Is dream recall underestimated by retrospective measures and enhanced by keeping a logbook? An empirical investigation.
Consciousness and Cognition May 1, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2016.03.015 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Empirical study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Dreaming |
| Keywords | Dream diaries Methodology Self-report methods |
| Key points | Retrospective measures underestimate dream recall and keeping a logbook enhances it. |
Abstract
In a recent review, Aspy, Delfabbro, and Proeve (2015) highlighted the tendency for retrospective measures of dream recall to yield substantially lower recall rates than logbook measures, a phenomenon they termed the retrospective-logbook disparity. One explanation for this phenomenon is that retrospective measures underestimate true dream recall. Another explanation is that keeping a logbook tends to enhance dream recall. The present study provides a thorough empirical investigation into the retrospective-logbook disparity using a range of retrospective and logbook measures and three different types of logbook. Retrospective-logbook disparities were correlated with a range of variables theoretically related to the retrospective underestimation effect, and retrospective-logbook disparities were greater among participants that reported improved dream recall during the logbook period. These findings indicate that dream recall is underestimated by retrospective measures and enhanced by keeping a logbook. Recommendations for the use of retrospective and logbook measures of dream recall are provided.