Dream recall frequency: impact of prospective measures and motivational factors.
Antonio Zadra, Geneviève Robert
Consciousness and Cognition December 1, 2012 DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2012.08.011 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Observational cohort Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 358 |
| Population | Participants who estimated their weekly dream recall frequency and kept a dream log |
| Duration | 2-5 weeks |
| Topics | Dreaming |
| Key findings | Checklist logs, but not narrative logs, yielded significantly higher dream recall frequency than participants' questionnaire estimates, and narrative logs led to fewer reported dreams per week. |
Abstract
Significant individual differences exist in dream recall frequency (DRF) but some variance is likely attributable to instrument choice in measuring DRF. Three hundred and fifty eight participants estimated their weekly DRF and recorded their dreams in either a narrative log (n = 165) or checklist log (n = 193) for 2-5 weeks. There was an early peak in DRF within the first week of both types of prospective logs after which DRF remained relatively stable. Although the two groups did not differ in their estimated DRF, significantly fewer dreams were reported per week on the narrative logs and only checklist logs yielded significantly higher DRF than participants' questionnaire estimates. The interactions between DRF measures did not vary across groups with low, medium or high baseline levels of DRF. Keeping a dream log does not necessarily increase DRF and narrative logs' time consuming nature can impact subjects' motivation to report all of their dreams over time.