unpleasant. Rees’ study was influential in challenging the assumption that ADCs should be pathologized and suggesting that they are a relatively common experience in bereavement.⁹

Several demographic variables may correlate with experiencing an ADC and therefore affect prevalence estimates. As with other exceptional experiences, females tend to report a higher level of ADCs than males. Elsaesser et al.¹⁰ found that among 1,004 responses from individuals reporting having an ADC, 85% were female and 14% were male, compared to Rees’sample of 76% female and 24% male.¹¹ Older and widowed populations have also been shown to have higher reporting rates than younger adult populations.¹² There has currently been no research examining prevalence in populations under eighteen.

Prevalence estimates may also be lower than the actual prevalence due to nondisclosure. Unfortunately, there remains a social stigma associated with anomalous experiences, as well as communications from the deceased. Individuals also report fear of disclosure due to negative responses from their peers, family, or fear of being pathologized by clinicians. ADCs are reported as deeply personal, meaningful, and cherished, which may also deter experiencers from sharing for fear that their experience may be diminished by others. These fears are deeply rooted in the history and ongoing culture of pathologizing these experiences or being met with spiritual illiteracy from mental health providers.¹³

Overall, experiences concerning communication with the deceased are quite common across a wide range of cultural settings and are particularly common in bereavement. Rather than portraying ADCs as rare or pathological, research is increasingly demonstrating how ADCs are normal, positive experiences and worthy of open discussion. However, despite some consistent associations, findings remain inconsistent across studies, partly due to differences in sampling methods and measurement tools.¹⁴ Also, the lack of a universally accepted definition for ADC makes comparisons between prevalence studies challenging.

Phenomenology

Overview

Although ADCs vary considerably across reports in content and context, research has identified numerous phenomenological characteristics that are consistent across accounts. Across varying backgrounds, individuals consistently report subjective features, suggesting that ADCs represent a recognizable class of human experience.

Experiencers typically report the feeling that their ADCs were genuine contacts with deceased loved ones, different from imagination, memory, or ordinary dreams. Features of these experiences include an exceptional degree of vivid details and certainty, emphasizing how the encounter remains present in their memory and how psychologically significant it is.¹⁵

Another regular feature is the spontaneous and unexpected nature of the encounter. Differentiating this experience from sought-out communications from mediums or other practices, ADCs typically occur when the experiencer is going about their everyday life without deliberate effort. ADCs may occur during routine daily activities, periods of silent reflection, during sleep, or in the moments of falling asleep or waking up.¹⁶ Although ADCs are more frequent in the most recent aftermath of bereavement, research indicates that ADCs may also occur years or even decades after the individual’s death.¹⁷

Modalities

ADCs are reported through multiple sensory modalities, with many experiencers reporting the involvement of more than one modality.

Visual

Visual experiences involve seeing the deceased as either a full-bodied apparition, a partial figure, a face, or a brief visual impression.¹⁸ Experiencers who visually see their deceased loved ones typically report the deceased appearing healthier, younger, peaceful, and recognizable than at the time of death.¹⁹ Individuals also report various visual perceptions with the apparition appearing translucent or solid.²⁰ Below is an example of a visual experience from Elsaesser:

On June 12th 2012, I was awakened around 6 am in the morning. I saw someone walking on my front porch through my bedroom window. I thought, “who would be here this early?” I got dressed and went to the front door. I opened the door and saw a woman with her back to me on my left, crying. I asked if she was OK. She turned around and it was my grandmother from my father’s side of the family. I was in shock to see her. She spoke and asked me for forgiveness and apologized for no longer talking to me after my father had passed away. I told her it was OK and I forgave her. She walked towards me and we hugged. I felt her frail body hug me and I hugged her back. I felt her clothes, her smell and she thanked me as we hugged. I felt this most intense feeling of love. I started to cry. She then started to turn into this bright white light. I had to close my eyes due to it being so bright. I could see the light fading away through my eye lids. The feeling of her started to slowly leave. I opened my eyes and she was gone. I was standing there with my arms still looking like I was hugging someone. I was in shock. I went back into the house and laid on my bed and my wife woke up. I told her what happened […] My grandmother had been dead for about 7 years.²¹

The following account displays how ADCs can occur during significant events in waking life:

My deceased sister materialized for me only once, at her daughter’s wedding. She was my closest sister, emotionally. Her daughter is like a daughter to me. During the vows portion of the wedding, my sister appeared in the front, facing the couple for only a second or two. She was very clear to me. I can describe what she was wearing even. Once I realized what was happening, she disappeared. I was very emotionally moved. I only told a few family members about it. Nobody else mentioned seeing her. This was about four years after the death.²²

Unlike the account above, visual ADCs may also occur during ordinary waking life, when the deceased is not at the forefront of the experiencer’s mind:

I was walking by a window in my house when I glanced out and saw my mother who had been dead about a dozen years or so. I was in my mid-fifties at the time. She was radiantly happy, and appeared to be in her early thirties. She died in her middle eighties. She was dressed in 1930’s style clothing, and looked prettier than she had even when she was in her thirties, but it was unmistakably her. But the most interesting thing was her huge smile and radiant happiness and joy. She was standing, or perhaps floating, in a gently rolling landscape filled with flowers in the most incredible colours – brilliant colours that we don’t have here. She communicated to me without words, but I’ll never forget what she ‘said’ to me: ‘There is only forgiveness.’ I had a good relationship with my mother, so I don’t think she was referring to anything specific, but it was a wonderful message for me personally and also to share in my ministry. I was a Christian minister at the time. I am now an interfaith chaplain, ordained through a metaphysical organization. ‘How’ I saw her is difficult to say – it wasn’t really with my physical eyes, but on the other hand it kind of was – what I saw out the window was not the land that is there physically, the apparition seemed to completely replace the actual landscape. It’s hard to explain, but it was a very vivid experience.²³

Auditory

Auditory communications involve hearing the voice of the deceased physically or mentally. This may include the experiencer hearing their name being called, a message of reassurance, or other communications.²⁴ Experiencers have also reported internal communications but note that these voices possess qualities that are separate from internal thought. There are also reports of auditory stimuli that the experiencer associates with the deceased:

Some days (~10) after my father died, I was at his house. I was in the kitchen and the house was quiet (late afternoon). I heard him come through the door and do a walk through the house. It was his gait, his movement up the steps. I heard the footsteps through the house, room by room. It was immediately obvious to me that he was doing a final walk through his house. After a couple of minutes, he exited the front door. It was clear that there was a shift in energy, a release. The experience was audio. It did not frighten me because the pace and movement of the sound was so like him.²⁵

ADCs can also include messages of forewarning, displayed in the account below:

My husband, Tim, had been recently diagnosed with a rare and terminal form of cancer. I was staying at a […] Inn about two hours from home because I had started a new job about two months prior and we had not yet found a place to stay. Ealy one weekday morning, I was awakened by what felt like someone sitting down on the corner of my bed. (My mom used to wake me up for school every day by sitting down on the corner of the bed.) I sensed or heard her say, ‘This is going to be really hard.’ This was in late 2011 and my mom had passed away in April of 1994. Somehow, I knew she was talking about Tim’s cancer fight. Even though I received that message, I was afraid to open my eyes. I was afraid that someone would really be sitting on my bed and that it wouldn’t be my mom. When I finally did open my eyes, no one was there. She was right. Tim’s cancer fight was horrific and losing him just over a year later was even worse. I still miss him terribly at six and a half years out.²⁶

Communications from the deceased may also carry veridical information, or previously unknown information that is verified to be true at a later time. The account below highlights how veridical information can be obtained through an auditory ADC:

One night I woke up and saw my biological father. He greeted me and said that he had come to tell me that he was leaving and that he had left me a small legacy. He added that he had met my children and that I had a beautiful family. He bid me a fond farewell and left. I never had any contact with him and I never met him in person. I learned of his existence at the age of nine when I discovered that the father I grew up with and whose surname I have was not my biological father. However, I never sought to meet him, and neither did he. So, we only met personally after his death. Two days after this experience, his family contacted me to inform me of his death and his wish that I receive a legacy he had left me. This confirmed that my experience was real and accurate.²⁷

