Skip to content

Influencing dreams through sensory stimulation: A systematic review.

Leila Salvesen, Elena Capriglia, Martin Dresler, Giulio Bernardi

Sleep Medicine Reviews February 15, 2024 DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101908 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review Peer reviewed
Topics Dreaming
Keywords Humans Acoustic stimulation Photic stimulation Dreams Sleep Incorporation Modulation Consciousness Sensory processing Sensory stimulation
Key findings Across 51 publications, external sensory stimulation during sleep was reported to change dream content in 0 to about 80% of cases, a wide range the authors attribute to inconsistent definitions and methods. The authors argue that the field lacks a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms, functions, and neurophysiological correlates of stimulus-dependent dream changes and contend that a paradigm shift is required.

Abstract

Sleep is typically considered a state of disconnection from the environment, yet instances of external sensory stimuli influencing dreams have been reported for centuries. Explaining this phenomenon could provide valuable insight into dreams' generative and functional mechanisms, the factors that promote sleep continuity, and the processes that underlie conscious awareness. Moreover, harnessing sensory stimuli for dream engineering could benefit individuals suffering from dream-related alterations. This PRISMA-compliant systematic review assessed the current evidence concerning the influence of sensory stimulation on sleep mentation. We included 51 publications, of which 21 focused on auditory stimulation, ten on somatosensory stimulation, eight on olfactory stimulation, four on visual stimulation, two on vestibular stimulation, and one on multimodal stimulation. Furthermore, nine references explored conditioned associative stimulation: six focused on targeted memory reactivation protocols and three on targeted lucid reactivation protocols. The reported frequency of stimulus-dependent dream changes across studies ranged from 0 to ∼80%, likely reflecting a considerable heterogeneity of definitions and methodological approaches. Our findings highlight a lack of comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms, functions, and neurophysiological correlates of stimulus-dependent dream changes. We suggest that a paradigm shift is required for meaningful progress in this field.

Comparable studies

Other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on dreaming, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Dreaming as mind wandering: evidence from functional neuroimaging and first-person content reports. 2013 Systematic review with meta-analytic comparison
Lucid dreaming incidence: A quality effects meta-analysis of 50 years of research 2016 Meta-analysis
The effectiveness of lucid dreaming therapy in patients with nightmares: A systematic review. Adults with chronic and recurring nightmares 2023 Systematic review
The relationships between insomnia, nightmares, and dreams: A systematic review Individuals without a concomitant psychopathology, including those with insomnia or... 2024 Systematic review
Psychosocial treatments for nightmares in adults and children: a systematic review 2023 Systematic review

Citations in the library

Explore topics