Cited by 23Sleep and Wakefulness ResearchNeural dynamics and brain functionPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

EEG Signal Diversity Varies With Sleep Stage and Aspects of Dream Experience

Open access
Aamodt, Arnfinn, Nilsen, André Sevenius, Thürer, Benjamin, Moghadam, Fatemeh Hasanzadeh, Kauppi, Nils, Juel, Bjørn Erik, Storm, Johan Frederik·2021·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Several theories link consciousness to complex cortical dynamics, as suggested by comparison of brain signal diversity between conscious states and states where consciousness is lost or reduced. In particular, Lempel-Ziv complexity, amplitude coalition entropy and synchrony coalition entropy distinguish wakefulness and REM sleep from deep sleep and anesthesia, and are elevated in psychedelic states, reported to increase the range and vividness of conscious contents. Some studies have even found correlations between complexity measures and facets of self-reported experience. As suggested by integrated information theory and the entropic brain hypothesis, measures of differentiation and signal diversity may therefore be measurable correlates of consciousness and phenomenological richness. Inspired by these ideas, we tested three hypotheses about EEG signal diversity related to sleep and dreaming. First, diversity should decrease with successively deeper stages of non-REM sleep. Second, signal diversity within the same sleep stage should be higher for periods of dreaming vs. non-dreaming. Third, specific aspects of dream contents should correlate with signal diversity in corresponding cortical regions. We employed a repeated awakening paradigm in sleep deprived healthy volunteers, with immediate dream report and rating of dream content along a thought-perceptual axis, from exclusively thought-like to exclusively perceptual. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess how signal diversity varied with sleep stage, dreaming and thought-perceptual rating. Signal diversity decreased with sleep depth, but was not significantly different between dreaming and non-dreaming, even though there was a significant positive correlation between Lempel-Ziv complexity of EEG recorded over the posterior cortex and thought-perceptual ratings of dream contents.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655884

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • Two studies attempting to correlate the diversity of dreams with EEG signal complexity resulted in null or conflicting findings.

    “This uncertainty is further emphasized by two studies attempting to correlate the diversity of dreams with EEG signal complexity, resulting in null or conflicting findings.42,43”

    From We are the Sensors of Consciousness! A Review and Analysis on How Awakenings During Sleep Influence Dream Recall (2025) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports mixed findings: EEG signal diversity did not differ significantly between NREM2 periods with and without dream reports, but posterior Lempel-Ziv complexity correlated significantly with thought–perceptual ratings of dream content. The study did not collect ratings of dream-experience richness, so it did not directly test whether the diversity or richness of dreams correlated with EEG complexity. This verdict addresses this source only, not the other study cited in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aamodt, A., Nilsen, A. S., Thürer, B., Moghadam, F. H., Kauppi, N., Juel, B. E., & Storm, J. F.
Affiliations
University of Oslo (NO)
Corresponding author
  • Aamodt, Arnfinn
  • Storm, Johan Frederik
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2021-04-23
Volume
12
Pages
655884-655884
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3159763479
Cited by
23
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Norges Forskningsråd
  • Horizon 2020
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
sleep stages, REM sleep, NREM sleep, dreams, dream content, Lempel-Ziv complexity, consciousness, sleep deprivation, posterior cortex, integrated information 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