This study compared the features of a broad population sample that frequently/very frequently experience Dream-Reality Confusion (DRC) to a representative who has never encountered it (Skrzypinska, Holda, Szmigielska, Slodka 2018). Dream-reality confusion is when it's impossible or difficult to tell whether an event, experience, or memory happened in reality or a dream state.
In their calculations, researchers could not account for comparable phenomena known as déja' rêvé in their calculations. Déja' rêvé (already dreamed) was the sensation of having already experienced a particular event while dreaming (Funkhouser & Schredl, 2010; Neppe, 2015). The distinction between déja' rêvé and DRC, according to researchers, is that with DRC, the origins of the perception of recollection are unknown.
Researchers reviewed prior DRC research and uncovered elements that may impact a person's risk of experiencing DRC. They also performed a study of the literature on these critical factors. Discovered personal characteristics like boundaries, dissociative symptoms, schizotypal features, BPD features, fantasy proneness, absorption, and neuroticism, as well as sleep disturbances like circadian rhythm abnormalities and frequent night awakenings, and dream variables like properties, content, emotions evoked, consequences, dream recall frequency, and attitudes toward dreams.
According to the researchers, no study linked DRC experience to the five-factor personality characteristics. They sought to explore how personality qualities differed between those who had lived in the DRC and people who had never lived in the DRC.
The features of DRC sufferers were compared to those of non-DRC sufferers in a questionnaire created by the researchers. They expected that DRC individuals would exhibit:
They also expected that DRC participants would have more frequent (h) sleep disruptions and I sleep-related phenomena than non-DRC participants, as well as (j) greater dream recall frequency and (k) more engaged attitudes regarding dreams than non-DRC individuals.
Participants were recruited using an internet-based strategy that included social media announcements. The release presented the research project, which included a brief description of DRC and the measurement scale. Using this convenience sampling approach, researchers collected 406 initial responses from people who filled out the prototype DRC scale. Two groups were created from the 406 initial responses using random assignment to provide the broadest range of outcome variables. The participants were divided into two groups: those who never had or virtually never encountered DRC (n=42; 16 men and 26 females) and those who had experienced DRC frequently or very frequently (n=40; 6 males and 34 females). The research study included 82 individuals with an average of 25.14 years.
Participants were given a booklet containing a demographic questionnaire (completed under a pseudonym) and many evaluation instruments for examining the attributes outlined in the original hypothesis. The researchers used the following tests: boundaries (Short-Form Boundary Questionnaire [SBQ]; Hartmann, 2011; Polish translation– experimental version), schizotypic features (Schizotypic Syndrome Questionnaire [SSQ]; van Kampen, 2006; Polish translation– experimental version), dissociative symptoms (Polish version of Dissociative Experiences Scale [DES]; Siuta, 2007), and BPD traits (McLean Screening Instrument for BPD [MS
Several assessments were translated into Polish or utilized already prepared Polish equivalents for this study. Before they were used, they were all put through a series of tests to ensure their dependability. Most of the tests yielded adequate or excellent results, and the McLean BPD Screening Instrument and the Creative Experiences Questionnaire yielded acceptable results.
According to the researchers, significant differences were discovered between the two groups of individuals. DRC participants were all more excellent in sleep-related phenomena, neuroticism, boundaries, dream recall frequency, and views concerning dreams. The magnitudes of the effects ranged from mild to big. This backed up five of the theories. To see whether we could verify the other assumptions further, logical regression was used with non-significant findings.
Researchers found that DRC people have thinner boundaries, higher neuroticism scores, more frequent lucid dreams, nightmares, recurring dreams, problem-solving dreams, presence sensing, and other sleep-related phenomena, higher dream recall, and more involved attitudes toward goals than people who don't have DRC. There were no surprises here. The difference in sleep-related phenomena experienced between the two groups was statistically significant, with a considerable effect size. Although it did not validate the remaining hypotheses, specific patterns emerged. The link between DRC and BPD traits was the most prominent.
Small sample size, online recruitment bias (many Polish homes do not have internet), and self-selection bias connected to DRC experiences were also drawbacks. However, the study's findings were mainly in line with earlier findings. According to the researchers, the results have increased information on the DRC. They also suggested that they should use bigger sample sizes in future research and that both random and targeted samples would be helpful. Researchers also questioned whether a qualitative investigation into the nature of the recollections might help them figure out how to tell the difference between them and waking experiences.
Our academic experts are standing by to help you with any writing assignment you may have. We offer a precisely matched service to your demands, from easy essay help proposals to whole dissertations.