Tactile

Tactile experiences involve sensations of physically being touched, hugged, kissed, or feeling of pressure (mainly on the back or shoulder) from a non-physical presence that is associated with the deceased. These experiences are mainly described as comforting and positive, giving the living reassurance that the deceased is still with them. Tactile ADCs may be described as such:

About a month after the sudden death of my mother, I was alone in the house in my bedroom. I was sitting on the side of the bed, extremely distressed, howling with the pain of my loss and raging at the God I had put my faith in because he hasn’t come to my help in my hours of need and darkness. I just couldn’t stop crying, and had never felt more alone. I then ‘felt’ my Mother sit next to me and wrap her arms around me. I know it was my Mum in the same was that you can feel someone you know well physically near you – I could smell her. As she hugged me, I was aware of being totally enveloped by her love, and, as she soothed me, I felt an intense warmness and a calmness I hadn’t felt since she died. I felt her stroking my hair, and I recognized the feeling of being comforted by my Mum. I am 100% sure that my Mum came to comfort me – I recognized her essence and energy. Although I shed many more tears in the months following her passing. I never again experienced the despair that I felt that morning. The experience, along with many others that followed, caused me to completely reconsider my traditional religious beliefs, and explore my own spirituality. I believe that I am more at ease with myself as a result of her contact that day.²⁸

Individuals may also report their ADC containing multiple sensory modalities, in the account below, the experiencer is hugged by the deceased, as well as sees the face of the deceased:

I was in the family room, in the basement, listening to a radio program. My phone alarm goes off at five a.m. and I usually aware 30 to 40 minutes prior to the alarm. The room was dark and I was halfway sitting on the couch, kind of learning on my right side. I felt what I thought was one of my dogs climb onto the couch and up towards my waist as if they were trying to hug me. My dogs are about 40-45lbs each and they will usually come up and cuddle. This was different; this was more of a hug, which startled me. When I turned to look, it was my youngest son, Sam, he seemed way younger and he was crying. Thinking back on it the room was dark, but I was as if the lights were on. The speaker to my Bluetooth crackled which distracted me briefly, I turned and he was gone. I stopped for a second to gather my thoughts on what just happened. Sam had based a week before from a drug overdose. My mind was trying to come to grips with the situation when I felt what felt like somebody’s razor stubble brush my left arm. When I turned it was him again. I got composed and said to him, ‘You can’t be here, we just went to your funeral,’ with that, he made an odd facial expression. The alarm on my phone went off and distracted me which was enough time for him to vanish, for lack of a better word. Both times he seemed somehow illuminated, and I only saw his upper torso. Looking back, I didn’t realize when he appeared was a week to the day of his passing around the time they say he died. Several weeks later, a friend of his posted some pictures of him to her Facebook account, one of them was him making that same face.²⁹.

Olfactory

Olfactory ADCs include smelling a fragrance that is associated with the deceased, such as their favorite perfume or tobacco, without the presence of an identifiable source. This modality is less frequently reported but nevertheless experienced by individuals.³⁰

It was a musky scent that was synonymous with Nan’s home and clothes.

The smell of my father’s pipe.

My father was a beekeeper. When he died, we inherited the family property, around which there were major property problems. I solved these problems so that I could put the house up for sale. The night after the sale was confirmed, I was awakened by a smell that stung my nose. When I was fully awake, I identified that smell. It was the one I smelled in the room where my father made his honey, a beeswax scent that I love. And at home I don’t have any candles or furniture wax or anything that has that scent.³¹

Olfactory ADCs may be reported by more than one witness:

My son died very suddenly whilst we were on holiday, of pulmonary oedema. He was a smoker. Neither my husband nor I smoke. As my husband’s job involved having clients in his car, it was a strictly non-smoking zone, usually smelling of air freshener. The day before my son’s funeral, we went to the local […] shop to buy wine, beers, etc. for the wake. We loaded our purchases into the back of the car and made our way home. As we neared our house, I was aware of a strong smell of tobacco smoke in the car. My husband is extremely pragmatic, so I didn’t mention anything, in case he thought I was imagining it. But when we parked on our drive, my husband remained in his seat, staring ahead. After about ten seconds, the car was engulfed in the smell and my husband asked me if I ‘could smell it?’ He was due to take my other son and daughter to the funeral parlor to say ‘goodbye’ later that day, but used my car, as it had unnerved him so much.³²

Sense of Presence

Feeling a sense of presence involves an individual feeling a familiar presence of the deceased nearby without clear sensory perceptions.³³ Elsaesser et al. found that around 34% of individuals who have reported an ADC have felt a sense of presence,³⁴ which is articulated in the accounts below:

I learned in February 2016 that an ex-boyfriend had died suddenly of a heart attack when he was only in his early fifties. We had lost touch two or three years before. The news of his death reached me the day after he died. A few days later, when I got home, just as I turned the key in my lock to open the door of my flat, I received the information that John was there at my place. And I was immediately uncomfortable. I went to the living room and felt John’s presence sitting on a chair around the dining table. He was waiting for me and wanted to see me after his abrupt passing. I couldn’t see him physically but I knew where he was and I cold feel his presence very well. I felt so ill at ease with this sensation that I asked him to leave. I felt that he really wanted to see me and insisted on staying, but I told him that I didn’t feel ready, that later maybe I might want to. And he left. I didn’t feel his presence anymore, the atmosphere was relaxed again. When I was ready one or two weeks later, I asked him to come in a dream and he did. But this is yet another ADC.³⁵

When experiencers describe their ADCs as a sense of presence, they are certain the presence they feel is of a specific deceased loved one, and they know where they are in the room.

I knew where to locate him in the room where I was. I couldn’t see him but I knew exactly where he was. Whereas when I think of him, I cannot ‘feel’ him.³⁶

On the evening of my father’s death, I was standing in front of the fireplace thinking about her, I couldn’t cry. I felt a presence in front of me on the right, then she moved behind me and put her hand on my right shoulder. I felt a lot of love.³⁷

Grandfather was present in the car with me a short time after his funeral. I was in my late teens or early 20s. Not sure of the date as I write this. His presence was strong. I had no doubt it was him although I didn’t ‘see’ or ‘hear’ him. He was there to say goodbye.³⁸

The following account shows how spontaneous ADCs can be. It can occur at any time when the experiencer is not expecting it.

I was heading to the kitchen to do the dishes. I don’t know what I was thinking about, but suddenly I just stopped and froze… I felt him, I felt his energy, his presence. I could almost smell him. I started to sob… and told him not to leave. This feeling lasted for several minutes and then slowly was gone. But for those few minutes it was as if he was right there, with me, loving me, letting me know.³⁹

Sleep Experiences

Sleep experiences are the most common modality of ADC, with around 62.4% of experiencers reporting their contact in a dream. Dreams involving ADCs are typically reported as extremely vivid and unlike ordinary dreams.⁴⁰

About five/six months after my grandmother passed away, I had an experience while sleeping. I went into my parents’ house where my grandmother lived long before they moved in, and there I was my grandmother, smiling, sitting on the sofa in the living room. It was very strange, because I knew and was aware at the time that she had passed away, but there she was, as real as if I were meeting someone face to face. She stood up and hugged me and I felt the warmth and touch of her skin. She looked at me and said she knew I loved her, that I shouldn’t worry (unfortunately I hadn’t been able to say goodbye like I would have liked to). After that I woke up, but it was a strange feeling, I very rarely have any notion of what I had dreamt, I hardly ever remember it, but this event was as real as any daily event in my life. I don’t know how to explain it. I doubt to this day that it was a dream as such since I have never had a dream experience of such a level of realism. In any case, I had a sense of tranquility and peace like I have rarely felt, both during and after this experience, as it allowed me to say goodbye properly.⁴¹

The account above describes a dream ADC that felt as real as waking life, and highlights how this dream was unlike any other. Those who report dream experiences also display the ability to recall them with intense detail.

