| Reference code: | PT/FB/BL-2014-083.04 |
| Location: | BF-GMS
|
Title:
| Exploration-insight from REM Dreams, NREM dreams and daydreams using the Ullman dream group method
|
| Publication year: | 2016
|
URL:
| http://www.asdreams.org/2016/abstracts/
|
| Abstract/Results: | ABSTRACT:
We have shown high levels of personal insight following a one hour session during which a dream is considered at length (Blagrove et al., 2010; Edwards et al., Frontiers in Psychology, 2013), using the Ullman dream appreciation technique (Ullman, 1996). Also, considering recent dream reports elicits significantly higher personal insight than does the control condition of considering a recent waking life event (Edwards et al., 2015). However, following Noreika et al. (2010), a daydream, collected in the sleep lab, may be a more closely matched control condition for a dream report: we use that comparison text for the study reported here. We recruited 31 participants, aged 18 – 30, in good health, who recall at least 3 dreams per week at home. Each participant spent 1 night in the sleep lab. There a daydream (DD) was collected after wiring up and prior to sleeping, and then a Rapid Eye Movement (REM) sleep dream and a non-REM stage 2 (N2) dream will be collected, the order of awakenings for the latter two sleep stages was counterbalanced. Each of the participants’ three transcripts were then considered in separate Ullman group sessions during the following week. The length of time of each session, and the length of time spent on each stage and substage of the Ullman method was calculated so as to ensure that each of the 3 conditions do not differ on these variables. At the end of each discussion participants completed the 13 item Gains from Dream Interpretation questionnaire (Heaton et al., 1998), with (day) dream substituted for dream so that the same questionnaire could be used for all three reports. The questionnaire has an Exploration-Insight subscale, assessing engagement, and insight about the dream and about waking life, from the session. Items are rated on a 1 – 9 scale, anchored as strongly disagree to strongly agree. Results: From the metaanalysis in Edwards et al. (2013), Exploration-Insight from the work of Hill of mean = 7.40. Edwards et al. (2015) had mean for dreams = 7.82 (0.84), and for control Event consideration = 7.21 (1.13). In the current study, mean for Day Dreams = 7.13 (0.99), for N2= 7.76 (0.85), and for REM dreams = 7.49 (1.01). On mixed model analysis difference between the three conditions has p=.05. Difference between the three conditions for personal insight was not significant. The Exploration-Insight difference between dreams and daydreams was mainly due to differences on GDI items 2, 12 and 13, which address learning about the dream. The lack of difference between dreams and daydreams in elicitation of personal insight may be due to the frequent incidence of references to waking life concerns in the daydreams; about 75% of all daydreams referred to current concerns of the participant.
|
| Accessibility: | Document exists in file
|
Language:
| eng
|
Author:
| Blagrove, M.
|
Secondary author(s):
| van Rijn, E., Reid, A., Edwards, C., Malinowski, J., Bennett, P., Eichenlaub, J.-B., Ruby, P.
|
Document type:
| Online abstract
|
Number of reproductions:
| 1
|
Reference:
| Blagrove, M., van Rijn, E., Reid, A., Edwards, C., Malinowski, J., Bennett, P., Eichenlaub, J.-B., & Ruby, P. (2016, June). Exploration-insight from REM Dreams, NREM dreams and daydreams using the Ullman dream group method. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the International Association for the Study of Dreams, The Netherlands.
|
| Indexed document: | No
|
| Keywords: | Insight / Ullman technique / Dreaming
|
Exploration-insight from REM Dreams, NREM dreams and daydreams using the Ullman dream group method |