Skip to content

How You Measure Is What You Get: Differences in Self- and External Ratings of Emotional Experiences in Home Dreams

Pilleriin Sikka, Diana Feilhauer, Katja Valli, Antti Revonsuo

The American Journal of Psychology August 21, 2017 DOI: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.130.3.0367 (opens in new tab)

Read Full Text
Relevant Not relevant

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Observational cohort Peer reviewed
Sample size 44
Population Adults (16 men, 28 women, average age 26.9 ± 5.1 years)
Duration 3 consecutive weeks
Topics Lucid dreaming
Keywords Narrative Scale ratio Developmental psychology Psychotherapist
Citations 63
Key findings Self-ratings of dream emotions yield more positive and more emotional ratings than external ratings, with the majority of self-rated dreams being positively valenced and the majority of externally-rated dreams being negatively valenced.

Abstract

Abstract This study demonstrates that different methods for measuring emotional experiences in dreams—self-ratings of dreams using emotion rating scales versus external ratings in the form of content analysis of narrative dream reports—can lead to strikingly different results and contradicting conclusions about the emotional content of home dreams. During 3 consecutive weeks, every morning upon awakening, 44 participants (16 men, 28 women, average age 26.9 ± 5.1 years) reported their dreams and rated their emotional experiences in those dreams using the modified Differential Emotions Scale. Two external judges rated emotional experiences in the same 552 (M = 12.55 ± 5.72) home dream reports using the same scale. Comparison of the 2 methods showed that with self-ratings dreams were rated as more emotional and more positive than with external ratings. Moreover, whereas with self-ratings the majority of dreams was rated as positively valenced, with external ratings the majority of dream reports was rated as negatively valenced. Although self- and external ratings converge, at least partially, in the measurement of negative emotional experiences, they diverge greatly in the measurement of positive emotional experiences. On one hand, this discrepancy may result from different biases inherent in the 2 measurement methods highlighting the need to develop better methods for measuring emotional experiences. On the other hand, self- and external ratings may capture different phenomena and should thus be considered complementary and used concurrently. Nevertheless, results suggest that negative emotional experiences can be measured in a more valid and reliable manner than positive emotional experiences. Supplementary results are available at http://www.press.uillinois.edu/journals/ajp/media/sikka/how_you_measure/

Comparable studies

Other observational and cohort studies on lucid dreaming, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Lucid Dreaming: a State of Consciousness with Features of Both Waking and Non-Lucid Dreaming Student volunteers trained to become lucid and signal lucidity with horizontal eye... 2009 Observational study n = 6
Neural Correlates of Dream Lucidity Obtained from Contrasting Lucid versus Non-Lucid REM Sleep: A Combined EEG/fMRI Case Study Experienced lucid dreamers 2012 Observational cohort n = 4
Real-time dialogue between experimenters and dreamers during REM sleep. Individuals during REM sleep, including frequent lucid dreamers, a novice, and a... 2021 Observational study n = 36
Lucid Dreaming in Narcolepsy Consecutive patients with narcolepsy and healthy controls 2015 Case-control study n = 106
Metacognitive Mechanisms Underlying Lucid Dreaming Human participants split into high- and low-lucidity groups based on reported dream... 2015 Observational cohort

Citations in the library

Cited by 30

and 25 more in the library

Cites 13

and 8 more in the library

Related reading

Explore topics

Lucid dreaming Dreaming