My father-in-law passed away in May 2010. About six months later, I woke up from a ‘dream’ one morning, and told my husband I had had such a vivid dream about his dad. I was walking along a path in the woods and my father-in-law was walking behind me. I was mildly uncomfortable, not quite knowing where we were headed, but comforted by my father-in-law’s proximity. I finally saw a tree house with a rope ladder ahead of us and I got nervous about having to climb the ladder. I was somewhat reassured with my father-in-law behind me and didn’t want to show that I was nervous. When we got to the ladder, I effortlessly seemed to just fly up the steps of the ladder. When we got into the tree house, I sat across from my father-in-law and took note of how well he looked. He was in shorts and a collared, button-down shirt with the sleeves rolled up. We sat in silence and looked at each other. He seemed to be about 60 years old, but healthy and well. I then woke up. It was somehow very emotional for me. I told my husband about the dream and then went downstairs to get breakfast. While standing at the sink in my kitchen, I suddenly realized the date was November 6th – my father-in-law’s birthday. I went back upstairs and told my husband how stunning it was that I would have this ‘dream’ on his father’s birthday when we hadn’t even been talking about it. Again, I felt very emotional. I again went downstairs when suddenly I understood my father-in-law’s message to me – ‘what you think you can’t do, you actually can do.’ I told my husband and was very choked up telling him. It was all very intense. About a year later, I suddenly felt very driven to do something artistic. Now to say that I had never been artistic at any point in my life is an understatement. As my husband said, ‘You never even doodled!’ Well, I ended up starting to draw and was somehow able to do it. I then started to paint and was somehow able to do it. My father-in-law was a wonderful painter. Oddly enough, my work looks very similar to my father-in-law’s. Sometimes, my husband will see one of my paintings and tell me if he didn’t know better, he’d swear his father had painted it! So, my father-in-law’s message to me was true. Like climbing that ladder in my dream, what I thought I couldn’t do, I actually could do.⁴²

ADCs may also bring great positive transformation into one’s life, help with the bereavement process, and demonstrate psychological and emotional significance:

My mother died in 1972: she was 42 and I was 17. My world fell apart. For the next 17 years, I dreamt about her every night (dreams and often nightmares where I saw her die again). In 1989, 17 years after her death, she appeared to me, again in my sleep, but it was not like my usual dreams. She was sitting on the floor, her knees bent under her, dressed in white, her face bathed in light. With a wonderful smile, she said to me several times ‘look how beautiful it is here, look at this light, I am happy now, you have to leave me’. This experience had absolutely nothing to do with my usual dreams and completely transformed me. All my dreams and nightmares totally disappeared and the way I dealt with my grief changed entirely.⁴³

The following account demonstrates similar aspects in the ADC being comforting, but occurred in the liminal space between being asleep and awake:

I was half asleep, but I knew I wasn’t dreaming. It felt different. My mum was sitting on my bed looking at me with her eyes full of tenderness. She had the same facial features, but without the old age and without the illness. She has always been a beautiful woman, but now she was glowing. She was a resplendent beauty, more lovely than ever. She was wearing a long white dress. She took me in her arms. It was a gesture she liked to do when she was alive, but I was shying away from it at that time. Now, I really let myself go into her embrace, I could actually feel her. We didn’t talk, but I felt that she wasn’t angry with me for not being there when she died, for saying the last words to her in a hurried and annoyed tone. It totally soothed me and in a lasting way.⁴⁴

After-death communications may also involve multiple witnesses experiencing communication from the same deceased person at the same time.

My husband’s son (MN) died in 2002 of a heart attack at the age of 22. He was his only son. We have no children together. We have been together for 24 years now. We had cleaned out the small room upstairs where there was a bag full of MN’s clothes and we took them and other things downstairs to make space in the small room upstairs. That night, I remember that while I was sleeping, I felt MN in the other room and then he came over to greet me. He felt so real, even while asleep, and I leaned back to kiss him. At that moment I woke up and saw my husband crying. It was 3 a.m. I asked him what was wrong and he told me that he had dreamt of his dead son… He had never dreamed of MN before, and neither had I, and we have never dreamed of him since. It was as if he had come to say good-bye… He was wearing a grey jumper, just like the one I had put in the bag containing his clothes.⁴⁵

Phenomenological Consistency

Although ADCs occur in various cultures, religions, and belief systems, literature surrounding phenomenology demonstrates consistency in ADC characteristics. Experiencers commonly describe encounters as vivid and real (sometimes even more real) than ordinary life, with emotional significance, and enduring perceptions that the ADC differed fundamentally from imagination or ordinary memory.⁴⁶ Moreover, ADCs involving non-human animals are strikingly similar to human ADCs in their phenomenology and their prevalence by type.⁴⁷

Historical Perspectives

Early Cultural and Religious Accounts

Communications with the deceased have been documented throughout human history and appear across different cultural and religious traditions. Beliefs surrounding continued communication with the deceased remain present in many societies, where ancestors are often regarded as maintaining ongoing relationships and offering guidance to the living. There have been reports of dreams, visions, voices, and sensed presence involving the deceased that have traditionally been incorporated into religious, spiritual, and cultural frameworks. These experiences are often regarded as deeply meaningful and provide insight into the nature of death, consciousness, or continuation of personality.

Encounters with the deceased in many religions have been interpreted as evidence of ongoing existence beyond bodily death. Reports of visions of saints, ancestors, or deceased loved ones are present throughout Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and Indigenous traditions. Although each tradition interprets these experiences differently, there remains commonality in phenomenology with contemporary reports of after-death communications. With the inclusion of aspects of encountering a deceased person, the transmission of a message, and the associated sense of transformation or reassurance.

Prior to the scientific investigation of these experiences, ADCs were generally understood through religious or supernatural frameworks rather than psychological explanations. With the emergence of modern scientific approaches to human experiences during the nineteenth century, researchers began to examine these reports through systematic observation and documentation.

19th-Century Interest in Communication with the Deceased

Viewing modern research surrounding ADCs, interest stemmed from the rise of Spiritualism in the nineteenth century, with the Fox sisters in New York. The Fox sisters claimed to communicate with the deceased through séances, mediumship, and trance communications, which led to the development of Spiritualism.⁴⁸ The Spiritualist movement captivated individuals from diverse backgrounds, including academics and intellectuals interested in viewing how these experiences connected to evidence of consciousness surviving bodily death.

Although Spiritualism is a religious movement, it propelled scientific exploration in viewing extraordinary human experiences. Through this movement, many people reported communications with the deceased, leading researchers to consider questions that remain central today in ADC research. These questions included viewing the prevalence of ADCs to distinguish whether they are a universal experience, whether they can be objectively studied, and whether they represent psychological processes or evidence of continued consciousness. The distinction between mediumship and ADCs was noticed during this time when viewing intentional communication from the deceased rather than spontaneous experiences that were not sought out. This distinction remains present today in contemporary ADC literature.

The Emergence of Psychical Research

The Society for Psychical Research (SPR) was established in London in 1882 and marked a significant transformation in how anomalous experiences were investigated. The aim of the SPR was to scientifically investigate phenomena associated with consciousness that fell outside of conventional materialistic explanations. Early psychical researchers were able to collect and analyze thousands of accounts involving apparitions, visitations from the deceased, and mediumship. Although the term ‘after-death communications’ had not yet been coined, many of the accounts analyzed involved individuals communicating with the deceased, which would be classified as a contemporary ADC.

One of the most influential pieces of literature created during this period was Phantasms of the Living (1886) by Edmund Gurney, FWH Myers, and Frank Podmore.⁴⁹ This work consisted of hundreds of accounts involving ADC experiences, with an attempt to classify them according to circumstances, timing, and evidential characteristics. Attention was also given to crisis cases, in which the ADC occurred near or at the time of death, as well as the possibility that these experiences could be explained by other extrasensory perceptions, psychological processes, coincidence, or other mechanisms.

Shortly after Phantasms of the Living, in the 1890s, the SPR conducted a large-scale survey called the ‘Census of Hallucinations’ asking 17,000 individuals ‘Have you ever, when believing yourself to be completely awake, had a vivid impression of seeing or being touched by a living being or inanimate object, or of hearing a Voice: which impression, so far as you could discover, was not due to any external physical cause?’.⁵⁰ As a result, the SPR received 1684 positive responses and found that it was quite common for mentally sane individuals to report a ‘hallucination’ from the deceased.

There were also reports of ‘hallucinations’ being outside of periods of bereavement, as well as reports of the individual being unaware that the person they were communicating with a deceased person. Based on this response, researchers concluded that these experiences occurred outside of grief and bereavement. This survey represented one of the earliest attempts at examining anomalous experiences through survey methodology and contributed to later discussions regarding the prevalence and psychological significance of encounters with the deceased.

