Different keys unlock different doors: analyzing content and affect regulation in dream reports
Simon Kempe, Anna-Julia Krome, Werner Köpp, Lutz Wittmann
Somnologie - Schlafforschung und Schlafmedizin August 4, 2023 DOI: 10.1007/s11818-023-00417-4 (opens in new tab) via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractTwo approaches for analyzing dream reports—the Hall and Van de Castle Coding System (HVCCS) and the Zurich Dream Process Coding System (ZDPCS)—were compared using one dream from a patient with impaired personality functioning. The HVCCS is economical to apply and focuses on content, while the ZDPCS provides a detailed reconstruction of the dream plot's dynamic development. The approaches differ in theoretical presuppositions, coding material, evaluation categories, norm data, time course of dream content, and economic and sample size considerations. Choosing an analytic strategy requires precise knowledge of each system's characteristics.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Case study Case report Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 1 |
| Population | A patient with impairments in personality functioning |
| Keywords | Dream Content measure theory Coding social sciences Affect linguistics Social psychology |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key finding | The Hall and Van de Castle Coding System and the Zurich Dream Process Coding System differ substantially in theoretical presuppositions, coding material, evaluation categories, norm data, time course, and economic considerations, with the HVCCS being more economical and the ZDPCS allowing detailed dynamic reconstruction. |
Abstract
Abstract Background For empirical dream research, numerous scales and rating systems exist for different facets of dreaming. Objective The present study aimed to compare two different approaches for dream report analysis focusing on content and affect regulation, respectively. Materials and methods The Hall and Van de Castle Coding System (HVCCS), complemented by two global rating scales, as well as the Zurich Dream Process Coding System (ZDPCS) were applied to one dream of a patient with impairments in personality functioning. Results The comparison of both approaches reveals clear differences with respect to theoretical presuppositions, coding material, evaluation categories, norm data, time course of dream content, and economic as well as sample size considerations. For instance, while the HVCCS is distinguished by its economic applicability, the ZDPCS allows for a detailed reconstruction of the dynamic development of the dream plot. Conclusion Only precise knowledge of the specific characteristics of different approaches to dream content allows researchers to adequately define their analytic strategy.