Dreaming and waking: Similarities and differences revisited
Abstract
Dreaming is often characterized as lacking high-order cognitive (HOC) skills. In two studies, we test the alternative hypothesis that the dreaming mind is highly similar to the waking mind. Multiple experience samples were obtained from late-night REM sleep and waking, following a systematic protocol described in Kahan (2001). Results indicated that reported dreaming and waking experiences are surprisingly similar in their cognitive and sensory qualities. Concurrently, ratings of dreaming and waking experiences were markedly different on questions of general reality orientation and logical organization (e.g., the bizarreness or typicality of the events, actions, and locations). Consistent with other recent studies (e.g., Bulkeley & Kahan, 2008; Kozmová & Wolman, 2006), experiences sampled from dreaming and waking were more similar with respect to their process features than with respect to their structural features.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Subjective dream recall does not necessarily produce reliable estimates of actual dream frequency.
“This is because subjective dream recall does not necessarily produce reliable estimates of actual dream frequency (Schredl et al., 2003b; Parke and Horton, 2009; Kahan and LaBerge, 2011).”
From Increased Awakenings From Non-rapid Eye Movement Sleep Explain Differences in Dream Recall Frequency in Healthy Individuals (2019) · cites this paper as Kahan and LaBerge, 2011
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 161 · Cited by 79
- Authors
- Kahan, T. L., & LaBerge, S. P.
- Affiliations
- Santa Clara University (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kahan, Tracey L.
- Venue
- Consciousness and Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 494-514
- ISSN
- 1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009481063
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 161
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Scholar Commons (Santa Clara University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Santa Clara University
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Keywords
- dreams, REM sleep, dream content, bizarreness, typicality, reality orientation, logical structure
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cognition, Dreams, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sleep, Sleep, REM, Wakefulness, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