From this research and analysis, researchers associated with the SPR, including Frederic Myers, started developing broader theories of consciousness. Myers proposed that human consciousness may extend beyond ordinary awareness and that exceptional experiences could provide insight into the mind’s structure and limitations.⁵¹ His work has been influential to researchers interested in survival after death, altered states of consciousness, and anomalous experiences.

20th-Century Developments

During much of the twentieth century, ADC experiences were often interpreted within the psychological or psychiatric frameworks of bereavement. Early psychiatric literature frequently pathologized these experiences and described post-bereavement perceptions of the deceased as hallucinations that required clinical evaluation.⁵² This pathologization was influenced by broader assumptions that sensory experiences not caused by external stimuli were psychological abnormalities or dysfunctions.⁵³

However, as more research emerged within bereavement studies, challenges arose to this established framework. Studies of bereaved populations found that sensing the presence of a deceased loved one, hearing their voice, or experiencing vivid dreams of the deceased were relatively common, even with ‘sane’ individuals.⁵⁴ Researchers began to recognize that these experiences generally serve as adaptive functions and assist the bereaved through grief by maintaining emotional bonds, processing the loss, and integrating the relationship with the deceased into their life.⁵⁵

There was a major theoretical shift with the development of the continuing bonds perspective in bereavement research,⁵⁶ Early models of grief in bereavement often emphasized the ideology of detachment from the deceased as a healthy adjustment.⁵⁷ In contrast, continuing bonds theory emphasized maintaining a symbolic or internal relationship with the deceased. Within this framework, ADCs became a central focus of examination, not only as an unusual event but also as an important component of the grieving process.⁵⁸

Contemporary ADC Research

Scientific investigation into ADCs has grown rapidly over the last 50 years. Initially, researchers primarily studied individual case reports and clinical observations; however, modern studies utilize quantitative, qualitative, epidemiological, and mixed-method approaches.⁵⁹ Researchers from psychology, psychiatry, palliative care, anthropology, religious studies, and psychical research have contributed to the empirical literature studying prevalence, phenomenology, psychological effects, and possible mechanisms of ADCs.⁶⁰ Although academic interest in ADCs is growing, there is no one dominant research methodology or approach.

Survey and Epidemiological Research

Most empirical research on ADCs uses surveys to determine prevalence and correlates of ADCs. Initially, researchers surveyed bereaved spouses and family members; participants were recruited from hospitals, bereavement services, and community samples.⁶¹ Rees’ (1971) study of widows demonstrated that sensory experiences of deceased spouses were much more frequent than previously believed and established ADCs as a valid subject for bereavement research. Subsequent surveys have expanded to include broader bereaved populations; researchers report prevalence estimates ranging from approximately 33-50% depending on operational definitions used.⁶²

More recently, researchers have also examined ADCs outside traditional bereavement samples, indicating that spontaneous experiences of communication with the deceased may occur in broader contexts than previously recognized.⁶³ Researchers have also examined associations between ADCs and variables such as age, gender, religiosity, spirituality, paranormal beliefs, attachment style, and grief outcomes.⁶⁴

Contemporary research has increasingly examined ADCs occurring in childhood, recognizing that children may report encounters with deceased relatives, friends, or even individuals they did not know in life. These experiences may shape children’s developing understanding of death, spirituality, and meaning. At the same time, the scope of ADC research has expanded beyond human relationships to include encounters with deceased companion animals. These studies suggest that animal ADCs share many of the same phenomenological characteristics as human ADCs, further supporting the consistency of these experiences across different relational contexts.⁶⁵

Qualitative Research

Qualitative methodologies have become increasingly valuable for understanding the lived experience of ADCs. Instead of attempting to explain ADCs qualitatively, researchers aim to describe, interpret, and integrate ADCs into individuals’ lives. ⁶⁶ Semi-structured interviews, narrative inquiry, interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), grounded theory, and reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) have all been used to analyze ADCs.

Researchers have consistently identified common themes, including perception of reality of ADC experience, comfort, reassurance, transformation of beliefs about death, ongoing emotional bond with the deceased, and reluctance to discuss ADCs due to fear of social stigma.⁶⁷ Researchers using qualitative methods have also highlighted considerable variability among ADCs. Many ADCs involve visual or auditory perceptions; however, others consist primarily of sensed presence, dreams, intuitive knowing, and symbolic communication.⁶⁸

Interview-based studies have shown that individuals commonly distinguish ADCs from imagination or ordinary dreams by vividness, emotional intensity, and long-lasting significance. An advantage of qualitative research is its ability to capture the complexity and personal meaning of ADCs without reducing them into predefined categories.⁶⁹ However, qualitative studies usually involve relatively small samples and are not designed to establish prevalence and causal mechanisms.⁷⁰

Case Studies and Veridical Investigations

Detailed case investigations have been an integral part of ADC research since Victorian times. Historically, the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) collected numerous reports of spontaneous encounters with the deceased, accompanied by extensive witness interviews and attempts at independent verification. Contemporary case studies continue this tradition by documenting unusual or potentially verifiable experiences in greater detail than is feasible within survey research.

Researchers have paid particular attention to cases involving veridical information; information apparently unknown to the experiencer at the time of ADC that is subsequently verified. This includes shared ADCs, where two or more individuals independently report experiencing the same event. Such cases are rare but have received attention because they appear less readily explained by conventional psychological models based solely on an individual’s cognition or memory. Case study methodology enables researchers to examine context, chronology, and verifiability of unusual reports in considerable detail. Nevertheless, critics have noted that retrospective accounts may be subject to memory distortion, selective reporting, confirmation bias, and lack of independent verification. Therefore, individual cases rarely resolve issues related to causation; this may generate hypotheses for further investigation.

Methodological Challenges

Despite progress made in ADC research, several methodological limitations exist. Definitions for ADC vary greatly between studies, making comparisons challenging and contributing to variations in reported prevalence rates. Some researchers include only waking sensory experiences, others including dreams, sensed presences, symbolic coincidences, and intuitive impressions. Much of the literature also relies on retrospective self-report, which is susceptible to recall bias or reconstruction over time. Convenience sampling remains prevalent, particularly in qualitative research; participants recruited through bereavement organizations or spiritual communities may not be representative of the wider population. Cross-cultural research remains limited, although recognition is growing that cultural beliefs affect both the interpretation and reporting of ADCs.

Clinical Perspectives

Interpretations of ADCs have evolved considerably over the past century. Early psychiatric and psychological research regarded these experiences of contact with the deceased as hallucinations specifically due to bereavement, grief, and psychopathology. As more research has been conducted surrounding the circumstances of communications with the deceased, pathologization has been moved away from the forefront of causation. This shift originated from research showing that individuals who reported ADCs were psychologically healthy, that it was a common experience during bereavement, and that it was beneficial to those in grief.⁷¹ As a result, psychological and clinical perspectives have transformed from asking whether ADCs are pathological to examining their phenomenology, meaning, and role in coping with loss.

Current Perspectives

Contemporary psychological and clinical approaches generally recognize that ADCs are common experiences among psychologically healthy individuals.⁷² Neuroscience-based models seek to describe the mechanisms by which ADCs may occur rather than resolving questions about their ultimate ontological status.⁷³ Clinicians are primarily interested in how bereaved people interpret their ADCs and how their interpretations affect their psychological well-being.

