Separating experience reporting from content recall in dream reports across sleep stages

Abstract Contentful dream reports are less frequent after non-rapid eye movement (NREM) than rapid eye movement (REM) awakening. This gap could reflect fewer reports of any experience or less recalled content within those reports. Distinguishing them requires retaining white dreams, experiences reported without recalled content. We audited the questions and codes behind all 20 datasets in the Dream EEG and Mentation database. Fourteen supported comparisons of any reported experience, ten supported content recall within experience reports, and one mapping merged white dreams with negative reports. A Bayesian hierarchical model decomposed the gap within six datasets supporting both comparisons at both stages. Averaged equally across datasets, contentful reports were 21.4 percentage points less frequent after NREM awakening. Most of this primary gap came from fewer reports of any experience: 16.6 points (95% credible interval 9.6 to 22.9), compared with 4.9 (− 4.1 to 12.3) for less recalled content. The experience-report contribution remained positive across weighting, sample and model checks. Content contributions depended on the datasets and weights averaged; both contributions were clearly positive in a four-dataset subset with at least ten records per stage. Uncertain-answer coding shifted the balance between negative reports and white dreams. Contrasting contentful with negative reports combined experience reporting with content recall. Theories must explain why any experience is reported less often after NREM awakening. Neural classifiers targeting any reported experience should retain white dreams in the positive class and assess content recall separately.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Square
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11519432/v1
Primary Topic
Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Separating experience reporting from content recall in dream reports across sleep stages

Zhao Peiyan
Research Square
Sleep and Wakefulness Research
preprint

Separating experience reporting from content recall in dream reports across sleep stages

Zhao Peiyan
preprint en

Abstract

Abstract Contentful dream reports are less frequent after non-rapid eye movement (NREM) than rapid eye movement (REM) awakening. This gap could reflect fewer reports of any experience or less recalled content within those reports. Distinguishing them requires retaining white dreams, experiences reported without recalled content. We audited the questions and codes behind all 20 datasets in the Dream EEG and Mentation database. Fourteen supported comparisons of any reported experience, ten supported content recall within experience reports, and one mapping merged white dreams with negative reports. A Bayesian hierarchical model decomposed the gap within six datasets supporting both comparisons at both stages. Averaged equally across datasets, contentful reports were 21.4 percentage points less frequent after NREM awakening. Most of this primary gap came from fewer reports of any experience: 16.6 points (95% credible interval 9.6 to 22.9), compared with 4.9 (− 4.1 to 12.3) for less recalled content. The experience-report contribution remained positive across weighting, sample and model checks. Content contributions depended on the datasets and weights averaged; both contributions were clearly positive in a four-dataset subset with at least ten records per stage. Uncertain-answer coding shifted the balance between negative reports and white dreams. Contrasting contentful with negative reports combined experience reporting with content recall. Theories must explain why any experience is reported less often after NREM awakening. Neural classifiers targeting any reported experience should retain white dreams in the positive class and assess content recall separately.

Research Square
Brunel University of London (GB)
Sleep and Wakefulness Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon