The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Bottom-up or top-down in dream neuroscience? A top-down critique of two bottom-up studies
Abstract
Recent neuroscientific studies of dreaming, specifically those in relation to waking sensory-motor impairments, but also more generally, betray a faulty understanding of the sort of process that dreaming is. They adhere to the belief that dreaming is a bottom-up phenomenon, whose form and content is dictated by sensory-motor brain stem activity, rather than a top-down process initiated and controlled by higher-level cognitive systems. But empirical data strongly support the latter alternative, and refute the conceptualization and interpretation of recent studies of dreaming in sensory-motor impairment in particular and of recent dream neuroscience in general.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
Dreams are likely a result of noise in the brain's hierarchical structure that traverses its feedback connectivity, which fits with evidence that dreams are top-down.
“Indeed, it is likely the case that dreams are indeed a result of noise in the brain's hierarchical structure that traverses its feedback connectivity, which fits with the evidence that dreams are “top-down.”151”
From The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization (2021) · cites this paper as [151]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 13
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- McGinn, 2013, Homunculism, New York Review of Books, 21, 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Foulkes, D., & Domhoff, G. W.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- Corresponding author
- Domhoff, G. William
- ORCID
- Domhoff, G. William
- Venue
- Consciousness and Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 27
- Pages
- 168-171
- ISSN
- 1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2003865585
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
- Keywords
- dreams, top-down processing, bottom-up processing, motor and sensory impairment
- MeSH terms
- Dreams, Humans, Neurosciences, Psychological Theory
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