Bereavement researchers currently agree that ADCs should be viewed in conjunction with grief, attachment, culture, and personal meaning.⁷⁴ This shift has led to changes in clinical practice, with clinicians moving away from automatically pathologizing ADCs toward appreciating the diversity of ways in which bereaved people experience and cope with their bereavements.⁷⁵

Implications for Clinical Practice

Recognizing the widespread occurrence and general harmlessness of ADCs has influenced current bereavement practices and clinical practices. Clinicians are increasingly being encouraged to differentiate between spontaneous bereavement experiences and hallucinations caused by psychiatric illness.⁷⁶ Contemporary researchers have therefore emphasized the importance of distinguishing between culturally and personally meaningful bereavement experiences and hallucinations occurring within the context of psychiatric illness.⁷⁷

Although there may be superficial similarities between ADCs and hallucinations, ADCs typically occur in the context of bereavement, are recognized as meaningful by those who experience them rather than frightening, and rarely disrupt normal functioning.⁷⁸ Several authors have argued that clinicians should create opportunities for bereaved people to talk about their ADCs without fear of ridicule or pathology.⁷⁹ Creating a safe space for people to discuss their ADCs may help to alleviate distress, enhance therapeutic alliance, and assist bereaved people in finding new meanings in their losses.⁸⁰

Conversely, dismissing or pathologizing ADCs may create shame or secrecy and discourage bereaved people from seeking professional assistance.⁸¹ Professional guidelines increasingly emphasize the need for clinicians to evaluate the broader clinical context when assessing reports of ADCs rather than making assumptions solely based on the presence of an unusual perceptual experience.⁸² Elements such as reality testing, functional impairment, emotional response, cultural background, and the presence or absence of additional psychiatric symptoms should all be evaluated when assessing reports of ADCs.⁸³

Bereavement and Continuing Bonds

In 1996, Klass et al. introduced a new prospective model in bereavement psychology with the emergence of the continuing bonds theory. Earlier models of grief and bereavement therapy frequently emphasized separation and detachment from the deceased in order to move on and have a healthy adjustment,⁸⁴ This technique had been used for decades until Klass, Silverman, and Nickman argued that maintaining an enduring psychological or spiritual relationship with the deceased is normal and often beneficial in the bereavement process.⁸⁵

Clinical researchers have primarily studied ADCs in relation to bereavement, coping, and psychological adjustment. Studies conducted within palliative care, hospices, and bereavement counseling have consistently found that many people find ADCs comforting rather than disturbing. Reports frequently describe diminished fear of death, strengthening the continuing bond with the deceased, and enhanced meaning-making following bereavement. Clinical investigations have also examined the distinction between ADCs and hallucinations associated with psychiatric illness.

Within this framework, ADCs were understood as a possible expression of an ongoing relationship rather than a hindrance to healing from the loss.⁸⁶ Bereaved individuals who experienced an ADC often reported positive feelings of comfort, closure, and an ability to find a sense of peace with the loss.⁸⁷ These studies indicate that rather than preventing adjustment, ADCs may facilitate meaning-making and support readjustment following bereavement. Contemporary grief theories have similarly emphasized that adaptation after bereavement involves maintaining a relationship with the deceased into one’s continued life rather than emotionally or psychologically severing attachment entirely.⁸⁸ Therefore, ADCs may represent one mechanism through which bereaved individuals can maintain a symbolic or spiritual continuity.⁸⁹

Although there exist superficial similarities, bereavement-related experiences typically occur in psychologically healthy individuals and are acknowledged as meaningful rather than frightening or accompanied by impairment testing or broader psychotic symptoms. These findings have led to modifications to clinical guidelines or encouraged practitioners to explore such experiences sensitively rather than assuming psychopathology.

Cognitive and Psychological Explanations

Attachment Theory

Several psychological models have been developed to explain the occurrence of ADCs without requiring an assumption of survival after death. Attachment theory asserts that the emotional bonds we form with others continue to function cognitively and emotionally after we lose them. According to Bowlby’s theory of attachment, our temporary belief that we see, hear, or feel the presence of our lost loved ones is a reflection of the continuing presence of our internal representation of our attachment to them as we attempt to come to terms with the fact that they will never return.⁹⁰ A similar explanation has been advanced for why recently bereaved people so often claim to hear the voice of their deceased loved one or expect them to appear at their door.⁹¹

Memory-Based Explanations

Memory-based explanations argue that when we are grieving, we tend to access and recall autobiographical memories related to our lost loved ones.⁹² When environmental stimuli, emotional states, or familiar routines trigger these memories, we create vivid mental images and representations that we perceive as being unusually real.⁹³ In some cases, these internally generated images may be mistakenly perceived as external reality, particularly when we are experiencing heightened levels of emotional arousal.⁹⁴

Predictive Processing Models

Predictive processing models, which are becoming increasingly popular in cognitive neuroscience, state that our perception of the world is based on our brains constantly generating and updating predictions about what is going on around us.⁹⁵ After losing someone close to us, our established expectations about their presence may continue to exist for a short time after we know they have died.⁹⁶ When our expectations conflict with the sensory data we receive, we may experience a sensation of perceiving, seeing, or hearing our lost loved one in a familiar location.⁹⁷

Sleep-Related Mechanisms

Sleep-related mechanisms have been proposed as one explanation for some after-death communication experiences, particularly those occurring during transitions between wakefulness and sleep. Hypnagogic and hypnopompic states are associated with vivid perceptual experiences, including visual, auditory, and multisensory phenomena that can involve familiar individuals.⁹⁸ These sleep-related processes may account for some ADC reports occurring near sleep onset or awakening; however, bereavement research demonstrates that many experiences of sensing, hearing, or seeing the deceased occur during full waking consciousness, suggesting that sleep-related mechanisms alone cannot account for the diversity of ADC phenomenology.⁹⁹

Meaning-Making and Adjustment

After-death communication is not just about explaining why ADCs occur, but also about understanding how people perceive and deal with them. Qualitative studies consistently show that people who have had ADCs view them as some of the most profound experiences of their lives. Common outcomes include a sense of reassurance about the well-being of the deceased, a reduction in fear of death, an increase in spiritual awareness, and a renewed sense of purpose following their bereavement.¹⁰⁰

Meaning-making theories suggest that after experiencing a significant loss, people need to reassess their perceptions of themselves and their world. ADCs can aid in this process by helping people integrate the death into their overall life stories.¹⁰¹ Whether an ADC is interpreted as actual communication from the deceased, a symbolic experience of the deceased, or a meaningful coincidence, many people who have had ADCs indicate that they help them to accept the loss, emotionally heal, and continue their relationship with their deceased loved one.¹⁰²

Although many people respond positively to ADCs, not everyone does. People who experience ADCs may feel confused, anxious, or fearful, particularly if the ADC is inconsistent with their personal beliefs or if they interpret it as evidence of mental illness.¹⁰³ People may also choose not to share their ADC experiences because they anticipate being ridiculed or stigmatized.¹⁰⁴ Therefore, the emotional response to an ADC depends not only on the ADC itself but also on the way the individual interprets it and how others respond to it.

Explanatory Models

The interpretation of after-death communications represents one of the central debates within the scientific study of exceptional human experiences. Although there is broad agreement that ADCs are authentic subjective experiences, there is no consensus concerning mechanisms responsible for their occurrence. Explanatory models encompass multiple disciplines, including psychology, neuroscience, psychiatry, philosophy of mind, religious studies, and psychical research.

Generally speaking, these models may be categorized into four groups: psychological explanations, neuroscientific explanations, living-agent psi hypotheses, and survival hypotheses. These approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and some researchers have argued that different mechanisms may account for different kinds of ADC.

Psychological Models

Psychological explanations regard ADCs as products of normal cognitive and emotional processes associated with bereavement rather than communication originating from the deceased. These models attempt to explain why such experiences occur and why they are often emotionally significant, as well as why they are particularly common following the death of a close attachment figure. Attachment theory has been especially instrumental in this regard. Bowlby proposed that close relationships are maintained through internal working models that persist following bereavement.¹⁰⁵ The continued activation of these attachment representations may contribute to experiences of sensing the presence of the deceased, hearing the voice of the deceased, and expecting deceased to appear in familiar settings.

Rather than representing psychopathology, these experiences may represent a temporary outcome of adapting to permanent separation. Memory-based accounts also propose that bereavement enhances accessibility of autobiographical memories associated with the deceased. Environmental cues, routines, and emotional states may activate vivid mental representations experienced as unusually realistic. Such processes may be particularly apparent during periods of intense grief when memories remain highly salient. Meaning-making theories emphasize adaptive purposes served by ADCs.

Contemporary bereavement research suggests maintaining an ongoing psychological relationship with the deceased can facilitate adjustment following loss. From this perspective, ADCs may aid bereaved individuals in incorporating bereavement into a broader life narrative, reducing emotional distress, and constructing meaning following significant loss regardless of whether experiences involve objective communication.

While psychological models explain many reported characteristics of ADCs, they are supported by extensive research on grief, attachment, and cognition, and they are typically less capable of accounting for cases in which experiencers report acquiring apparently verifiable information previously unknown to them at the time of experience.

