Cited by 40Sleep and Wakefulness ResearchPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

The Dream Catcher experiment: blinded analyses failed to detect markers of dreaming consciousness in EEG spectral power

Open access
Wong, William, Noreika, Valdas, Móró, Levente, Revonsuo, Antti, Windt, Jennifer, Valli, Katja, Tsuchiya, Naotsugu·2020·Neuroscience of Consciousness

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The Dream Catcher test defines the criteria for a genuine discovery of the neural constituents of phenomenal consciousness. Passing the test implies that some patterns of purely brain-based data directly correspond to the subjective features of phenomenal experience, which would help to bridge the explanatory gap between consciousness and brain. Here, we conducted the Dream Catcher test for the first time in a step-wise and simplified form, capturing its core idea. The Dream Catcher experiment involved a Data Team, which measured participants' brain activity during sleep and collected dream reports, and a blinded Analysis Team, which was challenged to predict, based solely on brain measurements, whether or not a participant had a dream experience. Using a serial-awakening paradigm, the Data Team prepared 54 1-min polysomnograms of non-rapid eye movement sleep-27 of dreamful sleep and 27 of dreamless sleep (three of each condition from each of the nine participants)-redacting from them all associated participant and dream information. The Analysis Team attempted to classify each recording as either dreamless or dreamful using an unsupervised machine learning classifier, based on hypothesis-driven, extracted features of electroencephalography (EEG) spectral power and electrode location. The procedure was repeated over five iterations with a gradual removal of blindness. At no level of blindness did the Analysis Team perform significantly better than chance, suggesting that EEG spectral power could not be utilized to detect signatures specific to phenomenal consciousness in these data. This study marks the first step towards realizing the Dream Catcher test in practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/nc/niaa006

Cites

107 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 112 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Bein B. Entropy. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2006; 20: 101– 9. 16634417
  2. Ezquerro-Nassar A, Noreika V. Electroencephalographic correlates of dreaming In: Valli K, Hoss RJ (eds), Dreams: Understanding Biology, Psychology, and Culture, Vol. 1. Greenwood: ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2019, 55– 63.
  3. Moffitt A. Individual differences among pre- and post-awakening EEG correlates of dream reports following arousals from different stages of sleep. Psychiatr J Univ Ottawa 1982; 7: 111– 25.
  4. Perrin F, Pernier J, Bertrand O, et al Corrigenda. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1990; 76: 565– 6.
  5. Pivik RT. Mental activity and phasic events during sleep. Dissertation Abstracts Int 1971; 32: 1254.
  6. Revonsuo A. Can functional brain imaging discover consciousness in the brain. J Conscious Stud 2001; 8: 3– 23.
  7. Revonsuo A. Inner Presence: Consciousness as a Biological Phenomenon Cambridge: MIT Press, 2006.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wong, W., Noreika, V., Móró, L., Revonsuo, A., Windt, J., Valli, K., & Tsuchiya, N.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International (JP)
Corresponding author
  • Wong, William
  • Tsuchiya, Naotsugu
Venue
Neuroscience of Consciousness
Published
2020-01-01
Volume
2020
Issue
1
Pages
niaa006-niaa006
ISSN
2057-2107 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3043596444
Cited by
40
References
112
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience of Consciousness (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
  • Signe and Ane Gyllenberg Foundation
  • Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher (DE170101254)
  • Academy of Finland (266434)
  • Australian Research Council Future (FT120100619)
  • Discovery Project (DP130100194, DP180104128, DP180100396)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
phenomenal consciousness, dreams, EEG spectral power, NREM sleep, explanatory gap, machine learning classification, blind analysis, subjective experience

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