No Cover Image

Journal article 517 views 58 downloads

Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams. / Mark Blagrove; Chris Edwards; Elaine van Rijn; Alex Reid; Josie Malinowski; Paul Bennett; Michelle Carr; Jean-Baptiste Eichenlaub; Shauna McGee; Katie Evans; Perrine Ruby

Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, Volume: 6, Pages: 138 - 162

Swansea University Author: Blagrove, Mark

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1037/cns0000167

Abstract

Throughout history, there have been reports and claims that consideration of dreams can produce personal realizations and insight. We assessed Exploration–Insight scores associated with discussing REM and non-REM dreams in connection with recent waking life experiences. Thirty-one participants were...

Full description

Published in: Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice
ISSN: 2326-5523 2326-5531
Published: American Psychological Association 2019
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa41116
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2018-07-24T19:26:39Z
last_indexed 2019-07-17T21:14:22Z
id cronfa41116
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2019-07-17T15:10:11Z</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>41116</id><entry>2018-07-24</entry><title>Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.</title><alternativeTitle></alternativeTitle><author>Mark Blagrove</author><firstname>Mark</firstname><surname>Blagrove</surname><active>true</active><ORCID>0000-0002-9854-1854</ORCID><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent><sid>8c78ee008e650b9f0a463bae56a5636c</sid><email>56f1c8c8ef24668a27a5e2cb8a684fce</email><emailaddr>WFEyPpvG0vhdqbL5iN33pH2HZhUyFASdV1DFdgIIhKs=</emailaddr><date>2018-07-24</date><deptcode>HPS</deptcode><abstract>Throughout history, there have been reports and claims that consideration of dreams can produce personal realizations and insight. We assessed Exploration&#x2013;Insight scores associated with discussing REM and non-REM dreams in connection with recent waking life experiences. Thirty-one participants were cued in the sleep laboratory for a daydream report and then awakened from REM and N2 sleep for dream reports. Participants subsequently discussed each of their dream and daydream reports for 30&#x2013;40 min with two experimenters, following the structured Ullman (1996) dream group discussion procedure. Participants assessed the benefit of discussing the reports by completing the Gains from (Day)Dream Interpretation (G[D]DI) questionnaire. We found no difference in G(D)DI scores between discussing REM and N2 dream reports, and no difference between dream and daydream discussions in engagement and thoroughness of exploring the reports. However, discussing dream reports produced higher scores on the G(D)DI Exploration&#x2013;Insight subscale compared with discussing daydream reports. Significant differences were evident in items reflecting the learning of what the report means in terms of waking life issues. Frontal theta prior to waking from N2 was significantly associated with Exploration&#x2013;Insight score obtained after N2 dream discussion, but this relationship was not found for REM dreams. The findings of high ratings of Exploration&#x2013;Insight after discussing dreams were evident even though participants did not select the dream, unlike what can occur for home recorded dreams, and even though discussion was brief. We suggest that insight might be produced by embodied and metaphorical thinking in dreams.</abstract><type>Journal article</type><journal>Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice</journal><volume>6</volume><journalNumber/><paginationStart>138</paginationStart><paginationEnd>162</paginationEnd><publisher>American Psychological Association</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>2326-5523</issnPrint><issnElectronic>2326-5531</issnElectronic><keywords></keywords><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>6</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2019</publishedYear><publishedDate>2019-06-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1037/cns0000167</doi><url></url><notes>Authors Mark Blagrove, Chris Edwards, Elaine van Rijn, Alex Reid, Josie Malinowski, Paul Bennett, Michelle Carr, Jean-Baptiste Eichenlaub, Shauna McGee, Katie Evans and Perrine Ruby</notes><college>College of Human and Health Sciences</college><department>Psychology</department><CollegeCode>CHHS</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HPS</DepartmentCode><institution/><researchGroup>Psychology</researchGroup><supervisor/><sponsorsfunders>CHHS</sponsorsfunders><grantnumber/><degreelevel/><degreename>None</degreename><lastEdited>2019-07-17T15:10:11Z</lastEdited><Created>2018-07-24T17:37:08Z</Created><path><level id="1">College of Human and Health Sciences</level><level id="2">Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Mark</firstname><surname>Blagrove</surname><orcid/><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Chris</firstname><surname>Edwards</surname><orcid/><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Elaine</firstname><surname>van Rijn</surname><orcid/><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Alex</firstname><surname>Reid</surname><orcid/><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Josie</firstname><surname>Malinowski</surname><orcid/><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Paul</firstname><surname>Bennett</surname><orcid/><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Michelle</firstname><surname>Carr</surname><orcid/><order>7</order></author><author><firstname>Jean-Baptiste</firstname><surname>Eichenlaub</surname><orcid/><order>8</order></author><author><firstname>Shauna</firstname><surname>McGee</surname><orcid/><order>9</order></author><author><firstname>Katie</firstname><surname>Evans</surname><orcid/><order>10</order></author><author><firstname>Perrine</firstname><surname>Ruby</surname><orcid/><order>11</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0041116-07082018112444.pdf</filename><originalFilename>41116.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2018-08-07T11:24:44Z</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>2503113</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>AM</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><action>Published to Cronfa</action><actionDate>12/11/2018</actionDate><embargoDate>2018-08-07T00:00:00</embargoDate><documentNotes/><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents></rfc1807>