Neuroscientific Models

Neuroscientific explanations focus on brain mechanisms that may contribute to ADCs. Contemporary models increasingly conceptualize perception as an active process whereby the brain constantly generates predictions about the external world based on prior experience, expectation, or sensory input. Predictive processing theories propose that the brain constructs perceptual experience by combining incoming sensory data with previously established expectations.

Following bereavement, deeply established expectations about the presence of a loved one may temporarily persist despite conscious awareness of their death. Under certain circumstances this mismatch between prediction and sensory data may produce vivid experiences of sensing or perceiving the deceased. Other neuroscientific accounts emphasize the role played by sleep-related processes.

Hypnagogic/hypnopompic states occurring during transitions between wakefulness/sleep are well known to produce vivid sensory experiences involving voices, figures, or a sense of presence. These mechanisms may help explain some ADCs, particularly those occurring at night or immediately upon awakening. Research has also explored the role played by imagery, absorption, dissociation, and attentional processes. Individuals with greater imaginative involvement or absorption may be more likely to experience unusually vivid internal representations. However, empirical findings remain inconsistent with these characteristics, as they are neither necessary nor sufficient for ADCs to occur.

While neuroscientific models provide plausible explanations for many reported experiences, critics note that they primarily explain how such perceptions might occur rather than addressing questions concerning whether all reported experiences can be explained solely by neuronal activity.

Living-Agent Psi (Super-Psi)

Some researchers within parapsychology have suggested that ADCs may be explained through living-agent psi, often referred to as the super-psi hypothesis. According to this interpretation, experiences interpreted as communication with the deceased may instead result from extraordinary but unconscious capabilities possessed by the living experiencer.¹⁰⁶ Super-psi hypotheses propose that telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition could enable individuals to obtain information appearing to come from a deceased person but instead originating from living minds or information existing within the environment. Within this framework, veridical details reported during ADCs do not necessarily imply post-mortem survival since they may be attributed to anomalous information acquisition by the experiencer.

The main advantage of the super-psi hypothesis is that it attempts to explain apparent evidential cases without presuming the existence of personal consciousness after death. However, this requires assumptions about the scope or sophistication of psi functioning exceeding current empirical evidence. Super-psi also fails to explain why experiences consistently exhibit the personality, memories, and communicative style of specific dead persons rather than appearing as anonymous information transference. Despite these criticisms, living-agent psi remains an important theoretical alternative within psychical research since it demonstrates that evidence supporting survival may not necessarily demonstrate definitive proof of post-mortem consciousness.

The Survival Hypothesis

The survival hypothesis proposes that at least some ADCs represent genuine communication between living individuals and deceased entities. Historically, this interpretation has been linked closely with psychical research and has motivated investigations into mediumship, apparitions, deathbed visions, and other experiences that appear to suggest continuity of consciousness beyond physical death.¹⁰⁷. Proponents of the survival hypothesis cite veridical ADCs, in which experiencers report acquiring information previously unknown to them or later independently verified. Shared ADCs involving multiple witnesses, or cases in which individuals encounter dead persons whose deaths were previously unknown, have also been considered potentially evidential.

Researchers including Frederic WH Myers, Eleanor Sidgwick, Ian Stevenson, Emily Williams Kelly, Erlendur Haraldsson and, more recently, Chris Roe and Callum Cooper have contended that while many ADCs may be explained psychologically, a number of thoroughly documented cases warrant consideration within wider discussions regarding survival research.¹⁰⁸ The primary hurdle facing survival hypotheses is methodological rather than conceptual. Since most ADCs occur spontaneously and cannot be reproduced under controlled conditions, it is difficult to obtain evidence sufficient to differentiate survival interpretations from alternatives such as super-psi, unconscious inference, or memory processes. Furthermore, survival represents only one possible explanation for experiences involving apparently verifiable information.

Conclusions

After-death communications are perhaps one of the most experienced types of exceptional human experience associated with death and bereavement. In addition to being documented across cultures and throughout time, research also supports the finding that ADCs are prevalent, phenomenologically diverse, and psychologically meaningful.

Although interpretations of ADCs vary, research has consistently shown that ADCs are widespread, phenomenologically diverse, and often associated with profound personal meaning. Historically, the evolution of ADC research reflects the changing views of science and culture toward extraordinary experiences. Initially, descriptions of ADC occurred primarily within religious and spiritual frameworks. During the late 1800s, psychical researchers developed systematic methods for studying reports of apparitions and communications with the deceased. By the middle of the 1900s, psychologists and bereavement researchers began to study ADCs as a normal part of grieving for lost loved ones, thereby refuting prior assumptions that ADCs represented symptoms of psychological disorders. Today, researchers studying ADCs approach them from several disciplines, including psychology, neuroscience, anthropology, clinical practice, and consciousness studies.

Research has shown that ADCs are quite common, especially among individuals who are bereaved. Studies have documented a wide range of ADCs, including sensing a presence, dreaming about a deceased individual, hearing or seeing a deceased individual, feeling touched by a deceased individual, and receiving messages from or hearing information from a deceased individual. Interestingly, many individuals describe ADCs as comforting, transforming, and helpful for adapting to loss. These findings have led to a change in clinical practice where ADCs are increasingly recognized as legitimate manifestations of grief rather than indicators of psychopathology.

Although much has been learned about ADCs through research, many questions remain unanswered about how ADCs occur. Psychological and neuroscientific theories offer explanations that focus on attachment processes, memory, predictive processing, perception, and meaning-making. These explanations account for many of the characteristics of ADCs experienced by bereaved individuals. However, researchers working within the field of psychical research contend that some ADCs may contain evidence of psi phenomena (living-agent psi), and/or may indicate that consciousness survives bodily death (survival hypothesis). As such, competing interpretations exist within the field of consciousness research; none have emerged as dominant. Thus, the study of ADCs exists at the interface between traditional psychological science and larger issues related to consciousness and human experience. Rather than existing under one discipline, ADCs raise questions that transcend disciplinary lines separating psychology, neuroscience, philosophy, and spirituality.

Therefore, investigations into ADCs require careful consideration of both empirical evidence and the subjective meanings ascribed to ADCs by those reporting them. Future research would greatly benefit from increased standardization in methodology, larger representative samples, longitudinal studies, cross-cultural studies, and continued investigation into understudied populations such as children and individuals experiencing ADCs outside typical bereavement situations. Additionally, combining quantitative, qualitative, and case study methodologies may yield a more complete understanding of why ADCs occur, how they affect individuals, and what they tell us about human responses to death and loss.

While research has demonstrated their prevalence, diversity in phenomenology, and psychological importance, fundamental questions concerning their origin and meaning remain unresolved. Continued interdisciplinary research may ultimately determine whether ADCs represent expressions of normal cognitive and emotional processes, manifestations of unexplained aspects of consciousness, or experiences involving multiple interacting mechanisms. Regardless of interpretation, ADCs represent an important area of human experience that continues to challenge, expand upon, and enhance scientific understandings of the relationship between mind, death, and meaning.

In recent years, the methodological quality of ADC research has grown significantly. More sophisticated methodologies such as population-based surveys, longitudinal studies of bereavement, cross-cultural studies, and multi-method studies have contributed to a more complete picture of this experience. Qualitative methods that allow for more detailed analysis of how individuals create meaning through ADCs across varying cultural/religious settings are also contributing to a better understanding of this phenomenon. New areas of study in this field include ADCs experienced by children; ADCs outside the traditional context of bereavement; and the relationship between ADCs and other extraordinary human experiences. There is also a need for standardization in terminology and measurement tools used to compare data from different studies.

Although many basic questions about the nature and source of ADCs remain unanswered, it appears that researchers increasingly recognize that ADCs represent a valid topic for interdisciplinary exploration. Researchers are using a variety of methodologies (epidemiological, qualitative, clinical, and case-study) to gain an even greater understanding of an experience commonly reported in relation to death and bereavement.

Emiliana Embrogno

Works Cited

Alvarado, C.S. (2003). The concept of survival of bodily death and the development of parapsychology. [Full text.] Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 67, 65-95.

American Psychiatric Association (2022). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Association.

Bentall, R.P. (1990). The illusion of reality: A review and integration of psychological research on hallucinations. [Abstract.] Psychological Bulletin 107/1, 82-95.

