ArticleSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society2026
Bodily stimulation during rapid eye movement sleep: effects of muscle and vestibular cueing on lucid dreaming.
Article in Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Objectives: Sensory stimulation during rapid eye movement (REM) sleep has been proposed as a method to induce lucidity, yet most approaches rely on distal sensory modalities such as light and sound. We explored whether bodily stimulation targeting the muscle and vestibular systems differentially influences dream incorporation and lucid awareness during REM sleep. Methods: 28 participants were assigned to electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) or galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) and completed a 2-week cognitive training protocol including dream journaling, reality checks, and association training, followed by two counterbalanced morning naps. One in the stimulation and one in the control condition, during which cues were delivered during REM sleep. Lucidity was assessed using external dream-report ratings and Dream Lucidity Questionnaire scores. Results: Neither EMS nor GVS significantly increased direct or indirect dream incorporation relative to Control. EMS did not significantly increase lucidity. In contrast, GVS was associated with higher externally rated lucidity and higher Dream Lucidity Questionnaire-7 scores than Control. Lucidity rates were high across EMS conditions, suggesting possible contributions of cognitive training, expectancy, and baseline lucid dream frequency. Conclusions: Targeted stimulation of bodily systems during REM sleep may differentially influence dream experience. While somatosensory stimulation showed limited effects, vestibular stimulation was associated with increased lucid awareness despite minimal explicit incorporation into dream content. These findings suggest that modulation of bodily self-processing during REM sleep may influence reflective awareness independently of direct sensory incorporation. Non-invasive vestibular stimulation may therefore represent a promising approach for investigating mechanisms of lucid awareness during sleep.
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.