Evidence & References
A compact evidence page showing the external references behind Inner Signal’s memory, crisis, AI, and destabilization boundaries.
Evidence & references
Inner Signal is not trying to look clinical. These references exist for a narrower purpose: to make the safety boundaries legible, source-backed, and reviewable.
False memory, hypnosis, and source monitoring
These references support the no-forced-memory-recovery boundary. Inner Signal may help users care for distressing inner material, but it should not be used to establish whether a specific event happened, who did what, or whether a dream, sensation, image, or ideomotor signal is factual evidence.
- American Psychological Association. Questions and Answers about Memories of Childhood Abuse.
- Leo DG et al. The role of hypnosis in memory recall and false memories. 2025.
- Muschalla B et al. Induction of false beliefs and false memories in laboratory studies: a meta-analysis. 2021.
- Johnson MK, Hashtroudi S, Lindsay DS. Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin. 1993;114(1):3–28.
Dissociation, derealization, and adverse practice effects
These references support the app’s decision to stop inward work when a user reports panic, derealization, depersonalization, too-open states, or dysregulated arousal. A destabilizing reaction is not treated as “material to go deeper into.”
- Britton WB et al. Defining and measuring meditation-related adverse effects in mindfulness-based programs. 2021.
- Farias M et al. Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation-based therapies: a systematic review. 2020.
- Castillo RJ. Depersonalization and meditation. Psychiatry. 1990.
Crisis support and means safety
These references support the app’s hard stop in acute self-harm, danger, and emergency contexts. Inner Signal is not a crisis service; the route is live human support and practical safety, not continued self-hypnosis.
- 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. If you need to talk, the 988 Lifeline is here.
- Suicide Prevention Resource Center. Reduce Access to Means of Suicide.
AI mental-health limits and youth safety
These references support the “bounded method, not AI therapy” stance and the adults-only boundary for deep self-hypnosis or inner-child processing. They also support privacy, transparency, and the recommendation that clinicians, parents, and trusted adults should be part of youth mental-health support.
- American Psychological Association. Health advisory on the use of generative AI chatbots and wellness applications for mental health.
- World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: guidance on large multi-modal models. 2025.
- American Academy of Pediatrics. Counseling Patients and Families on Using AI Chatbots. 2026.
- McBain RK et al. AI Chatbot Use and Disclosure for Mental Health Among US Adolescents and Young Adults. JAMA Pediatrics. 2026.
- Sobowale K et al. Evaluating Generative AI Psychotherapy Chatbots Used by Youth: Cross-Sectional Study. JMIR Mental Health. 2025.
What these sources do not claim
- They do not claim Inner Signal is psychotherapy.
- They do not claim self-hypnosis treats trauma, dissociation, panic, depression, suicidality, or any medical/psychiatric condition.
- They do not claim all recovered memories are false, or that all inner material is meaningless.
- They support a narrower design choice: do not force memory recovery, do not deepen destabilization, do not replace clinicians or crisis services, and do not make an AI tool the user’s only support.