CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Sleep and Wakefulness ResearchSleep and related disordersEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Brain functional connectivity upon awakening from sleep predicts interindividual differences in dream recall frequency

Open access
Vallat, Raphael, Nicolas, Alain, Ruby, Perrine·2020·Sleep
DOI 10.1093/sleep/zsaa116
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Why do some individuals recall dreams every day while others hardly ever recall one? We hypothesized that sleep inertia—the transient period following awakening associated with brain and cognitive alterations—could be a key mechanism to explain interindividual differences in dream recall at awakening. To test this hypothesis, we measured the brain functional connectivity (combined electroencephalography–functional magnetic resonance imaging) and cognition (memory and mental calculation) of high dream recallers (HR, n = 20) and low dream recallers (LR, n = 18) in the minutes following awakening from an early-afternoon nap. Resting-state scans were acquired just after or before a 2 min mental calculation task, before the nap, 5 min after awakening from the nap, and 25 min after awakening. A comic was presented to the participants before the nap with no explicit instructions to memorize it. Dream(s) and comic recall were collected after the first post-awakening scan. As expected, between-group contrasts of the functional connectivity at 5 min post-awakening revealed a pattern of enhanced connectivity in HR within the default mode network (DMN) and between regions of the DMN and regions involved in memory processes. At the behavioral level, a between-group difference was observed in dream recall, but not comic recall. Our results provide the first evidence that brain functional connectivity right after awakening is associated with interindividual trait differences in dream recall and suggest that the brain connectivity of HR at awakening facilitates the maintenance of the short-term memory of the dream during the sleep–wake transition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sleep/zsaa116

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

10 of 44 cited sources checked · 4 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation
    § Discussion · p. 7

    The cerebral functioning of high dream recallers and low dream recallers is different, as previously demonstrated with EEG and PET.

    “our findings confirm that the cerebral functioning of HR and LR is different, as previously demonstrated with EEG and PET [9, 10, 13]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [9] Eichenlaub, 2014, Brain reactivity differentiates subjects with high and low dream recall frequencies during both sleep and wakefulness, Cereb Cortex. source
    • cites [10] Vallat, 2017, Increased evoked potentials to arousing auditory stimuli during sleep: implication for the understanding of dream recall, Front Hum Neurosci. source
    • cites [13] Eichenlaub, 2014, Resting brain activity varies with dream recall frequency between subjects, Neuropsychopharmacology. source
  • Findingown data
    § Functional connectivity · p. 6

    There were no significant group differences in functional connectivity of the three default mode network seeds during the pre-nap resting-state scan.

    “First, we did not find any significant group differences in the functional connectivity of any of the three seeds during the pre-nap resting-state scan. In other words, the two groups did not differ in the DMN functional connectivity before the nap.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Dream recall · p. 6

    When combining both groups, dream recall did not significantly differ after awakening from N2 versus N3 sleep.

    “Lastly, when combining participants from both groups, we did not find a significant between-stage difference in dream recall after awakening from the nap. That is, dream recall was not significantly different after awakening from N2 or N3 sleep ( X 2 = 0.08, p = 0.78).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Dream recall · p. 6

    After awakening from partial sleep deprivation in the sleep unit, a significantly higher proportion of high dream recallers (65%) than low dream recallers (22%) reported a full or contentless dream.

    “After awakening from the partial sleep deprivation in the sleep unit, significantly more HR reported dreams than did LR (65% of HR and 22% of LR reported a full or a white [contentless] dream; X 2 = 7.0, p = 0.008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Functional connectivity · p. 6

    Significant group-by-time interaction effects were found for all three default mode network seeds.

    “We found significant interaction effects between group and time for all three seeds, which are reported in Supplementary Table S1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18
  • May combine two claims. 16

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    The default mode network is a set of functionally coupled brain areas involved in mind-wandering and episodic memory retrieval.