Bentall, R.P. (2000). Hallucinatory experiences. In Varieties of Anomalous Experience: Examining the Scientific Evidence, ed. by E. Cardeña, S.J. Lynn, & S. Krippner, 85-120. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Berntsen, D. (1996). Involuntary autobiographical memories. [Abstract.] Applied Cognitive Psychology 10/5, 435-54.

Botkin, A.L., & Hogan, R.C. (2014). Induced After-Death Communication: A Miraculous Therapy for Grief and Loss (2nd ed.). Charlottesville, Virginia, USA: Hampton Roads Publishing.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 3: Loss: Sadness and Depression. New York: Basic Books.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.

Castelnovo, A., Cavallotti, S., Gambini, O., & D’Agostino, A. (2015). Post-bereavement hallucinatory experiences: A critical overview of population and clinical studies. [Abstract.] Journal of Affective Disorders 186, 266-74.

Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. [Full text.] Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36/3, 181-204.

Conway, M.A., & Pleydell-Pearce, C.W. (2000). The construction of autobiographical memories in the self-memory system. [Abstract.] Psychological Review 107/2, 261-88.

Cooper, C.E., Roe, C.A., & Mitchell, G. (2015). Anomalous experiences and the bereavement process. [Abstract.] In Death, Dying, and Mysticism: The Ecstasy of the End, ed. by T. Cattoi & C.M. Moreman, 117-31. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Corlett, P.R., Horga, G., Fletcher, P.C., Alderson-Day, B., Schmack, K., & Powers, A.R. (2019). Hallucinations and strong priors. [Full text.] Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23/2, 114-27.

Creswell, J.W., & Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage.

Elsaesser, E. (2023). Spontaneous Contacts with the Deceased: A Large-Scale International Survey Reveals the Circumstances, Lived Experience and Beneficial Impact of After-Death Communications (ADCs). Winchester, UK: Iff Books.

Elsaesser, E., Roe, C.A., Cooper, C.E., & Lorimer, D. (2020). Investigation of the phenomenology and impact of spontaneous and direct after-death communications (ADCs): Research findings. [Full text.] Web page.

Elsaesser, E., Roe, C.A., Cooper, C.E., & Lorimer, D. (2021). The phenomenology and impact of hallucinations concerning the deceased. [Full text.] BJPsych Open 7/5, e148.

Evrard, R., Dollander, M., Elsaesser, E., Cooper, C.E., Lorimer, D., & Roe, C.A. (2021). Exceptional necrophanic experiences and paradoxical mourning: Studies of the phenomenology and the repercussions of frightening experiences of contact with the deceased. [Abstract.] L’Évolution Psychiatrique 86/4, e1-e24.

Field, N.P., Gao, B., & Paderna, L. (2005). Continuing bonds in bereavement: An attachment theory-based perspective. [Abstract.] Death Studies 29/4, 277-99.

Field, N.P. (2006). Continuing bonds in adaptation to bereavement: Introduction. [Abstract.] Death Studies 30/8, 709-14.

Fletcher, P.C., & Frith, C.D. (2009). Perceiving is believing: A Bayesian approach to explaining the positive symptoms of schizophrenia. [Full text.] Nature Reviews Neuroscience 10/1, 48-58.

Freud, S. (1917). Mourning and melancholia. In The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 14, ed. & trans. by J. Strachey, 237-58. London: Hogarth Press.

Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? [Abstract.] Nature Reviews Neuroscience 11/2, 127-38.

Gillies, J., & Neimeyer, R.A. (2006). Loss, grief, and the search for significance: Toward a model of meaning reconstruction in bereavement. [Abstract.] Journal of Constructivist Psychology 19/1, 31-65.

Grimby, A. (1993). Bereavement among elderly people: Grief reactions, post-bereavement hallucinations and quality of life. [Abstract.] Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 87/1, 72-80.

Guggenheim, B., & Guggenheim, J. (1996). Hello from Heaven! New York: Bantam Books.

Gurney, E., Myers, F.W.H., & Podmore, F. (1886). Phantasms of the Living. [Full text.] 2 vols. London: Trübner & Co.

Hallucinations Census (1882-95). Hallucinations Census. Series Reference Code: GBR/0012/MS SPR/24. [Summary.] Society for Psychical Research archive, GBR/0012/MS SPR/24, Cambridge University Library.

Haraldsson, E. (1989). Survey of claimed encounters with the dead. [Abstract.] OMEGA—Journal of Death and Dying 19/2, 103-13.

Hastings, A. (2012). Effects on bereavement using a restricted sensory environment (psychomanteum). Journal of Transpersonal Psychology 44/1, 1-25.

Hohwy, J. (2013). The Predictive Mind. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Johnson, M.K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D.S. (1993). Source monitoring. [Abstract.] Psychological Bulletin 114/1, 3-28.

Kamp, K.S., Steffen, E.M., Alderson-Day, B., Allen, P., Austad, A., Hayes, J., Larøi, F., Ratcliffe, M., & Sabucedo, P. (2020). Sensory and quasi-sensory experiences of the deceased in bereavement: An interdisciplinary and integrative review. [Full text.] Schizophrenia Bulletin 46/6, 1367-81.

Kamp, K.S., Moskowitz, A., Due, H., & Spindler, H. (2022). Are sensory experiences of one’s deceased spouse associated with bereavement-related distress? [Abstract.] OMEGA—Journal of Death and Dying (advance online publication).

Klass, D., Silverman, P.R., & Nickman, S.L. (eds.) (1996). Continuing Bonds: New Understandings of Grief. Washington D.C.: Taylor & Francis.

Klass, D., & Steffen, E.M. (eds.) (2018). Continuing Bonds in Bereavement: New Directions for Research and Practice. New York: Routledge.

Krippner, S. (2006). Getting through the grief: After-death communication experiences and their effects on experients. In The Survival of Human Consciousness: Essays on the Possibility of Life after Death, ed. by L. Storm & M.A. Thalbourne, 174-93. Jefferson, North Carolina, USA: McFarland.

LaGrand, L.E. (1997). After Death Communication: Final Farewells. St. Paul, Minnesota, USA: Llewellyn Publications.

Larøi, F., Bless, J., Laloyaux, J., Kråkvik, B., Vedul-Kjelsås, E., Kalhovde, A.M., Hirnstein, M., & Hugdahl, K. (2019). An epidemiological study on the prevalence of hallucinations in a general-population sample: Effects of age and sensory modality. [Excerpt.] Psychiatry Research 272, 707-14.

Matlock, J.G., & Hilton, B. (2025). After-death communications from non-human animals: Suggestions of post-mortem survival. [Full text.] Journal of Scientific Exploration 39/1, 63-84.

Matlock, J.G., Hilton, B., Sheldrake, R., Smart, P., & Nahm, M. (2024). After-death communications (ADCs) from non-human animals: Parallels with human ADCs. [Full text.] Journal of Scientific Exploration 38/1, 61-78.

Myers, F.W.H. (1903). Human Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death (2 vols.). London and New York: Longmans.

Neimeyer, R.A. (ed.) (2001). Meaning Reconstruction and the Experience of Loss. Washington. D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Neimeyer, R.A. (ed.) (2021). New Techniques of Grief Therapy: Bereavement and Beyond. New York: Routledge.

Nielsen, T.A. (2000). A review of mentation in REM and NREM sleep: “Covert” REM sleep as a possible reconciliation of two opposing models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23/6, 851-66.

O’Connor, M.F. (2019). Grief: A brief history of research on how body, mind, and brain adapt. [Abstract.] Psychosomatic Medicine 81/8, 731-38.

O’Connor, M.F. (2022). The Grieving Brain: The Surprising Science of How We Learn from Love and Loss. New York: HarperOne.

Ohayon, M.M., Priest, R.G., Caulet, M., & Guilleminault, C. (1996). Hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations: Pathological phenomena? [Abstract.] British Journal of Psychiatry 169/4, 459-67.

Pait, K.C., Exline, J.J., Pargament, K.I., & Zarrella, P. (2023). After-death communication: Issues of nondisclosure and implications for treatment. [Full text.] Religions 14/8, 985.

Parkes, C.M. (1972). Bereavement: Studies of Grief in Adult Life. London: Tavistock.

