Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relations between common nightmares and chronobiological factors remain poorly understood. The possibility that nightmare frequency and distress are associated with chronotype ("morningness-eveningness") was investigated in a sample of respondents to an Internet questionnaire. Over a 4(1/2)-year period, a total of 3978 subjects (mean age = 26.5 +/- 11.6 yrs; age range = 10-69; 2933 female, 1045 male) submitted responses to single items about chronotype and nightmares as well as to other demographic variables. Analyses of chronotype and nightmares items by age and gender replicated most previous findings for these measures-validating their further assessment-and uncovered abrupt increases in nightmare distress between ages 10-19 and 20-29 for females and ages 30-39 and 40-49 for males. Most important, there was a strong association between nightmares and eveningness for female subjects. The latter was expressed as a linear association between nightmare frequency and increasing eveningness and a cubic association between nightmare distress and increasing eveningness; the definite evening types displayed the most severe nightmares. The effect for nightmare frequency was independent of age and sleep duration but was eliminated when nightmare distress was covaried. For females, the nightmare/eveningness association appeared at ages 20 to 29 for the definite evening type and only later, at ages 30 to 39, for the moderate evening type. Findings are consistent with the possibility that nightmares are the expression of a more general pathological factor that is characteristic of eveningness and that is responsible for affective symptoms such as neuroticism and depression. This pathological factor appears to be expressed in late adolescence/ early adulthood, and relative morningness may be a protective factor delaying its onset. The well-established circadian modulations of cognitive, social, and affective tasks that are influenced by chronotype may extend to the memory and affective processes of sleep-including dreaming. This chronotypic influence, together with a likely gender difference in the neurophysiological substrate of emotional processing, may result in the differential occurrence of nightmares for female evening types.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".