    “Indeed, the DMN is a set of functionally coupled brain areas [23, 24] involved in mind-wandering and episodic memory retrieval [25]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [23] Raichle, 2001, A default mode of brain function, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. source

      The opening section describes an organized default mode comprising brain areas that consistently decrease their activity across tasks, and the Discussion identifies several of those areas. The passages do not establish that the areas are functionally coupled. The mind-wandering and episodic-memory clause is attached to a different citation [25], so it is not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [24] Sestieri, 2011, Episodic memory retrieval, parietal cortex, and the default mode network: functional and topographic analyses, J Neurosci. source
    • cites [25] Legrand, 2009, What is self-specific? Theoretical investigation and critical review of neuroimaging results, Psychol Rev. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    High dream recallers have increased regional cerebral blood flow in the MPFC and TPJ at rest during wake and sleep, and increased white matter density in the MPFC.

    “Noteworthy, we found that HR have an increased regional cerebral blood flow in the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) and temporoparietal junction (TPJ) at rest (during wake and sleep), as well as an increased white matter density in the MPFC [20].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20] Vallat, 2018, Dream recall frequency is associated with medial prefrontal cortex white-matter density, Front Psychol. source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    The default mode network is typically hyperconnected during REM sleep, which has the highest rate of successful dream recall, and hypoconnected during N3 sleep, which has the lowest rate.

    “Coherent with this, it is noteworthy that the DMN is typically hyperconnected during rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, the sleep stage associated with the highest rate of successful dream recall, and hypoconnected during N3 sleep, the sleep stage associated with the lowest rate of successful dream recall [28-31].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [28] Cavallero, 1992, Slow wave sleep dreaming, Sleep. source
    • cites [29] Nielsen, 2000, A review of mentation in REM and NREM sleep: “covert” REM sleep as a possible reconciliation of two opposing models, Behav Brain Sci. source
    • cites [30] Horovitz, 2009, Decoupling of the brain’s default mode network during deep sleep, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. source

      The Results and Discussion report reduced frontal–posterior DMN connectivity during deep sleep, supporting the deep-sleep portion of the claim. The paper does not establish REM hyperconnectivity or compare dream-recall rates across sleep stages; it also does not specifically identify its deep-sleep finding as N3. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [31] Wu, 2012, Variations in connectivity in the sensorimotor and default-mode networks during the first nocturnal sleep cycle, Brain Connect. source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation
    § Behavioral tests · p. 4

    Participants trained on the descending subtraction task before the MRI session to avoid a practice effect.

    “In the evening at the sleep unit, participants trained on the DST (six blocks of 2 min each), which was used to evaluate cognitive performances during the MRI session on the following day, to avoid a practice effect over the first trials [34].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [34] Dinges, 1985, Assessing performance upon abrupt awakening from naps during quasi-continuous operations, Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    High dream recallers show more intra-sleep wakefulness than low dream recallers, with no differences in other sleep parameters.

    “Results showed more intra-sleep wakefulness in HR than in LR (with no differences in other sleep parameters), which is coherent with the idea that periods of wakefulness during sleep are necessary to encode dream content into long-term memory [8].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [9] Eichenlaub, 2014, Brain reactivity differentiates subjects with high and low dream recall frequencies during both sleep and wakefulness, Cereb Cortex. source
    • cites [10] Vallat, 2017, Increased evoked potentials to arousing auditory stimuli during sleep: implication for the understanding of dream recall, Front Hum Neurosci. source

      The Results (Sleep Parameters) show more wakefulness after sleep onset in high dream recallers, and the Discussion identifies awakening duration as the key difference. However, Table 1 also marks total sleep time as significantly different between groups, so the unqualified claim of no differences in other sleep parameters is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Intra-sleep awakening promotes dream recall, as confirmed by objective sleep measurements.

