In 1983–84, as a senior psychology student at Western Washington University, I presented a paper in my abnormal psychology seminar titled Synesthesia and Schizophrenia. What followed was one of the most memorable moments of my academic life: silence.
My classmates stared, looking confused, uncertain of what to say. My professor stared down at the round table where were all seated around, deeply lost in thought. We sat there for too long a time until it was uncomfortable. No one spoke.
Finally, I broke the silence to ask, had I said something wrong? Our professor had a few false starts to say something, then looked up at me seeing the concern on my face. Realizing my duress, he said, "No, nothing is wrong. I just never heard of that before. Psychologists often spend their entire careers searching for a seminal line of study, and here you have found one as an undergraduate."
The idea was simple, but radical at the time: schizophrenia might be better understood through the “filter” of synesthesia, a non-pathological perceptual condition where senses blend (such as seeing colors when hearing sounds). I argued that comparing these conditions—one non-pathological, one pathological—could illuminate each other’s mechanisms. It was an attempt to bridge cognitive, neurological, and perceptual processes in a way that had not yet been considered.
I gave it a few weeks, considering if I shouldn't take up this study after graduating. To be a research psychologist. In the end I decided I wanted a career eventually in computers and creative arts. As it turned out, computers paid, the Arts, not so much. Something I came to understand more so after leaving IT and making a go of it in the Arts. Something I'm still working through although finally, I am actually making some progress.
However, I will always feel I let many down in not going into that study of my own devising because it long lay fallow. For decades, nothing seemed to be getting done on it. My paper lived in obscurity. Until one day, with the advent of the internet, I realized I could, and I should, put it online. Just tin order o get it out there. So, I made it freely available online for years.
On one site, I checked one day and noticed that it had logged over 800 downloads. Some years later I put it up for sale on Amazon and Smashwords (see below), combining it with another paper I’d delivered in class on contextualism in science and psychology along with the history of psychology. I had titled it:
Notes on Albert's Mind, Field Theory and Contextualism.
Then it occurred to me that rather than this seeding research, for some it may merely have been downloaded by lazy students for an “easy grade” in plagiarizing it. And that made me sad.
Over the decades since I presented the paper, I didn't see much about the topic until more recently when some considerations of it were to be seen in the professional literature. I didn't think it was due to my paper, just that research had finally caught up with the concept.
Today indeed, research is catching up. Here are some of the ideas from my 1984 paper, alongside modern findings.
Excerpts from 1984 & Modern Resonance
1. Synesthesia as a Lens on Schizophrenia
“This paper is directed towards seeing the schizophrenic person through the ‘filter’ of a ‘normal’ condition known as synesthesia. Various mental and neural mechanisms are pointed to; some similar to both schizophrenia and synesthesia.”
Modern Echo: In 2021, an article in Schizophrenia Bulletin (“Perceptual Gains and Losses in Synesthesia and Schizophrenia”) argued precisely this: that both conditions reflect unusual perceptual integration and can illuminate one another.
2. Plasticity and Neural Pathways
“There is no reason why these ‘extra’ neural cells and pathways cannot be utilized: to either result in schizophrenic behavior, or that of a condition like synesthesia; as the ‘patient’ directs and orchestrates his brain, perhaps unwittingly, to avoid ‘normal’ channels of operation.”
Modern Echo: Contemporary neuroimaging has confirmed that both synesthetes and people with schizophrenia show atypical connectivity. Research into cross-activation theory and disinhibited feedback now describes neural pathways similar to what I speculated about decades ago.
3. Synesthesia as Normal Variant, Not Defect
“Synesthesia was no longer considered to be an indication of a deranged or abnormal mind. Surely then, if it is not defective, it must be normal… Studying these systems can enrich the understanding of the processes of the schizophrenic person.”
Modern Echo: Synesthesia is now firmly established as a non-pathological trait, validated through genetics, neuroimaging, and cognitive studies. It is explicitly used as a research model for atypical perceptual processing.
4. Hallucinations vs. Synesthetic Percepts
“A synesthete feels in control, a schizophrenic does not. A schizophrenic has hallucinations and/or delusions; synesthetics could be similar to hallucinations, but only to delusions if it got out of control…”
Modern Echo: Recent work (2022, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews) proposes a continuum between hallucinations, synesthesia, and delusions, noting precisely the difference I emphasized: synesthesia is consistent and controllable, hallucinations intrusive and distressing.
5. Cognition and Physiology Intertwined
“So it does appear that vision, synesthesia, and also perhaps, schizophrenia, are at least somewhat cognitive in nature. However, there may still be physiologically related causative factors involved.”
Modern Echo: Today, models explicitly integrate cognition, physiology, and genetics. Twin studies (2023, Nature Translational Psychiatry) suggest overlapping factors between synesthesia and schizophrenia susceptibility.
Why This Matters
Looking back, I see my undergraduate paper as an early glimpse of a path science would only begin exploring decades later. In 1984, my proposal was seen as shocking. By the 2010s, researchers were finally asking the same kinds of questions, supported by genetic studies, brain imaging, and perceptual experiments.
I don’t claim priority for the field. I was just a student. But I do claim this: in a quiet seminar room in 1984, I stumbled into an idea that would take decades for psychology and neuroscience to seriously engage. And the stunned silence of my peers and professor that day told me I had found something worth holding onto.
Closing Thoughts
The story of that paper isn’t just about being “right too early.” It’s about how ideas can live underground, ignored or borrowed without attribution, until the scientific tools and climate catch up. It’s also about how creative leaps often come from outsiders, students, or those not yet entrenched in disciplinary orthodoxies.
I still have that original paper. It’s been downloaded hundreds of times, perhaps plagiarized for quick grades, perhaps read with genuine interest. And now, finally, I see research catching up with a thought I had as a 20-something undergraduate.
The now combined (Synesthesia/Schizophrenia and Notes on Albert, etc.) paper is available on Amazon or Smashwords. Cover art by Marvin Hayes.
Or as an audiobook on Audible/Amazon.
Excuse the reading of the source references at the ends of some sentences. This was necessary because, for the audiobook to sync properly with the ebook, the text has to be identical in both formats. That way, a reader/listener can switch seamlessly from listening in transit to reading later. Still, it felt strange at times to read out a string of names in the middle of a paragraph, as is often done in academic and scientific papers.
Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!
Compiled with aid of ChatGPT
No comments:
Post a Comment