Penberthy, J.K., Pehlivanova, M., Kalelioglu, T., Roe, C.A., Cooper, C.E., Lorimer, D., & Elsaesser, E. (2023). Factors moderating the impact of after-death communications on beliefs and spirituality. [Full text.] OMEGA—Journal of Death and Dying 87/3, 884-901.

Powers, A.R., Mathys, C., & Corlett, P.R. (2017). Pavlovian conditioning-induced hallucinations result from overweighting of perceptual priors. [Abstract.] Science 357/6351, 596-600.

Rees, W.D. (1971). The hallucinations of widowhood. [Excerpt.] British Medical Journal 4, 37-41.

Rubin, D.C., Boals, A., & Berntsen, D. (2008). Memory in posttraumatic stress disorder: Properties of voluntary and involuntary, traumatic and nontraumatic autobiographical memories in people with and without posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. [Abstract.] Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137/4, 591-614.

Steffen, E., & Coyle, A. (2011). Sense of presence experiences and meaning-making in bereavement: A qualitative analysis. [Abstract.] Death Studies 35/7, 579-609.

Streit-Horn, J. (2011). A Systematic Review of Research on After-Death Communication (ADC). [Full text.] PhD dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA.

Sudduth, M. (2009). Super-psi and the survivalist interpretation of mediumship. [Full text.] Journal of Scientific Exploration 23/2, 167-93.

Waters, F., Blom, J.D., Dang-Vu, T.T., Cheyne, A.J., Alderson-Day, B., Woodruff, P., & Collerton, D. (2016). What is the link between hallucinations, dreams, and hypnagogic-hypnopompic experiences? [Abstract.] Schizophrenia Bulletin 42/5, 1098-109.

Weisberg, B. (2009). Talking to the Dead: Kate and Maggie Fox and the Rise of Spiritualism. New York: HarperOne.

Woollacott, M., Roe, C.A., Cooper, C.E., Lorimer, D., & Elsaesser, E. (2022). Perceptual phenomena associated with spontaneous experiences of after-death communication: Analysis of visual, tactile, auditory and olfactory sensations. [Full text.] EXPLORE: The Journal of Science and Healing 18/4, 423-31.

Endnotes

1
Rees (1971); Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
2
Cooper et al. (2015). ↩︎
3
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Krippner (2006); Penberthy et al. (2023). ↩︎
4
Krippner (2006); Penberthy et al. (2023). ↩︎
5
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Roe et al. (2021). ↩︎
6
Krippner (2006); Penberthy et al. (2023). ↩︎
7
??. ↩︎
8
Streit-Horn (2011). ↩︎
9
Rees (1971). ↩︎
10
Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
11
Rees (1971). ↩︎
12
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Cooper et al. (2015). ↩︎
13
Pait et al. (2023). ↩︎
14
Streit-Horn (2011). ↩︎
15
Rees (1971); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
16
Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
17
Guggenheim & Guggenheim (1996); Haraldsson (1989); LaGrand (1997). ↩︎
18
Woollacott et al. (2021). ↩︎
19
Gurney, Myers, & Podmore (1886); Woollacott et al. (2022). ↩︎
20
Gurney, Myers, & Podmore (1886). ↩︎
21
Elsaesser (2023), 53. ↩︎
22
Elsaesser (2023), 56. ↩︎
23
Elsaesser (2023), 57. ↩︎
24
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Woollacott et al. (2021). ↩︎
25
Elsaesser (2023). ↩︎
26
Elsaesser (2023), 25. ↩︎
27
Elsaesser (2023), 28. ↩︎
28
Elsaesser (2023), 40. ↩︎
29
Elsaesser (2023), 42. ↩︎
30
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Rees (1971). ↩︎
31
Elsaesser (2023), 90. ↩︎
32
Elsaesser (2023), 88. ↩︎
33
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Rees (1971); Steffen & Coyle (2011); Woollacott et al. (2022). ↩︎
34
Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
35
Elsaesser (2023), 12. ↩︎
36
Elsaesser (2023), 13. ↩︎
37
Elsaesser (2023), 13. ↩︎
38
Elsaesser (2023), 14. ↩︎
39
Elsaesser (2023), 14. ↩︎
40
Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
41
Elsaesser (2023), 97. ↩︎
42
Elsaesser (2023), 99. ↩︎
43
Elsaesser (2023), 103. ↩︎
44
Elsaesser (2023), 102. ↩︎
45
Elsaesser (2023), 101. ↩︎
46
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Penberthy et al. (2023). ↩︎
47
Matlock et al. (2024); Matlock & Hilton (2025). ↩︎
48
Weisberg (2009) ↩︎
49
Gurney, Myers, & Podmore (1886). ↩︎
50
Hallucinations Census (1895). ↩︎
51
Myers (1903. ↩︎
52
Castelnovo, Cavallotti, Gambini, & D’Agostino (2015). ↩︎
53
Kamp et al. (2020). ↩︎
54
Kamp et al. (2020); Hastings (2012); Rees (1971). ↩︎
55
Cooper et al. (2015); Hastings (2012); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
56
Klass, Silverman, & Nickman (1996). ↩︎
57
Freud (1917). ↩︎
58
Klass et al. (1996). ↩︎
59
See Cooper et al. (2015); Elsaesser et al. (2021); Matlock et al. (2024); Penberthy et al. (2023); Woollacott et al. (2022). ↩︎
60
Kamp et al. (2020). ↩︎
61
Streit-Horn (2011). ↩︎
62
Streit-Horn (2011). ↩︎
63
Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
64
Elsaesser et al. (2021); Penberthy et al. (2023). ↩︎
65
Matlock et al. (2024); Matlock & Hilton (2025). ↩︎
66
Elsaesser (2023). ↩︎
67
Penberthy et al. (2023); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
68
Elsaesser (2023). ↩︎
69
Braun & Clarke (2022). ↩︎
70
Creswell & Poth (2018). ↩︎
71
Elsaesser et al., 2021; Rees, 1971). ↩︎
72
Rees (1971); Haraldsson (1989); Elsaesser et al. (2021). ↩︎
73
Clark (2013); O’Connor (2019). ↩︎
74
Kamp et al. (2022); Klass & Steffen (2018); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
75
Botkins & Hogan (2014). ↩︎
76
Grimby (1993); Rees (1971). ↩︎
77
Kamp et al. (2022); Larøi et al. (2019). ↩︎
78
Bentall (2000); Kamp et al. (2022). ↩︎
79
Klass et al. (1996); Neimeyer (2001). ↩︎
80
Klass et al. (1996); Neimeyer (2001). ↩︎
81
Pait et al. (2023). ↩︎
82
Botkin & Hogin (2014). ↩︎
83
American Psychiatric Association (2022). ↩︎
84
Freud (1917). ↩︎
85
Klass, Silverman, & Nickman (1996). ↩︎
86
Cooper et al. (2015). ↩︎
87
Cooper et al. (2015); Elsaesser et al. (2020). ↩︎
88
Kamp et al. (2020); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
89
Castelnovo et al. (2015); Field (2006); Klass et al. (1996). ↩︎
90
Bowlby (1980). ↩︎
91
Parkes (1971). ↩︎
92
Conway & Pleydell-Pearce (2000); Field et al. (2005). ↩︎
93
Berntsen (1996); Rubin et al. (2008). ↩︎
94
Johnson et al. (1993); Bentall (1990). ↩︎
95
Clark (2013); Friston (2010); Hohwy (2013). ↩︎
96
Bowlby (1980); O’Connor (2019, 2022). ↩︎
97
Corlett et al. (2019); Powers et al. (2017); Fletcher & Frith (2009). ↩︎
98
Ohayon et al. (1996); Nielsen (2000); Waters et al. (2016). ↩︎
99
Rees (1971); Grimby (1993); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
100
Kamp et al. (2022); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
101
Gillies & Neimeyer (2006); Neimeyer (2021). ↩︎
102
Cooper et al. (2015); Klass et al. (1996); Steffen & Coyle (2011). ↩︎
103
Evrard et al. (2021). ↩︎
104
Pait et al. (2023). ↩︎
105
Bowlby (1980). ↩︎
106
Sudduth (2009). ↩︎
107
Alvarado (2003). ↩︎
108
Matlock & Hilton (2025) extend the discussion to include non-human animals. ↩︎