    “Intra-sleep awakening-which is both a state and a trait factor-was also hypothesized to promote dream recall [7, 8], a hypothesis that was recently confirmed using objective sleep measurements.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [7] Schredl, 2003, Factors of home dream recall: a structural equation model, J Sleep Res. source
    • cites [8] Koulack, 1976, Dream recall and dream recall failure: an arousal-retrieval model, Psychol Bull source
    • cites [9] Eichenlaub, 2014, Brain reactivity differentiates subjects with high and low dream recall frequencies during both sleep and wakefulness, Cereb Cortex. source
    • cites [10] Vallat, 2017, Increased evoked potentials to arousing auditory stimuli during sleep: implication for the understanding of dream recall, Front Hum Neurosci. source

      The Discussion (‘Intra-Sleep Awakenings and Dream Recall’) reports objectively measured awakening durations and identifies duration as the best predictor of dream recall. It says the results support the arousal-retrieval model, but the observational finding does not establish that awakenings cause dream recall or definitively confirm the hypothesis. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Behavioral tests · p. 4

    The descending subtraction task has been previously used to demonstrate performance deficits and normalization in the first 30 minutes after awakening.

    “The DST has been previously used to evidence performance deficit and normalization in the first 30 min post awakening [34-36].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [34] Dinges, 1985, Assessing performance upon abrupt awakening from naps during quasi-continuous operations, Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput source

      The Instrumentation section identifies and describes the descending subtraction task, and the Results report DST performance deficits immediately after awakening. The introductory passage says post-awakening impairment generally does not last beyond 15–30 minutes, but the paper does not show DST performance normalizing within that period. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [35] Evans, 1975

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [36] Stampi, 1990, Ultrashort sleep schedules: sleep architecture and the recuperative value of multiple 80- 50- and 20-min naps source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion · p. 7

    Short-term memory consistently involves the prefrontal cortex and angular gyrus.

    “the known cerebral correlates of short-term memory, which consistently involve the PFC and AG [49, 50]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [49] Christophel, 2017, The distributed nature of working memory, Trends Cogn Sci. source

      The 'Storage of Working Memory Contents' section reports working-memory-related activity in the PFC and parietal cortex. It does not identify the angular gyrus specifically, and its account of distributed activity does not establish that both regions are consistently involved. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [50] Caclin, 2018, Musical and verbal short-term memory: insights from neurodevelopmental and neurological disorders, Ann N Y Acad Sci source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § High-recallers (HR, n=20) > Low-recallers (LR, n=18) · p. 8

    More than 95% of dream reports involve characters.

    “more than 95% of dream reports involve characters [55]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [55] Vallat, 2017, Characteristics of the memory sources of dreams: A new version of the content-matching paradigm to take mundane and remote memories into account, PLoS One. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Descending subtraction task · p. 6

    There was no significant main effect of group or group-by-time interaction for descending subtraction task performance.

    “Contrary to our hypothesis, there was no significant main effect of group or interaction between group and time for the DST performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § Descending subtraction task · p. 6

    There was no significant effect of time on the percentage of mistakes in the descending subtraction task.

    “There was no main effect of time in the percentage of mistakes, a finding in line with the generally held view that speed is more impaired than accuracy during sleep inertia [15].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Functional connectivity · p. 6

    At 25 minutes post-awakening, there were almost no group differences in functional connectivity, except increased MPFC-putamen connectivity in high dream recallers.

    “Similarly, there were almost no group differences during the 25-min post-awakening resting-state scan, except increased connectivity between the MPFC and the putamen in HR.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Abstract · p. 2

    There was a between-group difference in dream recall but not in comic recall.

    “At the behavioral level, a between-group difference was observed in dream recall, but not comic recall.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § Memory recall · p. 6

    There was no significant group difference in the final memory score for the comic story content questionnaire.

    “For the recall of the comic, no significant group difference was found in the final memory score to the questionnaire about the story content (on a scale from 0 to 10: HR = 5.6 ± 2.0; LR = 4.7 ± 2.7; p = 0.26).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Descending subtraction task · p. 6

    Descending subtraction task performance (total responses and percentage correct) was significantly reduced at 5 minutes post-awakening compared to pre-nap and 25 minutes post-awakening.

    “Specifically, the total number of responses and the percentage of correct responses were reduced at 5 min p-a compared to pre-nap and 25 min p-a (all p 's < 0.05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § Memory recall · p. 6

    There was a trend for a higher number of words during free recall of the comic in high dream recallers than low dream recallers.

