CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 47Sleep and Wakefulness ResearchSleep and related disordersPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Ontogeny of dreaming: A review of empirical studies

Sándor, Piroska, Szakadát, Sára, Bódizs, Róbert·2014·Sleep Medicine Reviews
DOI 10.1016/j.smrv.2014.02.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The examination of children's sleep-related mental experiences presents many significant challenges for researchers investigating the developmental trajectories of human dreaming. In contrast to the well-explored developmental patterns of human sleep, data from dream research are strikingly divergent with highly ambiguous results and conclusions, even though there is plenty of indirect evidence suggesting parallel patterns of development between neural maturation and dreaming. Thus results from studies of children's dreaming are of essential importance not only to enlighten us on the nature and role of dreaming but to also add to our knowledge of consciousness and cognitive and emotional development. This review summarizes research results related to the ontogeny of dreaming: we critically reconsider the field, systematically compare the findings based on different methodologies, and highlight the advantages and disadvantages of methods, arguing in favor of methodological pluralism. Since most contradictory results emerge in connection with descriptive as well as content related characteristics of young children's dreams, we emphasize the importance of carefully selected dream collection methods. In contrast nightmare-related studies yield surprisingly convergent results, thus providing strong basis for inferences about the connections between dreaming and cognitive emotional functioning. Potential directions for dream research are discussed, aiming to explore the as yet unra…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2014.02.001

Cites

133 of 133 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • There is no agreement about dream content qualitative features and dream recall rates in the life span among age groups.

    “Nonetheless dream content and dream recall studies have been made both on healthy cohort and pathological samples at any age, there is no agreement about dream content qualitative features and dream recall rates in the life span among age groups.5,67–69,72”

    From Spotlight on dream recall: the ages of dreams (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

  • The most used method in children's dream research is the exclusive collection of dream reports.

    “Consequently, the most used method in children’s dream research is the exclusive collection of dream reports.5,67–69”

    From Spotlight on dream recall: the ages of dreams (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

  • Children's studies are mainly based on reports by the caregiver.

    “children’s studies are mainly based on reports by the caregiver.5,7,79”

    From Spotlight on dream recall: the ages of dreams (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

  • Empirical evidence favors a correlation between mental imagery and sleep mentation in children.

    “Due to these findings, the study of dream recall rates in children moved from a language-emotional level to an assessment of executive functions, with empirical evidence in favor of a correlation between mental imagery and sleep mentation.4–6,69”

    From Spotlight on dream recall: the ages of dreams (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

  • A low compliance in recording dream content may be due to the presence of a stranger (the researcher) and can lead to a bias in reporting dreams.

    “A low compliance in recording dream content may be due to the presence of a stranger (ie, the researcher) and can lead to a bias in reporting dreams.5–7”

    From Spotlight on dream recall: the ages of dreams (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 139 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sándor, P., Szakadát, S., & Bódizs, R.
Affiliations
Semmelweis University (HU)
ORCID
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
435-449
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.smrv.2014.02.001
OpenAlex
W2148426252
Cited by
47
References
139
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • BIAL Foundation
  • Hungarian National Scientific Research Fund (OTKA-K105367)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
children's dreams, dream content, nightmares, neuronal maturation, sleep architecture, cognitive and emotional development, consciousness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child Development, Dreams, Humans, Human Development, Young Adult, Sleep Medicine Specialty

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