investigating on the methodology effect when evaluating lucid dream
Clicks: 194
ID: 245923
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
194 views
30 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #923 of 1,131 articles by views in accounts of chemical research
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,131 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Lucid dreaming (LD) is a state of consciousness in which the dreamer is aware that he or she is dreaming and can possibly control the content of his or her dream. To investigate the LD prevalence among different samples, researchers have used different types of methodologies. With regard to retrospective self-report questionnaire, two ways of proceeding seem to emerge. In one case, a definition of LD is given to participants (During lucid dreaming, one is – while dreaming – aware of the fact that one is dreaming. It is possible to deliberately wake up, to control the dream action, or to observe passively the course of the dream with this awareness), while in the other instances, participants are presented separate questions targeting specific LD indicators (dream awareness and dream control).In the present study, we measured LD frequency in a sample of French student in order to investigate for possible disparities in LD frequency depending on the type of questionnaire as outlined above. Moreover, we also study links between the prevalence of LD as assessed respectively by each questionnaire with various factors such as Vividness of Mental Imagery and Parasomnia.Results revealed no significant difference between LD frequencies across questionnaires. For the questionnaire with definition (DefQuest), 81.05% of participants reported experience of LD once or more. Concerning the questionnaire based on LD indicators (AwarContQuest), 73.38% of participants reported having experienced LD once or more. However, with regard to the correlations analysis, links between LD prevalence and factors such as Vividness of Mental Imagery and Parasomnia, varied across questionnaires. This result is an argument suggesting that researchers should be careful when investigating links between LD and other factors. The type of methodology may influence findings on LD research. Further studies are needed to investigate on the methodology effect in LD research namely on the respective weight of awareness and control.
| Reference Key |
ribeiro2016frontiersinvestigating
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Nicolas RIBEIRO;Yannick GOUNDEN;Véronique QUAGLINO |
| Journal | accounts of chemical research |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01306
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.