Skip to content

Validating Psychometric Questionnaires Using Experience-Sampling Data: The Case of Nightmare Distress

Stefan Stieger, T. Kuhlmann

Frontiers in Neuroscience December 5, 2018 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00901 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Experience sampling study Peer reviewed
Sample size 92
Population Participants recruited for an experience sampling study on dreams
Duration 22 days, twice per day
Topics Dreaming
Key points Only the subscales 'general nightmare distress' and 'impact on sleep' showed convergent and divergent validity; the subscale 'impact on daily reality perception' had unclear validity, and all NDQ items did not differentiate between bad dreams and nightmares.

Abstract

Nightmares are a comparatively frequent phenomenon. They are often accompanied by emotional distress and gain clinical relevance when recurrent. To assess how much distress nightmares cause the individual, the Nightmare Distress Questionnaire (NDQ, Belicki, 1992) is probably the most often used measure. However, its validity is still disputed. To analyze the validity of the proposed three NDQ subscales in more detail, we conducted an experience sampling study, gathering data either in real-time or short retrospective timeframes over the course of 22 days twice per day (N = 92 participants). The measurements were implemented via a mobile app using participants’ own smartphones. Besides the dream quality, we assessed concepts on a daily basis that past research found to be related to dreams. These included critical life events, alcohol consumption, eating behavior, and well-being. We found that only the subscales “general nightmare distress” and “impact on sleep” showed convergent as well as divergent validity. The validity of the subscale “impact on daily reality perception” is unclear. If at all, this subscale is rather indirectly associated with nightmare distress. Furthermore, all of the NDQ items did not differentiate between a bad dream and a nightmare, which suggests that the NDQ might rather be a measure of negative dreams in general and not nightmares in particular. Based on the present experience sampling design, we propose to advance the validation process by further possibilities, such as an item-level, person-level, and multi-level approach. This approach seems to be especially fruitful for concepts which are not very salient (e.g., laughter), can hardly be remembered retrospectively (e.g., dream content), or are potentially threatened by recall biases (e.g., alcohol consumption).

Comparable studies

Other observational and cohort studies on 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
Nightmare Prevalence, Nightmare Distress, and Self-Reported Psychological Disturbance Young adults with a mean age of 20 years 2002 Prospective observational study n = 116
Long-term effects of extreme situational stress on sleep and dreaming Survivors of traumatic events who complained of sleep disturbances, compared with... 1987 Case-control study n = 11
The relationship of nightmare frequency and nightmare distress to well‐being Adults who reported dreams 2004 Observational cohort n = 147
Dreaming in NREM Sleep: A High-Density EEG Study of Slow Waves and Spindles Healthy human subjects 2018 Observational cohort n = 14

Citations in the library

Explore topics