ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
A novel method for objectively classifying sequential emotion within dreams: a proof-of-concept pilot study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The cathartic dream: Using a large language model to study a new type of functional dream in healthy and clinical populations.Journal of sleep research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditionally, emotions in dreams have been assessed using subjective ratings by human raters (e.g., external raters or dreamers themselves). These methods have extensive support and utility in dream science, yet they have certain innate limitations due to the subjective nature of the rating methodologies. Attempting to circumvent several of these limitations, we aimed to develop a novel method for objectively classifying and quantifying sequential (word-for-word) emotion within a dream report. We investigated whether sentiment analysis, a branch of natural language processing, could be used to generate continuous positive and negative valence ratings across a dream. In this pilot, proof-of-concept study, we used 14 dream reports collected upon awakening following overnight polysomnography. We also collected pre- and post-sleep affective data and personality metrics. Our objectives included demonstrating that (1) valence ratings derived from sentiment analysis (Valence Aware Dictionary for sEntiment Reasoning [VADER]) could be used to visualize (plot) positive and negative emotion fluctuations within a dream, (2) how the visual properties of emotion fluctuations within a dream (peaks and troughs, area under the curve) can be used to generate novel "emotion indicators" as proxies for emotion regulation throughout a dream, and (3) these emotion indicators correlate with sleep, affective, and personality variables known to be associated with dreaming and emotion regulation. We describe 6 novel, objective dream emotion indicators: Total number of Peaks, total number of Troughs, Positive, Negative, and Overall Emotion Intensity (composites from an "area under the curve" method using the trapezoid rule applied to the peaks and troughs), and the Emotion Gradient (a polynomial trendline fitted to the emotion fluctuations in the dream chart). The latter signifies the overall direction of sequential emotion changes within a dream. Results also showed that ⅚ emotion indicators correlated significantly with at least one existing sleep, affective, or personality variable known to be associated with dreaming and emotion regulation. We propose that the novel emotion indicators potentially serve as proxies for emotion regulation processes unfolding within a dream. These preliminary findings provide a methodological foundation for future studies to test and refine the method in larger and more diverse samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.