Mindscape Collective is now The Consciousness Library. Same library, new name. You may need to sign in again. About the change
Skip to content

Georgina Nemeth

4 papers in the library · 14 citations · publishing 2018-2023

Papers

Dreaming, Mind-Wandering, and Hypnotic Dreams.

Frontiers in Neurology January 1, 2020 Peter Fazekas, Georgina Nemeth 14 citations

Dreaming, mind-wandering, and hypnotic dreams may share underlying neural mechanisms, challenging earlier theories. Hobson's AIM theory mapped states of consciousness along dimensions of brain activity, input source, and neurochemical modulation, linking REM dreaming to other altered states like hypnosis. However, hypnosis is not a sleep-like state, and dreaming is not REM-centric. The neuro-cognitive theory places dreaming and mind-wandering on a continuum driven by default-mode network activity, questioning AIM theory. This paper argues that hypnotic dreams—experiences arising from explicit suggestions during hypnosis—can inform the neuro-cognitive theory, and comparing them with dreaming and mind-wandering may advance understanding of consciousness.

The route to recall a dream: theoretical considerations and methodological implications.

Psychological Research June 1, 2023 Georgina Nemeth

Dream reports are shaped by three distinct steps: the generation of a conscious experience during sleep (dream production), storing a memory trace of that experience (dream encoding), and accessing that trace upon waking (dream retrieval). The paper argues that prospective methods such as laboratory reports and logs provide more direct access to data about dream production and encoding than retrospective scales, which cannot systematically control factors affecting retrieval and thus screen off variability in production and encoding. Understanding how trait and state factors interact with each step is crucial for improving empirical research on dream experiences.

Dream experiences and the neural correlates of perceptual consciousness and cognitive access.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences September 19, 2018 Peter Fazekas, Georgina Nemeth

Dreaming may offer clues about whether seeing something requires being able to think about it. The paper examines two lines of argument: one points to low activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during REM sleep, the other to a general posterior hot zone as the neural correlate of dream experiences. Neither withstands close scrutiny. White dreams—episodes where people report having dreamed but recall nothing—are the most promising phenomenon for settling the debate. Cognitive access is not a single process, and its brain basis remains poorly understood. A form of cognitive access may operate without the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and perhaps without any frontal activity. If so, posterior-only activation during conscious experiences could still be compatible with the claim that perceptual consciousness requires cognitive access.

The route to recall a dream: Theoretical considerations and methodological implications

Georgina Nemeth preprint

Dream reports are not direct readouts of dreaming; they result from a three-step process: producing a conscious experience during sleep, encoding a memory trace of that experience, and retrieving the trace upon waking. Different theories of dreaming make different assumptions about how these steps relate to what people report. Trait and state factors—such as personality, sleep stage, or time since awakening—can affect each step separately, so understanding which step is being modulated is essential for interpreting dream data. Prospective methods (e.g., laboratory awakenings) give more direct access to dream production and encoding than retrospective methods (e.g., morning logs), which cannot control retrieval-stage factors and thus obscure variability in earlier steps.