spelling 2019-07-17T15:10:11Z v2 41116 2018-07-24 Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams. Mark Blagrove Mark Blagrove true 0000-0002-9854-1854 false 8c78ee008e650b9f0a463bae56a5636c 56f1c8c8ef24668a27a5e2cb8a684fce WFEyPpvG0vhdqbL5iN33pH2HZhUyFASdV1DFdgIIhKs= 2018-07-24 HPS Throughout history, there have been reports and claims that consideration of dreams can produce personal realizations and insight. We assessed Exploration–Insight scores associated with discussing REM and non-REM dreams in connection with recent waking life experiences. Thirty-one participants were cued in the sleep laboratory for a daydream report and then awakened from REM and N2 sleep for dream reports. Participants subsequently discussed each of their dream and daydream reports for 30–40 min with two experimenters, following the structured Ullman (1996) dream group discussion procedure. Participants assessed the benefit of discussing the reports by completing the Gains from (Day)Dream Interpretation (G[D]DI) questionnaire. We found no difference in G(D)DI scores between discussing REM and N2 dream reports, and no difference between dream and daydream discussions in engagement and thoroughness of exploring the reports. However, discussing dream reports produced higher scores on the G(D)DI Exploration–Insight subscale compared with discussing daydream reports. Significant differences were evident in items reflecting the learning of what the report means in terms of waking life issues. Frontal theta prior to waking from N2 was significantly associated with Exploration–Insight score obtained after N2 dream discussion, but this relationship was not found for REM dreams. The findings of high ratings of Exploration–Insight after discussing dreams were evident even though participants did not select the dream, unlike what can occur for home recorded dreams, and even though discussion was brief. We suggest that insight might be produced by embodied and metaphorical thinking in dreams. Journal article Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice 6 138 162 American Psychological Association 2326-5523 2326-5531 1 6 2019 2019-06-01 10.1037/cns0000167 Authors Mark Blagrove, Chris Edwards, Elaine van Rijn, Alex Reid, Josie Malinowski, Paul Bennett, Michelle Carr, Jean-Baptiste Eichenlaub, Shauna McGee, Katie Evans and Perrine Ruby College of Human and Health Sciences Psychology CHHS HPS Psychology CHHS None 2019-07-17T15:10:11Z 2018-07-24T17:37:08Z College of Human and Health Sciences Psychology Mark Blagrove 1 Chris Edwards 2 Elaine van Rijn 3 Alex Reid 4 Josie Malinowski 5 Paul Bennett 6 Michelle Carr 7 Jean-Baptiste Eichenlaub 8 Shauna McGee 9 Katie Evans 10 Perrine Ruby 11 0041116-07082018112444.pdf 41116.pdf 2018-08-07T11:24:44Z Output 2503113 application/pdf AM true Published to Cronfa 12/11/2018 2018-08-07T00:00:00 true eng
title Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
spellingShingle Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
Blagrove, Mark
title_short Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
title_full Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
title_fullStr Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
title_full_unstemmed Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
title_sort Insight from the consideration of REM dreams, non-REM dreams, and daydreams.
author_id_str_mv 8c78ee008e650b9f0a463bae56a5636c
author_id_fullname_str_mv 8c78ee008e650b9f0a463bae56a5636c_***_Blagrove, Mark
author Blagrove, Mark
author2 Mark Blagrove
Chris Edwards
Elaine van Rijn
Alex Reid
Josie Malinowski
Paul Bennett
Michelle Carr
Jean-Baptiste Eichenlaub
Shauna McGee
Katie Evans
Perrine Ruby
format Journal article
container_title Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice
container_volume 6
container_start_page 138
publishDate 2019
institution Swansea University
issn 2326-5523
2326-5531
doi_str_mv 10.1037/cns0000167
publisher American Psychological Association
college_str College of Human and Health Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id collegeofhumanandhealthsciences
hierarchy_top_title College of Human and Health Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id collegeofhumanandhealthsciences
hierarchy_parent_title College of Human and Health Sciences
department_str Psychology{{{_:::_}}}College of Human and Health Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Psychology
document_store_str 1
active_str 1
researchgroup_str Psychology
description Throughout history, there have been reports and claims that consideration of dreams can produce personal realizations and insight. We assessed Exploration–Insight scores associated with discussing REM and non-REM dreams in connection with recent waking life experiences. Thirty-one participants were cued in the sleep laboratory for a daydream report and then awakened from REM and N2 sleep for dream reports. Participants subsequently discussed each of their dream and daydream reports for 30–40 min with two experimenters, following the structured Ullman (1996) dream group discussion procedure. Participants assessed the benefit of discussing the reports by completing the Gains from (Day)Dream Interpretation (G[D]DI) questionnaire. We found no difference in G(D)DI scores between discussing REM and N2 dream reports, and no difference between dream and daydream discussions in engagement and thoroughness of exploring the reports. However, discussing dream reports produced higher scores on the G(D)DI Exploration–Insight subscale compared with discussing daydream reports. Significant differences were evident in items reflecting the learning of what the report means in terms of waking life issues. Frontal theta prior to waking from N2 was significantly associated with Exploration–Insight score obtained after N2 dream discussion, but this relationship was not found for REM dreams. The findings of high ratings of Exploration–Insight after discussing dreams were evident even though participants did not select the dream, unlike what can occur for home recorded dreams, and even though discussion was brief. We suggest that insight might be produced by embodied and metaphorical thinking in dreams.
published_date 2019-06-01T05:05:59Z
_version_ 1647974295531421696
score 10.872048