    “However, there was a tendency for a significantly higher number of words during free recall in HR than LR (HR = 223.8 ± 113 words; LR = 156.1 ± 98 words; p = 0.056).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Dream recall · p. 6

    The between-group difference in dream recall after the nap was significant for participants awakened in N2 sleep (75% HR vs 17% LR) but not for those awakened in N3 sleep.

    “The between-group difference in dream recall after the nap was significant for participants that were awakened in N2 sleep (75% of HR and 17% of LR, X 2 = 4.6, p = 0.03), but not for participants that were awakened in N3 sleep (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning
    § Sleep parameters · p. 5

    Several participants were unable to reach and maintain N2 and N3 sleep during the 45-minute nap due to discomfort of the MRI environment.

    “As expected and due to the inherent discomfort of the MRI environment, several participants were not able to reach and maintain N2 and N3 sleep during the 45 min nap slot.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    The period immediately after awakening is marked by sleep inertia, a transient state of impaired vigilance and cognition that usually dissipates within 30 minutes.

    “The wake period immediately following awakening from sleep is indeed marked by sleep inertia, a transient state of impaired vigilance and cognition that usually dissipates within the first 30 min after awakening [14-16].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [14] Tassi, 2000, Sleep inertia, Sleep Med Rev. source
    • cites [15] Trotti, 2017, Waking up is the hardest thing I do all day: sleep inertia and sleep drunkenness, Sleep Med Rev. source
    • cites [16] Vallat, 2019, Hard to wake up? The cerebral correlates of sleep inertia assessed using combined behavioral, EEG and fMRI measures, Neuroimage. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Low dream recallers recall fewer dreams than high dream recallers regardless of awakening sleep stage, even when awakenings are experimentally controlled, indicating state factors cannot fully compensate for trait factors.

    “Remarkably, LR still recall significantly fewer dreams than HR regardless of the sleep stage in which they are awakened, even when the number of awakenings is increased and experimentally controlled during a night in the lab [9, 11-13], showing that state factors cannot completely compensate for trait factors.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [9] Eichenlaub, 2014, Brain reactivity differentiates subjects with high and low dream recall frequencies during both sleep and wakefulness, Cereb Cortex. source
    • cites [11] Goodenough, 1959, A comparison of “dreamers” and “nondreamers”: eye movements, electroencephalograms, and the recall of dreams, J Abnorm Soc Psychol source
    • cites [12] Pagel, 2003, Non-dreamers, Sleep Med. source
    • cites [13] Eichenlaub, 2014, Resting brain activity varies with dream recall frequency between subjects, Neuropsychopharmacology. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Sleep parameters · p. 6

    In the final sample, high and low dream recallers did not differ in age, BMI, education, habitual sleep duration, or sex ratio, apart from dream recall frequency.

    “The two groups differed in DRF (HR = 6.5 ± 0.7 dream reports per week, LR = 0 ± 0 dream report per week, p < 0.001), but did not differ for all the other variables including age (HR = 22.5 ± 2.5 years, LR = 22.7 ± 2.4 years, p = 0.86), BMI (HR = 22.9 ± 2.6 kg/ m 2 , LR = 21.8 ± 2.2 kg/m 2 , p = 0.15), education (HR = 3.8 ± 2.5 years of higher education, LR = 3.6 ± 1.3 years of higher education,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Prior research has identified state and trait factors contributing to intra- and interindividual variability in dream recall.

    “Previous research identified several state and trait factors that participate in intra- and interindividual variability in dream recall, respectively [1, 2].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [1] Schredl, 2008, Dream recall, dream length, and sleep duration: state or trait factor, Percept Mot Skills. source
    • cites [2] Schredl, 2004, Reliability and stability of a dream recall frequency scale, Percept Mot Skills. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Sleep parameters · p. 6

    There were no significant group differences in any sleep parameters during the nap or in the latency between awakening and the two post-awakening resting-state scans.

    “Importantly, there was no significant group difference for any of the sleep parameters considered or in the latency between the awakening and the two post-awakening resting-state scans.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Introduction · p. 3

    Sleep inertia varies within and between individuals and is a candidate explanation for state and trait variability in dream recall.

