Cited by 0Mental Health via WritingPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionMind wandering and attention

The words of our inner worlds: emotional language use in mind-wandering and dream reports reflects mental ill-being

Open access
Strid, Nanna, Tuominen, Jarno, Bernstein, Ryan, Kirberg, Manuela, Valli, Katja, Windt, Jennifer, Bekinschtein, Tristan, Noreika, Valdas +2 more·2026·Neuroscience of Consciousness

Abstract

Do the words we use reveal how we feel? While much research has explored language use in social media, little is known about how the content of spontaneous thoughts and experiences, such as daytime mind-wandering and nighttime dreaming, reflects well-being, and ill-being. We analyzed 1 496 mind-wandering reports (N = 152) and 1781 dream reports (N = 172) using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Participants also self-reported their well-being and ill-being. Linear mixed-effects models showed that ill-being (negative affect, anxiety, and depression symptoms) was associated with the use of negative tone and negative emotion words (including anxiety, anger, sadness words) in mind-wandering reports. Ill-being (specifically, negative affect) was also associated with greater use of anxiety words in dream reports. Well-being (eudaimonic well-being and peace of mind) was associated with the use of positive tone words in mind-wandering reports, but this association was not robust in sensitivity analyses. These findings indicate that the way people describe their feelings in reports of different conscious states reflects aspects of their mental health and may contribute to future diagnostic tools in psychology and psychiatry.

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/niag075

Cites

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

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 80

Authors
Strid, N., Tuominen, J., Bernstein, R., Kirberg, M., Valli, K., Windt, J., Bekinschtein, T., Noreika, V., Revonsuo, A., & Sikka, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Sikka, Pilleriin
Venue
Neuroscience of Consciousness
Published
2026
Volume
2026
Issue
1
ISSN
2057-2107 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7224994259
Cited by
0
References
80
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Neuroscience of Consciousness (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Emil Aaltonen Foundation
  • Finnish Cultural Foundation
  • the TOP Foundation
  • the Cambridge ESRC Impact Acceleration
  • Australian Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
Keywords
mind wandering, dream narrative, emotional expression, negative affect, anxiety, depression, eudaimonic well-being, inner peace, spontaneous thought, LIWC, self-reported well-being

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