    “Because sleep inertia can largely vary both within and between individuals, it represents a good candidate to explain both state and trait variability in dream recall [7, 17, 18].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [7] Schredl, 2003, Factors of home dream recall: a structural equation model, J Sleep Res. source
    • cites [17] Koukkou, 1983, Dreaming: the functional state-shift hypothesis. A neuropsychophysiological model, Br J Psychiatry. source
    • cites [18] Morel, 1991, The electrophysiological correlates of dream recall and nonrecall from stage 2 sleep, Can J Psychol. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Participants · p. 4

    The high and low dream recaller groups did not differ in age, BMI, habitual sleep duration, or education level, apart from dream recall frequency.

    “Apart from the DRF ( p < 0.001), the two groups did not differ in other assessed parameters, including age, BMI, habitual sleep duration, or education level (all p 's ≥ 0.25).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion · p. 7

    A meta-analysis of episodic encoding and retrieval found that the precuneus, prefrontal cortex, superior frontal gyrus, and angular gyrus were among the largest clusters associated with retrieval success.

    “a meta-analysis of the brain areas associated with episodic encoding and retrieval [46] found that the precuneus, PFC, SFG, and AG were among the largest clusters associated with retrieval success”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Spaniol, 2009, Event-related fMRI studies of episodic encoding and retrieval: meta-analyses using activation likelihood estimation, Neuropsychologia. source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Sleep parameters · p. 6

    One participant was excluded due to technical failure, leaving 38 participants (20 high dream recallers and 18 low dream recallers) in the final analysis.

    “One subject out of the 39 remaining was discarded because of a technical failure during data acquisition, leading thus to a total of 38 participants included in the final analysis (20 HR and 18 LR).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § EEG and eye movement recordings · p. 5

    Eye movements were monitored during the experiment to ensure participants did not close their eyes during resting-state scans.

    “To ensure that the participants were not closing their eyes during the resting state scans, eye movements were monitored during the experiment using an EyeLink 1000 fMRI eye-tracking system (SR Research Ontario, Canada).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
28 of 28

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Participants already familiar with the MRI environment are less anxious and therefore more likely to fall asleep.

    “we assumed that participants who are already familiar to the MR environment might be less anxious and therefore more prone to fall asleep”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The impact of partial sleep deprivation on functional connectivity, if any, was similar in high dream recallers and low dream recallers.

    “it is likely that the impact of the partial sleep deprivation on the functional connectivity, if any, was similar in HR and LR (though this remains to be tested)”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Sleep inertia is higher following sleep deprivation.

    “because sleep inertia is known to be higher following sleep deprivation”
3 of 3

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?

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(2, 72) = 6.04reported p = .004 · recomputed p = .004

    “F (2, 72) = 6.04, p = .004”

  • ConsistentF(2, 72) = 4.29reported p = .017 · recomputed p = .017

    “F (2, 72) = 4.29, p = .017”

2 of 2

Self-check

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

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Solms, 1997, Institute for Research in Behavioral Neuroscience.The neuropsychology of dreams: A clinico-anatomical study
  2. Stampi, 1990, Ultrashort sleep schedules: sleep architecture and the recuperative value of multiple 80- 50- and 20-min naps, 71
  3. Wittmann, 2004, NREM sleep dream recall, dream report length and cortical activation, 54
  4. Maquet, 2005, Human cognition during REM sleep and the activity profile within frontal and parietal cortices: a reappraisal of functional neuroimaging data., 219

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Vallat, R., Nicolas, A., & Ruby, P.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology, Center for Human Sleep Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
ORCID
Venue
Sleep
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2020-06-28
Volume
43
Issue
12
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
DOI
10.1093/sleep/zsaa116
OpenAlex
W3037540166
Cited by
31
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Université de Lyon (ANR-11-IDEX-0007)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
dream recall, sleep inertia, awakening, brain functional connectivity, default mode network, individual differences, short-term memory, sleep-wake transition
MeSH terms
Brain, Dreams, Electroencephalography, Humans, Mental Recall, Sleep

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-01.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-01.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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